6 runs awarded - the overthrow rule explained

[Kianig89]

Dharmasena the clown at his best 6 runs even i from my bed knew its 5 runs Kumar should be held accountable

 

[Madplayer]

Dharmasena the clown at his best 6 runs even i from my bed knew its 5 runs Kumar should be held accountable

He was pathetic throughout the world cup and in the final he got the trophy for being the poorest umpire by committing this blunder.

 

[Kianig89]

He was pathetic throughout the world cup and in the final he got the trophy for being the poorest umpire by committing this blunder.

Absolutely it was complete lottery appealing to him pathetic umpiring in the biggest game

 

[Bilal Ahmad15]

I want an apology from the ICC.

No team or its fans deserves to have what happened to us yesterday.

This Final is going to haunt us for the next half a century, future kiwi cricketers will have to live with it and have the pressure of righting the wrong of 2019.

Perhaps make a petition? I will sign it straight away

 

[Bahnz]

There is potential scope for ambiguity in the wording of the law, given that it references throw or "act", which may pertain to the moment that the ball deflected off Stokes' bat.

Not really. The word "act" in this context is clearly referring to the "willful act of the fielder". Given that I'm fairly certain that Guptill never intended to hit Stokes bat and have the ball ricochet away for 4 overthrows, then it's clear that the correct moment to apply the law was when Guptill let go of the ball. It should've been 5, and NZ should've won the World Cup.

Dharmasena is an awful umpire and it's a disgrace that the ICC saw fit to entrust the biggest event in its calendar to him.

 

[Kiwi]

NZ got robbed of the title. Extra run awarded, Ross Taylor's lbw.....unbelievable ICC is shocking

 

[shane]

The practice of adding runs scored to the boundary resulting from the overthrow is itself a ridiculous rule. The batsmen should never get more than four runs for that, unless the overthrow was deliberate.

The clause itself is a little ambiguous. It says that the batsmen shall be awarded the boundary as well as "the runs completed by the batsmen". But it does not say at what point these runs would need to have been completed. It is arguable that it is referring to all runs completed before the ball hits the boundary rope. The remainder of the clause may be referring to a situation where the ball hits the boundary before the batsmen have completed a run but where they had crossed for that run at the moment the fielder released the ball.

 

[jagatk]

Rules were made from beforehand not to favour england.
Just like if the ball hits the helmet which is on the ground, a team is awarded 5 penalty runs? Its an obstruction. In this case the obstruction was the bat.
Now this was never pre-planned or nobody knew this was going to happen.

Its rules that ICC have made so they must have looked at all possibilities and outcomes. We can;t argue with them just like we can't argue with the 5 penalty runs added too. Or the DRS but umpires call which is wierd.

Well now it turns out the rules were incorrectly applied. And England should have got only 5 runs from that overthrow not 6.

 

[Ab Fan]

Dharmasena the clown at his best 6 runs even i from my bed knew its 5 runs Kumar should be held accountable

Kane Williamson should have argued about this. It was biggest moment of the World Cup.

 

[mon858]

Kane Williamson should have argued about this. It was biggest moment of the World Cup.

I doubt if he even knew of the potential 5 vs 6 issue at that point otherwise I am sure NZ would have argued for it. They must only thought whether the 4 will be given or not which according to laws once ball crossed boundary it had to be given, so they didnt ru argue for that reason.

 

[Suleiman]

Can some expert weigh in?

Pathetic if true. NZ should sue ICC for damages.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Dharmasena is as incompetent as they get. Why is the most mentally weak umpire refereeing the final?

 

[Ab Fan]

As a cricket match and a true spirit of the game, England should have denied themselves to take extra runs..Either England should have taken just 2 runs or that bowl would have been called as dead bowl, so they have to comeback and bowl again.

 

[shane]

As a cricket match and a true spirit of the game, England should have denied themselves to take extra runs..Either England should have taken just 2 runs or that bowl would have been called as dead bowl, so they have to comeback and bowl again.

I am not sure they are allowed to do that and, if this was your team, you would never have forgiven them for doing it.

 

[Ab Fan]

I am not sure they are allowed to do that and, if this was your team, you would never have forgiven them for doing it.

Nobody, would have guts to not take a four, at that very precarious situation.

 

[Madplayer]

Nobody, would have guts to not take a four, at that very precarious situation.

Thats true. Cant really blame England for any of it really. My grudge is totally with ICC and stupid umpiring.

 

[amvbfm]

The law only refers to "wilful act of a fielder" and therefore there is no way that six runs could've been awarded as in this case runs should be calculated at the time of the throw. The real problem is the law uses the word overthrow in 19.8 without defining it anywhere. What then actually is an overthrow? Will a throw hitting a batsmen's body or equipment also be considered an overthrow? From a purely literal interpretation of this law one can even argue how this law doesn't specifically address cases where the ball deflects off the bat or body of a batsman and goes for a boundary.

 

[Robert]

It was six not five. It wasn’t an overthrow until it hit Stokes’ bat, and he didn’t wilfully act to deflect it, and wasn’t a fielder either.

 

[James]

As a cricket match and a true spirit of the game, England should have denied themselves to take extra runs.

Stokes is a good sportsman, he was trying to do just this, but the umpires overruled him.

 

[Robert]

I want an apology from the ICC.

No team or its fans deserves to have what happened to us yesterday.

This Final is going to haunt us for the next half a century, future kiwi cricketers will have to live with it and have the pressure of righting the wrong of 2019.

Only if you have a great big collective sook about it, and still complain about being “robbed” like Botham does 27 years later.

Tomorrow is another day.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Very unfortunate for New Zealand.

Not Stokes' or England's fault though.

 

[cricketAXEpert]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As per the rules:<br><br>If the ball reaches the boundary due to an overthrow (even unintentionally off the bat) then the 4 runs for the boundary is added to the runs completed before the overthrow, which can lead to a batsman scoring six runs or more off 1 ball <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CWC19Final?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CWC19Final</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ENgvNZ?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ENgvNZ</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1150470132029906944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 14, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Overthrows is a very common rule, highly unfortunate that it came into play at that moment.
However the boundary rule was the real farce. They should have shared the World cup title. or keep doing super overs till there is a clear winner.
Super overs take no time

 

[Phantom Menace]

Only if you have a great big collective sook about it, and still complain about being “robbed” like Botham does 27 years later.

Tomorrow is another day.

No, these things have an impact on how players will react and play in future tournaments. Just look at the increased pressure South African players play with every world cup because of the 1999 semi final. Its just one more factor that has to be overcome for South Africa and now NZ until they win their first world cups.

 

[Abdullah719]

Overthrows is a very common rule, highly unfortunate that it came into play at that moment.
However the boundary rule was the real farce. They should have shared the World cup title. or keep doing super overs till there is a clear winner.
Super overs take no time

There's nothing wrong with the ways overthrows are dealt with, they are largely due to the fielding sides' incompetence such as when the keeper or bowler fail to collect the ball or the fielder does a wayward throw. Things like uneven bounce come into play but are part of the game.

However, 4 extra runs because the throw hit the batsman or his equipment and was deflected to the boundary is just stupid. I expect to see this rule changed pretty soon.

 

[akkers]

Ex-umpire Simon Taufel seems to think it should have been 5 runs.

Anyway in club cricket and professional matches batsmen dont usually take runs when a ball rebounds off them (although they can take the runs as per rules). They dont take the runs because its unsportsmanship. But Eng were happy to take those extra 4 runs in this case. Is that sportsmanship?

 

[big_gamer007]

So as per [MENTION=9]Saj[/MENTION] post runs are added to the runs completed. Stokes didn't complete run so why was 6 runs given?

 

[James]

Ex-umpire Simon Taufel seems to think it should have been 5 runs.

Anyway in club cricket and professional matches batsmen dont usually take runs when a ball rebounds off them (although they can take the runs as per rules). They dont take the runs because its unsportsmanship. But Eng were happy to take those extra 4 runs in this case. Is that sportsmanship?

Stokes was clearly trying to decline the extra runs in his body language, but was overruled by the umpires.

 

[ads101]

I was happy England won, even the super over/boundaries stuff seemed fair. But yeah this overthrows thing really puts a dampener. I think it was 5 runs not 6. And I think the rules are poor, really only 4 runs should have come off it. And while Stokes didn't do it on purpose because he was grounding his bat, he pushed the ball to the boundary, wasn't just a simple defection.

I'd be happier if New Zealand and England both share the world cup. That way both nations have won, and there's no ill feeling. What's happened makes neither team happy, England's win is tarnished by this technicality, New Zealand will feel robbed.

Would probably feel the same way if Pakistan won in this way too.

 

[dildilpak]

Stokes was clearly trying to decline the extra runs in his body language, but was overruled by the umpires.

Nope, he was only trying to say it wasn’t deliberate. He never spoke to the umpires about discrediting the extra runs.

 

[ads101]

Nope, he was only trying to say it wasn’t deliberate. He never spoke to the umpires about discrediting the extra runs.

I think you're right he was just saying sorry. He didn't come out and decline the runs. Don't think he wanted it, but he didn't pressure to decline them.

Having said that I can't blame Stokes here even if he wanted the extra runs. In such a high pressure situation you don't refuse runs. It's like a batsman refusing to walk when they knick it happens all the time. If England lost the world cup just because Stokes was trying to be honourable, England and Stokes himself would never live it down.

Think the umpires mucked up. What's really irritating is that ICC have just come out and said it's "up for umpires interpretation" as their excuse. Rules shouldn't be open for interpretation, they should be clearly defined.

 

[dildilpak]

I think you're right he was just saying sorry. He didn't come out and decline the runs. Don't think he wanted it, but he didn't pressure to decline them.

Having said that I can't blame Stokes here even if he wanted the extra runs. In such a high pressure situation you don't refuse runs. It's like a batsman refusing to walk when they knick it happens all the time. If England lost the world cup just because Stokes was trying to be honourable, England and Stokes himself would never live it down.

Think the umpires mucked up. What's really irritating is that ICC have just come out and said it's "up for umpires interpretation" as their excuse. Rules shouldn't be open for interpretation, they should be clearly defined.

I have seen this tons of times.. rules being interpreted differently by every umpire, for eg. overturning of soft signals in a close catch. And all of this happens because the rules are so loosely worded by a bunch of reactive oldies in the MCC. ICC should definitely do something about the ‘custodians of cricket’ non-sense & should tighten up the ambiguities in the rules.

 

[Captain caveman]

Stokes was clearly trying to decline the extra runs in his body language, but was overruled by the umpires.

Stokes put his hands up to say that he didn't do it on purpose!
At no point did he offer to decline the extra runs!!

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Stokes put his hands up to say that he didn't do it on purpose!
At no point did he offer to decline the extra runs!!

Why on earth would he decline those runs? Nobody does that, and this is a World Cup final, the biggest match in all of cricket by far.

The rule is stupid, umpiring was pathetic and NZ was unlucky. But England aren't at fault here, they were there to win the cup.

 

[Ab Fan]

I doubt if he even knew of the potential 5 vs 6 issue at that point otherwise I am sure NZ would have argued for it. They must only thought whether the 4 will be given or not which according to laws once ball crossed boundary it had to be given, so they didnt ru argue for that reason.

Kane Williamson and his boys were just too nice on that day. If you are not sure of the rule, you have to discuss/argue with umpire on this and make sure the correct decision is done there itself. Umpires can make mistakes but if you stop them there, they might re-think. It was a crucial juncture of the game.They had to..

You can remain nice, have the sportsman spirit but you also have to make sure that you are not getting robbed by any bad decision. Not completely his fault but there was a mistake.

 

[Cricket lover 27]

Kane Williamson and his boys were just too nice on that day. If you are not sure of the rule, you have to discuss/argue with umpire on this and make sure the correct decision is done there itself. Umpires can make mistakes but if you stop them there, they might re-think. It was a crucial juncture of the game.They had to..

You can remain nice, have the sportsman spirit but you also have to make sure that you are not getting robbed by any bad decision. Not completely his fault but there was a mistake.

True. As they say “ Nice guys finish last”.

 

[MenInG]

The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), custodians of the Laws of Cricket, is considering reviewing the overthrow rule in light of the incident that occurred during the 2019 World Cup final. According to The Times, the MCC feels that overthrows are worth taking a look whenever it next reviews the laws of the game which is the responsibility of the MCC Laws sub-committee. Significant attention has been drawn to the rule after New Zealand's Martin Guptill's throw took a deflection off Ben Stokes' bat and went to the boundary.

Moreover, umpires Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus erroneously gave England six runs instead of five as they had not noticed that Stokes and his partner Adil Rashid had not crossed over when Guptill made the throw. England needed nine runs from the last three balls before that and the overthrows brought the deficit down to three off two.

Stokes immediately put his hands up to apologise and his Test team-mate James Anderson later said that he had asked the umpire to take away the extra four runsthat was awarded. Anderson explained that the etiquette is that if the ball takes a deflection off the batsman and goes to an empty part of the field, the batsman refrain from taking an extra run.

The game went on to end in a tie and the Super Over that was played to decide the match also ended in a tie. However, England were declared on the basis of their superior tally of boundaries through the course of the match.

https://sports.ndtv.com/world-cup-2...fter-world-cup-2019-final-controversy-2072474

 

[Aman]

The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), custodians of the Laws of Cricket, is considering reviewing the overthrow rule in light of the incident that occurred during the 2019 World Cup final. According to The Times, the MCC feels that overthrows are worth taking a look whenever it next reviews the laws of the game which is the responsibility of the MCC Laws sub-committee. Significant attention has been drawn to the rule after New Zealand's Martin Guptill's throw took a deflection off Ben Stokes' bat and went to the boundary.

Moreover, umpires Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus erroneously gave England six runs instead of five as they had not noticed that Stokes and his partner Adil Rashid had not crossed over when Guptill made the throw. England needed nine runs from the last three balls before that and the overthrows brought the deficit down to three off two.

Stokes immediately put his hands up to apologise and his Test team-mate James Anderson later said that he had asked the umpire to take away the extra four runsthat was awarded. Anderson explained that the etiquette is that if the ball takes a deflection off the batsman and goes to an empty part of the field, the batsman refrain from taking an extra run.

The game went on to end in a tie and the Super Over that was played to decide the match also ended in a tie. However, England were declared on the basis of their superior tally of boundaries through the course of the match.

https://sports.ndtv.com/world-cup-2...fter-world-cup-2019-final-controversy-2072474

Too damn late now...

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If you know, you know <br><br> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ENGvNZ?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ENGvNZ</a> <a href="https://t.co/ZyIcvwkk8B">pic.twitter.com/ZyIcvwkk8B</a></p>— England Cricket (@englandcricket) <a href="https://twitter.com/englandcricket/status/1533120147614883840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>