Asela Gunaratne pulling the stumps out before the match was finished - out or not out?

[Major]

5 required off 3, man facing is Gunaratne, he tries going for a shot, edges it and it flies away from the keeper and goes for 4. Gunaratne gets too excited, pulls out the wicket, but he is reminded by his partner that 1 run is still needed and the match ain't over. He apologies to the umpires for it.

Farhan Behardieen appeals this, but the umpires didn't discuss this decision with anyone and let the game go on.

I think this should had been given out. Whether he made a mistake, was just too excited, it was stupid stuff by Gunaratne and was to be given out.

But i dont know the rules, and could someone tell here what the rule says and what do they personally think? Was it out or not?

 

[JustAnotherFan]

I thought it was out.

 

[Major]

I thought it was out.

i think it should had atleast allowed a discussion to go on between the umpires. I think the umpires didn't wanted to create a controversy here or anything as such, because only 1 run was needed off 2.

But i personally wanted the batsmen to be given out for his own stupid acts.

I found it personally how Prasanna panicked at the other end

 

[aloo paratha]

Would be really stupid if it was given out, even if it says so in the laws. He just got confused. If I was Behardein I wouldn't have even insisted.

 

[Syed1]

He should have been hitwicket had the ball not crossed the boundary line, but since it did the ball was dead and hence not out.

 

[Major]

Would be really stupid if it was given out, even if it says so in the laws. He just got confused. If I was Behardein I wouldn't have even insisted.

just got confused isn't a good excuse.

The reason why batsmen lose their wickets is because of their own mistakes.

Plus, the falling over the stumps or reaching your ground but jumping in the air while the ball hits the stumps could lead to a run out

 

[Syed1]

The laws are very clear on this, if the ball crosses the boundary line then it is a dead ball and whatever transpires after it does not matter.

 

[JustAnotherFan]

I was just wondering if the ball had cleared the boundary before he interfered with the stumps.

 

[Amirforpresident]

i think it should had atleast allowed a discussion to go on between the umpires. I think the umpires didn't wanted to create a controversy here or anything as such, because only 1 run was needed off 2.

But i personally wanted the batsmen to be given out for his own stupid acts.

I found it personally how Prasanna panicked at the other end

He did not panick just asked the umpire to continue which is completely normal.

 

[Major]

He should have been hitwicket had the ball not crossed the boundary line, but since it did the ball was dead and hence not out.

Good point.

But when the replay was going on, i tried to look at the real time replay, and it looked as if the ball had not crossed the boundary.(or maybe it did)

But i think it should had warranted a discussion between the umpires and should had looked at the replays at least.

 

[soso_killer]

I thought it was funny actually, very similar to the Bangladesh wicketkeeper celebrating before the match was won against India.
Players are human not robots, we want to see emotions showed.

 

[Major]

He did not panick just asked the umpire to continue which is completely normal.

he panicked, he even got more panicky when Farhan was still trying to get the decision discussed

 

[aloo paratha]

just got confused isn't a good excuse.

The reason why batsmen lose their wickets is because of their own mistakes.

Plus, the falling over the stumps or reaching your ground but jumping in the air while the ball hits the stumps could lead to a run out

Alright perfectionist, people make mistakes lol, if he had fallen on his stumps I would've said that's out, but he thought they'd won, I'm pretty sure that's small enough of a reason to be forgivable.

Anyways, my two cents.

 

[Gubol123]

He should have been hitwicket had the ball not crossed the boundary line, but since it did the ball was dead and hence not out.

he had already completed his shot. so it cannot be hitwicket. it is more like batsman running into wicket while taking a run. ofcourse in this case he was not attempting to run. But he certainly was not out hitwicket

 

[Syed1]

he had already completed his shot. so it cannot be hitwicket. it is more like batsman running into wicket while taking a run. ofcourse in this case he was not attempting to run. But he certainly was not out hitwicket

You can be hitwicket after you complete your shot. This is what the law says.

 

[Major]

You can be hitwicket after you complete your shot. This is what the law says.

View attachment 72192

this where the rule fell on Inzamam when he hit that shot and fell over the wicket.

So if we apply this rule here(had the ball not crossed at that moment) it could had been given out.

I think the ball and boundary distance was very very close, when the stumps were pulled out

 

[JustAnotherFan]

According to my PVR he interferes with the stumps while the ball has not crossed the line. I am surprised the umpires did not check it on camera.

 

[Gubol123]

You can be hitwicket after you complete your shot. This is what the law says.

View attachment 72192

View attachment 72193

(a)
(i) is not the case
(ii) he was attempting the run
(iii) not the case
(iv) not the case
(b) not hte case again.

may be i am missing. is the above section 28.1?

The umpires should have discussed at least

 

[Major]

According to my PVR he interferes with the stumps while the ball has not crossed the line. I am surprised the umpires did not check it on camera.

maybe some time issue that also went on? Because the umpires also didn't check that no ball by Parnell aswell

 

[Gubol123]

interesting.

but does the same rule apply when Inzamam hit that shot and fell over his wicket?

he was completing his shot. so it is a hit wicket and very funny

 

[aloo paratha]

he was completing his shot. so it is a hit wicket and very funny

Had completed the shot long ago, he literally ran to the stumps

 

[Gubol123]

Had completed the shot long ago, he literally ran to the stumps

he always brought lot of joy for cricket watcher, mostly from his batting and but also with his running between the wickets. What Pakistan is missing these days is not just great cricketers but also great characters..

 

[MMHS]

As per law - it was never out.

If, had he uprooted it after the ball had crossed boundary; no story here. Ball was dead after touching the rope, with 4 runs counted.

If, had he touched it before the ball had crossed boundary, an argument can be to call it dead ball hence SRL losing 4 runs. OR, at worst, Umpires could have given 5 runs penalty for unsporting behaviour, which would have been hilarious.

He was never out, because hit the wicket law tells "while in action of batting" - even if the batsman's cap or sun glass drops on to bells & dislodge it - batman is out. But, it has to be as part of a batting action.

Sometimes, batsmen dislodge the bell while running for 1st run or turning for 2nd run - it's not out. But, it's out in case if it's for an action to complete a batting move - for example, batsman had stepped down to loft a flighted spin & missed the ball. To beat stumping, with same swing he tries to extend the bat & it hits the stamp - he is out (not necessarily bat has to be in his hand, even slipped bat is out).

If it's to be to protect body (trying to avoid bouncer or Beemer), still out, as long as Umpires hadn't called it no ball for foot fault or being Beemer. One can be hit out to an wide ball as well.

...............

This could have been out only if, the ball was at fielders hand & due to batsmen's action a run out can't be made (in this case say the bails were dislodged hence direct throw can't get batsman run out). A bizire instance, but that's actually obstructing the field. Technically possible only if batsman throws the bat to wickets knowing that he can't beat a direct throw.

Only thing umpire could have done here is calling dead ball (if it was before boundary), but then he had to award SAF 5 penalty runs as well.

 

[ahmedzee]

He should have been hitwicket had the ball not crossed the boundary line, but since it did the ball was dead and hence not out.

This is the actuality. Ball was dead once it crossed the boundary. Hence not out.

 

[Buffet]

It was not out.

 

[Eye_Done]

It was not out and SL won. Get over it

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

Player to watch out for. He has it in him to become a top finisher!

He is my biggest worry tomorrow.