Why not i do

Sobers wrote:

---

A well known member of this Forum has been named to play this week in a lower grade.
I won't name him but due to a rare medical condition he was unable to field last week.
My question is - If said player has yet to get off the mark and the ball hits his pads should I just give him out anyway regardless of the LBW law?

---

        Sobers, has this got anything to do with ur duck last week ? And Quirky will get
        em early for ya

 

Can't complain too much Woofa he sent down Bushranger rookie Brett Forsythe to sub for him.

Sobers wrote:

---

A well known member of this Forum has been named to play this week in a lower grade.
I won't name him but due to a rare medical condition he was unable to field last week.
My question is - If said player has yet to get off the mark and the ball hits his pads should I just give him out anyway regardless of the LBW law?

---

I have already answered this question today Stuart

 

Most smart people would push one to fine leg for a single before teeing off for a big one, not Persuader.

Need a ruling on a LBW decision guys if anyone knows or has there view (maybe Stumpy) can help me out.

On Saturday Left arm spinner bowling around the wicket hits the batsman on the toe on the full infront of Middle and leg, umpire says not out as the angle of the ball from the directory of the hand would have continued the ball to miss leg stump.

But our bowler claims to believe it is a direct line from point of contact from stump to stump thus should have been out, for what it is worth i thought it hit in front of middle and off so did our bowler making it as plumb as they get.

On further inspection of the rules i seem too come across a conversation saying that with a quick/swing bowler a direct line is drawn from stump to stump.

So in finishing my view is that all swing or spin is forgotten and a straight line is drawn from point of realease too the point of contact and continueing that path.

What is everyones thoughts??

slocs wrote:

---

not out. old rule was out. move up with the times.

---

Ok so what was the old rule and what is the new rules if you could please explain for me!

 

You are right Beav. Slocs is trying to winde you up.

I got given out on Saturday in exactly the same circumstances by one of the leagues leading umpires, Bobby Fraser, and upon questioning him over a beer on the law after the game his decision was deemed to be correct.

Beav,

Ball is deemed to be continuing on the line from which it came. Umpires not to take account of what spin might have been if ball had landed. Old law used to be taking account of spin.

Ball does not do a right angle back to stumps like some cricketers think.

So if point of delivery by bowler is wide of stumps at bowlers end and ball hits even slightly towards leg stump line on the batting crease on the full it will more than likely miss stumps gven that it is deemed to continue on its line.

Best way to test it at training is to set up two boxes 12 inches apart on the batting crease and see if bowlers can bowl between these and hit the stumps without hitting the boxes on the crease line. Damn hard and will show you how hard it is to get an LBW in any circumstances.