2023 ICC Men's Cricket World Cup Game 38 Bangladesh v Sri Lanka 6/11 1900hrs @ Arun Jaitley Stadium

[Snarls Barkley]

Fair enough, but if he's just wandered off and not told the fielding team or the umpires what he's doing then I have a little less sympathy for him, especially in this day and age where we are starting to see fielding teams - correctly IMO - apply the rules more vigorously to batsmen who, for decades, have been getting away with all sorts of egregious s**t and not losing their wicket under the "spirit of cricket".

Again, I haven't seen the incident, but if Matthews has told the umpires about his strap then it should be on them to call a "dead ball" or a "timeout"...

I feel like Angelo is paying for the sins of many batsmen before him.

I suspect there will be a rule change to "reaching the pitch within the two minutes" rather than "ready to face the next delivery in two minutes" (or whatever the specific rules is).

I can't see them changing this. The old rule used to be stepping on to the field in a certain amount of time and then changed to ready to face the ball to stop any tomfoolery.

Maybe they'll add something for equipment failure but even then its happened one time in 150 years of international cricket they probably don't need to change any rules. You'd hope next time something like this happened the opposing captain wouldn't be a dick and common sense could win for once.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Helmet broke on the way out and I believe the rules are such that you cannot face fast bowling at international level without a helmet any more. Pretty poor from the Bangladesh team.

A spinner was bowling. No excuse. Face up.

 

[The Passenger]

Think Pommy has nailed it in commentary... What if 90 minutes later Bangladesh are late bowling their overs and are forced to have an extra man inside the circle for the final 1 or 2 overs?

Completely with Bangladesh on this one.

Does the timer not stop for things like batsmen changing gloves, helmets etc?

I'm 99.9% positive it stops for concussion tests but not sure about the above...

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Once more, what was he TRYING to get away with.

Bangladesh have their time limits. Are they offering to cover this stoppage? Why do Bangladesh have to bowl even quicker now?

 

[PhatBoy]

A spinner was bowling. No excuse. Face up.

Top edge sweep into the face might suggest a little more care be taken about making it compulsory to face up

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Does the timer not stop for things like batsmen changing gloves, helmets etc?

I'm 99.9% positive it stops for concussion tests but not sure about the above...

Almost certain it ONLY stops for an injury (eg concussion)

 

[PhatBoy]

Bangladesh have their time limits. Are they offering to cover this stoppage? Why do Bangladesh have to bowl even quicker now?

Yes I would imagine like any officials with any sort of intelligence they would factor that in. Bangladesh don’t have to bowl quicker

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Do the umpires have capacity to stop the innings clock?

If not - they should

And batsman should be penalised minutes if they change gloves excessively, or aren't ready to face a bowler (particularly at start of over)

 

[Grasshopper17]

And they weren't really urgent about getting a replacement helmet. It was all lazy Sunday sort of stuff

Yep. I went back and put a stopwatch on it. Mathews was out there for SEVEN minutes. Long enough to be timed out 3 times over.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yes I would imagine like any officials with any sort of intelligence they would factor that in. Bangladesh don’t have to bowl quicker

Except they don’t you only get concessions for concussion stoppages. Theses the issue. Time is precious you need every minute to bowl the overs on time

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yep. I went back and put a stopwatch on it. Mathews was out there for SEVEN minutes. Long enough to be timed out 3 times over.

But apparently he’s not at fault…somehow.

 

[sherb]

I can't see them changing this. The old rule used to be stepping on to the field in a certain amount of time and then changed to ready to face the ball to stop any tomfoolery.

Maybe they'll add something for equipment failure but even then its happened one time in 150 years of international cricket they probably don't need to change any rules. You'd hope next time something like this happened the opposing captain wouldn't be a dick and common sense could win for once.

Surely there has to be some latitude in the rules for the umpires to apply, you know, common sense in a situation like this?

 

[Grasshopper17]

He passed the departing batsman on the field

Only because ol mate was walking off the field slower than Inzamam-Ul-Haq in his prime.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I haven't seen the incident, but here is what cricinfo said.

"So the broadcast just showed the full incident clearly. Essentially Mathews was ready to take strike when his strap broke. He called for a new helmet and while that wait ensued, Shakib appealed."

If that is the case (can someone confirm?), it seems like a pretty ordinary appeal to me.

More of a spirit of cricket infringement than Carey in the Ashes.

 

[Grasshopper17]

No, you have two minutes.
You expect a batsman to walk roughly 100m - one minute - have a quick conference with his batting partner, take guard, get his head around the field and conditions, break a piece of equipment, and be responsible for a player he can’t directly talk to, getting a new, fitted piece of equipment, onto his head so he can face up, in two minutes. Right.

So when Mitchell Starc breaks a spike or a boot: do you think the 12th man should sprint out and ensure he finishes the over within the allotted 4 minutes plus change?


Ridiculous stance

To be honest, the new batsman does not HAVE to have any sort of conference with his batting partner.

In fact, on the 90% likelihood that the same guard (usually middle or middle and leg) has already been marked by a prior batsman, there's arguably no need to mark guard even. 2 minutes is plenty.

 

[Scorpus]

It's not on the fielding team to ensure

1) the batter's gear is functional / not broken

and 2) that the batter gets to the pitch with enough time to spare that even if the gear is broken, they can replace it

Those things are entirely the responsibility of the batting side. Mathews could have and should have been fully ready to go in the event of a wicket, with checked, working gear. Could have begun before the 2 minutes.

Correct decision

 

[big_e]

To be honest, the new batsman does not HAVE to have any sort of conference with his batting partner.

In fact, on the 90% likelihood that the same guard (usually middle or middle and leg) has already been marked by a prior batsman, there's arguably no need to mark guard even. 2 minutes is plenty.

Plus the sign of the cross and then get yourself set after that.

It's 90 seconds in some T20 competitions and they can do that easily.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I remember in the Sydney 2008 test ishant sharma came out with two left handed gloves to slow the game down. Imagine if the aussies had appealed then lol

We'd have missed out on one of test crickets greatest moments. 10 of the best minutes.

 

[hawkman]

Mate we just HAVE to find a way to do this next Ashes. It would be so good.

I for one am disappointed we haven't already. If Broad wasn't ready within the time immediately after the Bairstow dismissal that would have been the perfect time to do it

 

[Grasshopper17]

They don’t mate and making out like someone breaking their equipment is ‘a batsman thinking he can get away with anything’ is f**king stupid

I think LukeParkerno1 is more commenting on the relative absence of urgency to get a replacement helmet out there pronto, or, better, find a way to face up without a helmet against a spinner for at least a ball.

By extension, it quite regularly seems batsmen get to play the game at the pace of their choosing. So much so that the other night when Travis Head was rushing through his overs, the commentators were saying how the batsmen should be pulling away and making him wait. That is not in the rules (or the spirit) of the game! And it should not be normalised as being OK, no matter how rushed the batsman feels.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Again, what was Mathews trying to get away with?

What was Johnny Bairstow trying to get away with?

Rules are rules.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Why not? Here’s an idea you have 3 minutes so get off your lazy you know what and get out there and face up. It’s not hard. There’s already enough delays and batsmen take the Mickey out of these rules.

He wouldn’t be if he wasn’t so slow and lazy getting out there. The fielding team has penalties for not bowing overs why should the batsmen delay things?

Love getting confirmation my view on something is right.
That you're saying the opposite sits very well with me.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

A good ton from Asalanka but everyone seems to have forgotten about this game and is just talking about the timed out dismissal.

To be fair everyone had forgotten about this game before the time out dismissal. This thread had like one post.

But you are right, a very good innings when the side was in all sorts.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I for one am disappointed we haven't already. If Broad wasn't ready within the time immediately after the Bairstow dismissal that would have been the perfect time to do it

Cummins would have been murdered in the long room.

 

[Greendogg5]

I think LukeParkerno1 is more commenting on the relative absence of urgency to get a replacement helmet out there pronto, or, better, find a way to face up without a helmet against a spinner for at least a ball.

By extension, it quite regularly seems batsmen get to play the game at the pace of their choosing. So much so that the other night when Travis Head was rushing through his overs, the commentators were saying how the batsmen should be pulling away and making him wait. That is not in the rules (or the spirit) of the game! And it should not be normalised as being OK, no matter how rushed the batsman feels.

100% agree with all of this