In a game on the weekend the batsman went to play a cut shot off our spinner and their bat hit the wickets keepers’ glove on two occasions. He hit the ball but for no runs. The keeper impacted the shot so should it be a no ball, dead ball or just part of the game?

Responses

Simon Taufel

Current Rating: 5 / 5

Business Coach

last year

If you apply Law 27.5 (Restrictions on the actions of the wicket keeper) strictly, an accidental interference of this nature should result in the umpire calling and signaling dead ball and the ball not counting as one in the over (ie. rebowl the ball). If the action or interference was deliberate, then more serious action is available to the umpire.

Comments

Allan Pike

Thanks Simon. It wasn't deliberate by the keeper and probably a technique issue but it wasn't called a dead ball by the umpire which we thought was surprising. Thanks for clearing it up

Andrew Bennett

Teacher

last year

I would have thought it only mattered if the keeper's gloves were in front of the stumps, if so...No ball (rules: 27.3.1&2) otherwise it's a late cut, play on.

In a game on the weekend the batsman went to play a cut shot off our spinner and their bat hit the wickets keepers’ glove on two occasions. He hit the ball but for no runs. The keeper impacted the shot so should it be a no ball, dead ball or just part of the game?

Partner Sponsors

Responses

Your Answer

Platinum Sponsors

In a game on the weekend the batsman went to play a cut shot off our spinner and their bat hit the wickets keepers’ glove on two occasions. He hit the ball but for no runs. The keeper impacted the shot so should it be a no ball, dead ball or just part of the game?

Partner Sponsors