Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Rushy finally strikes with 2 wickets in 2 balls - with the score on 446. Archer in now.

And those two wickets still didn't lead to a collapse - Archer is out just now but Rushy has joined Rimmington in registering a century and the 500 is up for Sussex.

We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

All out for a mere 552 so I guess that means we'll have about 10 minutes to lose a couple of wickets bat before lunch.

captaincolly wrote:All out for a mere 552 so I guess that means we'll have about 10 minutes to lose a couple of wickets bat before lunch.

And there's the first one - Latham.

No sign of rain either.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:No sign of rain either.

Unfortunately not! There'll never be a better time for someone to make a triple century. If 3 bowlers can register tons then the batsmen surely can.

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

Yep. I guess the ball must have slipped out of his hand and resulted in beamers but they can't have been dangerous.

As for Latham - it'll soon be time for the T20 so he'll be back in the middke order with Colly opening!!

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

It has got nothing to do with pace . Any ball ,regardless of pace, bowled above waist height( the waist is deemed to be the bottom of the rib cage not the waistline,as in trousers) is deemed dangerous and unfair under Law 41.7

Bowling of dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries

41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is to be deemed dangerous and unfair, whether or not it is likely to inflict physical injury on the striker. If the bowler bowls such a delivery the umpire shall immediately call and signal No ball. When the ball is dead, the umpire shall caution the bowler, indicating that this is a first and final warning. The umpire shall also inform the other umpire, the captain of the fielding side and the batsmen of what has occurred. This caution shall apply to that bowler throughout the innings.

41.7.2 Should there be any further such delivery by the same bowler in that innings, the umpire shall

- call and signal No ball

- when the ball is dead, direct the captain of the fielding side to suspend the bowler immediately from bowling

- inform the other umpire for the reason for this action.

The bowler thus suspended shall not be allowed to bowl again in that innings.

the Law changed in October .Before that a non pitching delivery from a slow bowler was above shoulder height.
The problem was that a slow bowler's quicker ball could often be delivered at a pace regarded as dangerous, hence the change.

The Phil Hughes incident caused a great deal of rethinking about both dangerous and unfair bowling.

southwood wrote:

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

It has got nothing to do with pace . Any ball ,regardless of pace, bowled above waist height( the waist is deemed to be the bottom of the rib cage not the waistline,as in trousers) is deemed dangerous and unfair under Law 41.7

Bowling of dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries

41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is to be deemed dangerous and unfair, whether or not it is likely to inflict physical injury on the striker. If the bowler bowls such a delivery the umpire shall immediately call and signal No ball. When the ball is dead, the umpire shall caution the bowler, indicating that this is a first and final warning. The umpire shall also inform the other umpire, the captain of the fielding side and the batsmen of what has occurred. This caution shall apply to that bowler throughout the innings.

41.7.2 Should there be any further such delivery by the same bowler in that innings, the umpire shall

- call and signal No ball

- when the ball is dead, direct the captain of the fielding side to suspend the bowler immediately from bowling

- inform the other umpire for the reason for this action.

The bowler thus suspended shall not be allowed to bowl again in that innings.

the Law changed in October .Before that a non pitching delivery from a slow bowler was above shoulder height.
The problem was that a slow bowler's quicker ball could often be delivered at a pace regarded as dangerous, hence the change.

The Phil Hughes incident caused a great deal of rethinking about both dangerous and unfair bowling.

Thanks for the explanation.

captaincolly wrote:

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

Yep. I guess the ball must have slipped out of his hand and resulted in beamers but they can't have been dangerous.

See my response to WL.

Batsmen often do not wear a helmet to slow bowlers but, in any case, the effects of being hit by ,even, a slow bowler can be quite serious, and painful, even with a helmet on especially in first class/second eleven etc. Even recreational level slow stuff can cause nasty injury .

southwood wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:We've lost the strike bowler too - Steel out of the attack after bowling two beamers!

How can a bowler of his pace bowl what is deemed a dangerous delivery?
Lathan proving it's not just at the Riverside that he can't bat, can't bat on roads either.

Yep. I guess the ball must have slipped out of his hand and resulted in beamers but they can't have been dangerous.

See my response to WL.

Batsmen often do not wear a helmet to slow bowlers but, in any case, the effects of being hit by ,even, a slow bowler can be quite serious, and painful, even with a helmet on especially in first class/second eleven etc. Even recreational level slow stuff can cause nasty injury .

Thanks. Suppose it's better to be safe than sorry!

I assumed the rule had been correctly applied and if there's evidence that the risk of injury remains regardless of pace fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.