Sport Today

by **Ravi Gudlavallet** » Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:09:14

Hi,

Why doesn't the 'handled the ball' wicket go to the bowler?
What are the rules behind it.

I guess it should be treated somewhat similar to a hit wicket.
Both the cases the batsman does the mistake more or less by instinct
and is unintentional. So, why is it treated differently?

----

by **The Wo** » Wed, 21 Mar 2001 19:37:51

Quote:

> Hi,

> Why doesn't the 'handled the ball' wicket go to the bowler?

Because it just doesn't. But good point - like HW, most HB's (from L2k
onwards) will be in defending the wicket (like the most recent 2 in Tests).
Should probably become creditable to the bowler in L2020

Quote:

> What are the rules behind it.

by **Mike Holman** » Thu, 22 Mar 2001 03:43:56

Quote:

>Hi,

>Why doesn't the 'handled the ball' wicket go to the bowler?
>What are the rules behind it.

>I guess it should be treated somewhat similar to a hit wicket.
>Both the cases the batsman does the mistake more or less by instinct
>and is unintentional. So, why is it treated differently?

Because Handled The Ball refers to *any* handling of the ball by the
batsman. In the Gooch and Swaugh cases, yes, it looks immensely like the
bowler having done the damage. But if a batsman takes it into his head
to pick the ball up and throw it at the keeper, that's hardly the
bowler's fault.

Cheers,

Mike
--
1888 - last time England won a 3-match series after going one down
1979 - last time England completed four consecutive series wins
2001 - England win two successive series in Asia for the first time

by **Matthew van de Werke** » Thu, 22 Mar 2001 08:44:19

Quote:

> >Hi,

> >Why doesn't the 'handled the ball' wicket go to the bowler?
> >What are the rules behind it.

> >I guess it should be treated somewhat similar to a hit wicket.
> >Both the cases the batsman does the mistake more or less by
instinct
> >and is unintentional. So, why is it treated differently?

> Because Handled The Ball refers to *any* handling of the ball by the
> batsman. In the Gooch and Swaugh cases, yes, it looks immensely like
the
> bowler having done the damage. But if a batsman takes it into his
head
> to pick the ball up and throw it at the keeper, that's hardly the
> bowler's fault.

> Cheers,

> Mike
> --
> 1888 - last time England won a 3-match series after going one down
> 1979 - last time England completed four consecutive series wins
> 2001 - England win two successive series in Asia for the first time

Similarly, if a batsman takes it into his head to suddenly start
giving catching practice off (say) Slater's bowling, that's hardly
Slater's fault, but he still gets the wicket.

Cheers,
MvdW

by **ratskille** » Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:33:35

Quote:

> Similarly, if a batsman takes it into his head to suddenly start
> giving catching practice off (say) Slater's bowling, that's hardly
> Slater's fault, but he still gets the wicket.

I believe that catching practice by the batsman is mistakenly thought
to be "enticed" by the bowler.

Personally, I have always held that the bowler should be wired to a
machine that determines what he is thinking (as he bowls) before he
is awarded the wicket. When I was up and coming up, my younger
cousin bowled me with a ball that slipped out of his hand and turned
out to be a wicked yorker, then bragged about it for weeks. I got
back at him by explaining in the school newspaper that it was the
best ball he Never bowled.

rS.

Sport Today

Handled the Ball decision

Handled the Ball decision

Handled the Ball decision

Handled the Ball decision

Handled the Ball decision

Handled the Ball decision