Message Board Archives

That man was outside of the field of play(when did he return if you doubt me)

Link Text

In reply to doosra

So you want to bring the boundaries up that far and then still give a man six for barely clearing it???

In reply to doosra

That should have been called a six.

As long as the ball crosses over the boundary line it should be six. A few great acrobatic catches have tainted the spirit of this rule, in my opinion

In reply to doosra

I don't have facebook so I can't see the video.

But if it is about the now common place play where a fielder catches a ball in the field of play then subsequently tosses it up in the air - steps over and outside the boundary - then returns over the boundary unto the field of play to catch the ball a second time, then that should definitely be deemed to be an improper catch.

I have no problem with a fielder catching a ball with his/her feet inside the rope but the ball crosses over the boundary line while in the air - they are still within the boundary and the field of play when the catch is taken.

In reply to DirtyDan

The. The problem becomes—how do you determine that the ball has crossed the boundary line. If the ball has not been grounded, it is becomes difficult to determine when it has crossed the line.

In reply to SnoopDog

tries to catch it on the boundary
didn't have control so throw it up
then crosses the boundary...at this point he is over the boundary...

then jumps in the air (while still over the boundary) and catches the ball
they throw its back in...then jumps in the boundary, catches it again and while about to fall over the boundary again,
throws it up to a waiting fielder

my protest is simple lol - if he went over the boundary (he did) and comes into contact with the ball (in the air or not - he did after jumping up in the air beyond the boundary) while still beyond the boundary, it should be considered a 6..or simply put - if you are beyond the boundary you are out of play unless your return to the field of play

For those in the UK but without Facebook, i.e., twice blessed:

Is there nothing that Harry Brook can't do?

In reply to doosra

Agreed.

The law needs to be amended to disallow a fielder from leaving the boundary (and thus field of play) to affect a live play within the boundary.

In reply to SnoopDog

T

was this not the rule years ago, if you caught the ball over the boundary , you could not throw it back in and catch it .

In reply to tc1

The law has always been (and still is) that a fielder cannot affect a legitimate catch if his/her feet are planted outside the boundary rope when the catch is taken. In that case, it's a 6 not a catch.

What we are talking about here is where the ball is initially caught inside the boundary rope - tossed up in the air - fielder jumps over and beyond the boundary - jumps back into the field of play and catches the ball again.

My contention is that once a fielder leaves the field of play/boundary they should be disallowed from affecting any live play within the boundary. There's a reason the game has boundaries.

In reply to SnoopDog

Disagree. If a fielder chases a ball, stops it before it crosses the boundary, but crosses themself the boundary, what sense does it make for that fielder now to be null and void, unable to return to the field of the play and field the ball? The nearest 'live' fielder might be 50 yards away and the batsmen could run 7!

That should be 6