IPL Betting Sites
A two-man catch to dismiss Hobart skipper Matthew Wade in a T20 Big Bash match in Brisbane has led to confusion over the laws with even Lord's weighing in. Matt Renshaw

Matt Renshaw catch at boundary causes confusion in BBL

220

A two-man catch to dismiss Hobart skipper Matthew Wade in a T20 Big Bash match in Brisbane has led to confusion over the laws with even Lord’s weighing in. Hobart batted first and had limped to 98 for five off 14.4 overs largely thanks to a captain’s knock by Wade. On 61, he launched the ball high to the long-on boundary. Brisbane’s Matt Renshaw, fielding just inside the ropes, leapt and parried the ball into the air as he fell backwards.

He landed off the field and then jumped to slap the falling ball back over the ropes to Tom Banton, running round from deep mid-wicket, who caught the pass.

After a long video review the third umpire decided that Wade, who had already walked off, was given out.

“I had no idea of the rule really – once he hit outside the field of play I didn’t know if he was allowed to touch the ball or not,” Wade told match broadcaster Channel 7.

“Umpires said he was, and once they told me he was allowed to (go) outside the field of play and tap it back in, I knew I was out.”

The 2017 update to the laws included a provision for boundaries and “airborne fielders”.

Lord’s, home of the MCC who act as cricket’s rule makers, tweeted that “Under Law 19.5, the catch is deemed lawful.”

The law says: “A boundary will also be given if a fielder in contact with the ball makes contact with any object grounded beyond the boundary, including another fielder.”

The Lord’s tweet explained that “the key moment is when he first touches the ball, which is inside the boundary. He’s airborne for his second contact.”

“Amazing catch,” it said.

Wade was also impressed.

“It was pretty good work by Matt Renshaw,” he said.

The Hurricanes finished on 126 for 9 and the Heat then passed that target with 10 balls and five wickets to spare.

Also Read: In stats: Where’s the Faf du Plessis we knew?




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *