| Trott's time-wasting against SA was illegal |
|
|
| Category: Shorts |
| Written by Luke Tagg |
| Tuesday, 09 March 2010 21:33 |
|
Apologies for revisiting the ghosts of series past, but you may feel as I do: Jonathan Trott's time-wasting antics in the first two Tests of the recent series against South Africa were never properly addressed. Or rather, they were - we just never heard anything official about it. His crease walkabouts disappeared in the final two Tests, shortly after an official complaint was lodged with the umpires by Graeme Smith in the second Test. Clearly somebody took the time to read the laws of cricket. When they did, they would have discovered the truth about Trotty's routine: it was illegal. There is a good article in the "Ask the Laws" department of the Lord's official site, which breaks it down using the law book. Citing the Laws of Cricket, the following clause places Trott's guilt on top of his burden of shame: Law 42.10 states: "It is unfair for a batsman to waste time. In normal circumstances the striker should always be ready to take strike when the bowler is ready to start his run up." Factors that are considered to not be "normal circumstances" include "a fly buzzing round the striker's head, something getting in his eye or shoelaces becoming untied". None of those things happened to Trott, yet he was never ready by the time the bowler was. As a tactic of riling the South Africans up it could only be classified as a howling success. So not only was he annoying, he was also a criminal. A time-wasting, cricket criminal. I demand punishment, but will settle for petty revenge. Full Story: Ask the Laws Department: XVII (Time wasting) |
|
hosted by The "Silly Point" | ||
Latest Sledges
"Kamran Akmal did the honours behind the stumps." ...
Unless it's the Proteas in a World Cup as they'll...
Normally I wouldn't respond to someone who should...
pace isn't everything u lil fan... england doesn't...
Just for interest sake, don't exclude the honourab...