In the ODI World Cup 2023, New Zealand secured their second consecutive victory by defeating the Netherlands with a 99-run lead in Hyderabad on October 9th. However, amidst the excitement of the match, a contentious moment arose that has sparked debate among cricket enthusiasts.
The incident unfolded during the second innings when New Zealand’s Tom Latham attempted to stump Netherlands’ batter Sybrand Engelbrecht off the bowling of Rachin Ravindra.
The TV umpire, Joel Wilson, made a crucial call, deeming it a ‘no ball.’ According to Wilson, Latham, the Kiwi wicketkeeper, was positioned in front of the stumps while attempting to collect the ball.
This pivotal moment occurred in the 41st over of the Netherlands’ innings. At this juncture, the team led by Scott Edwards was struggling at 191/7 in their pursuit of a challenging target of 323 runs.
Ravindra observed Engelbrecht stepping out of his crease and delivered the ball wide on the off-side. Acting swiftly, New Zealand’s stand-in captain collected the ball and removed the bails in a flash, appealing for a stumping.
The delivery was initially signaled as ‘wide,’ prompting the leg-umpire to summon the TV umpire, Joel Wilson, into action. After scrutinizing multiple replays, Wilson upheld the decision in favor of the batter.
During the review, Wilson explained, “Take it back; it looks like he has collected the ball in front of the stumps. I’m checking, where are the gloves when he is collecting it? He’s not wholly behind the stumps, so I have a no-ball, and the batsman will be not out.”
This call by the experienced umpire, however, attracted a flurry of criticism. Former wicketkeeper Ian Smith, providing commentary during the game, expressed his disbelief at the decision that favored the Netherlands.
Smith, a 66-year-old cricket veteran, remarked, “Well, I’ve got to say, as a former wicketkeeper, that’s the most bizarre thing I’ve ever seen. That is just crazy. When the ball went into the gloves, they were clearly, clearly behind the stumps. They might have been initially in front, but when the ball went into the gloves, clearly behind the stumps. Look at the gloves there. Are you telling me it’s a no ball? Well, when I look in the paper tomorrow, it will say it, but not for mine.”
To assess the validity of Wilson’s decision, it’s crucial to consult the Marylebone Cricket Club’s (MCC) laws governing the positioning of the wicketkeeper during stumping attempts.
MCC law 27.3 states, “The wicketkeeper shall remain wholly behind the wicket at the striker’s end from the moment the ball comes into play until a ball delivered by the bowler touches the bat or person of the striker or passes the wicket at the striker’s end or the striker attempts a run.” In the event of a contravention of this law, the striker’s end umpire is expected to call and signal ‘No ball’ promptly after the ball’s delivery.
Get the latest cricket news here, like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter and Instagram for more such updates.
