Sour Kiwi Fruits... not really

You would expect nothing less from the anti-England Cricinfo or rather pro-everyone except England Cricinfo

Should Stokes’ WC final ‘6’ actually been ‘5’?

Andrew Miller.

Cricinfo.

Monday, 15 July 2019.

PTG 2850-14180.

Sunday’s World Cup final was a contest that could not be separated by runs scored, in regulation play nor during the Super Over, but were England inadvertently awarded one run too many during the chaotic scenes of Trent Boult's final over to Ben Stokes?  In what was later pinpointed by New Zealand's captain Kane Williamson as the key "uncontrollable" of England's run-chase, Stokes inadvertently sent a throw from deep midwicket skimming to the third man boundary, after diving for his crease in a bid to complete his second run.

After consultation with his colleagues, umpire Kumar Dharmasena signaled six runs for the incident, meaning that England - seemingly drifting out of contention needing nine runs from three balls, were suddenly right back in the hunt needing three more from two.  However, according to Law 19.8, pertaining to 'Overthrow or wilful act of fielder', it would appear that England's second on-field run should not have counted, making it a total of five runs for the incident, not six. The International Cricket Council has been approached for comment on the matter.

The law states: "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act”.

The crucial clause is the last part. A review of the footage of the incident shows clearly that, at the moment the ball was released by the New Zealand fielder, Martin Guptill, Stokes and his partner, Adil Rashid, had not yet crossed for their second run.  There is potential scope for ambiguity in the wording of the law, given that it references throw or "act", which may pertain to the moment that the ball deflected off Stokes' bat. However, there is no reference to the batsman's actions at any other point in the Law.

Speaking before questions about the Law came to light, Eoin Morgan said: "I wasn't quite sure what had happened to start with because, obviously, he dived and there was dust everywhere and the ball deflected through and all the Blackcaps standing around going 'What's going on?' So I was trying to figure out, did he hit it, did the keeper hit it?

New Zealand captain Kane Williamson was left to regret the small margins that left them runner's up for the consecutive World Cups. "You can't sort of look at that and think that perhaps that decided the match”, he said. "There were so many other bits and pieces to that game that were so important. When it comes down to a tie, you start looking at every single delivery, don't you? It was a pretty tough pill to swallow that when, yeah, when we were looking pretty likely with Trent bowling really, really well, so one of those things.

Though Stokes was unable to take England all the way in the remainder of that over, he and Jos Buttler teamed up in the Super Over to score a further 15 runs to give England the trophy after New Zealand this time were the team to match their total, only to lose on boundary countback.

And the Aussies are always pro-Poms, right!?

'We're not perfect': Taufel admits World Cup umpires got it wrong.

Daniel Cherny.

Melbourne Age.

Monday, 15 July 2019.

PTG 2851-14181.

Former Australian international umpire Simon Taufel has confirmed that England should only have been awarded five runs – not six – off the third-last ball of their innings in the World Cup final (PTG 2850-14180, 15 July 2019), but stressed it would be unfair to suggest the umpiring error cost New Zealand the trophy in one of the most remarkable cricket matches ever played.

Retired Australian umpire Taufel, named International Cricket Council umpire of the year every year from 2004 to 2008, stood in the 2011 World Cup final, and is a member of the MCC Laws subcommittee. He was also the International Cricket Council’s manager of umpire performance and training as recently as 2015.

Taufel defended officiating umpires Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus, who were in the middle for the chaotic finish, but confirmed they had made a mistake.  "There was a judgment error on the overthrow”, said Taufel.  "The judgment error was the timing of when the fielder threw the ball. The act of the overthrow starts when the fielder releases the ball. That's the act.  It becomes an overthrow from the instant of the throw”.  Replays showed that England batsman Ben Stokes and non-striker Adil Rashid hadn't crossed at the time of the throw.

Taufel explained that the umpires had a raft of things to consider every ball.  "In this particular case, the umpires have got a lot on their plate, because like every ball, they've had to watch the batsmen complete the first run, they've had to watch the ball being fielded, to understand how it's in play, whether the fielder's done the right thing. Then they've got to look to see when the ball is released, in case there is an overthrow. And that happens every delivery of the game. And then they've got to back to see where the two batsmen are".

"They've then got to follow on and see what happens after that, whether there is a run out, whether there's an 'obstructing the field', whether the ball is taken fairly. There's multitudes of decisions to be taken off the one delivery. What's unfortunate is that people think that umpiring is just about outs and not outs. They forget we make 1000s of decisions every match".

"So it's unfortunate that there was a judgment error on the timing of the release of the ball and where the batsmen were. They did not cross on their second run, at the instant of the throw. So given that scenario, five runs should have been the correct allocation of runs, and Ben Stokes should have been at the non-striker's end for the next delivery".

"We're not perfect. You've got the best two umpires in the elite panel doing the final. They're doing their best like the other two teams are. This is just part of the game.  I think it's unfair to say that the World Cup was decided by that one event. There's a lot of 'what ifs' and 'what should bes' and 'what could bes' that happen off those 600-plus deliveries. That's the nature of sport”.

However, Dharmasena and Erasmus were part of a Playing Control Team of five, match referee Rajan Madugalle, third umpire Rod Tucker and fourth Aleem Dar (PTG 2647-14170, 12 July 2019).  What part they individually or collectively played in the 6 run decision-making process is not known.