IS this a catch?

[Hurricane]

Saw this in the big bash game.

Someone takes a catch while diving in air. They then hold the ball with one hand as they continue diving through the air. then they land on the ground with their hand pressing the ball into the turf as they land and skid along the grass.
The ball has touched the ground here before he has control over his body. Is this is a catch.

Spikey says it is.

I say no.

 

[benchmark00]

Yes it is, as per my explanation in the BBL thread.

 

[Daemon]

I think it would depend from catch to catch, but in this hypothetical case it should be out.

 

[Manee]

Definitely not.

 

[Daemon]

Saw this in the big bash game.

Someone takes a catch while diving in air. They then hold the ball with one hand as they continue diving through the air. then they land on the ground with their hand pressing the ball into the turf as they land and skid along the grass.
The ball has touched the ground here before he has control over his body. Is this is a catch.

Spikey says it is.

I say no.

The rules say you have to be in control of the ball though, not the body isn't it?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I'm pretty sure that used to be not out, but I'm also pretty sure the Law (maybe not Law, but interpretation, maybe?) changed a good while back.

 

[Neil Pickup]

As far as I'd take it, that's not out, as you're not in control of ball and body when the ball is grounded.

 

[Jarquis]

1. Out Caught
The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his bat without having previously been in contact with any fielder, and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch before it touches the ground.

3. A fair catch
A catch shall be considered to have been fairly made if
(a) throughout the act of making the catch
(i) any fielder in contact with the ball is within the field of play. See 4 below.
(ii) the ball is at no time in contact with any object grounded beyond the boundary.
The act of making the catch shall start from the time when the ball in flight comes into contact with some part of a fielder’s person other than a protective helmet, and shall end when a fielder obtains complete control both over the ball and over his own movement.
(b) the ball is hugged to the body of the catcher or accidentally lodges in his clothing or, in the case of the wicket-keeper only, in his pads. However, it is not a fair catch if the ball lodges in a protective helmet worn by a fielder. See Law 23 (Dead ball).
(c) the ball does not touch the ground even though the hand holding it does so in effecting the catch.
(d) a fielder catches the ball after it has been lawfully struck more than once by the striker, but only if it has not been grounded since first being struck.
(e) a fielder catches the ball after it has touched an umpire, another fielder or the other batsman.
However, it is not a fair catch if the ball has previously touched a protective helmet worn by a fielder. The ball will then remain in play.
(f) a fielder catches the ball in the air after it has crossed the boundary provided that
(i) he has no part of his person touching or grounded beyond the boundary at any time while he is contact with the ball.
(ii) the ball has not been grounded beyond the boundary. See Law 19.3 (Scoring a boundary).
Note also Law 19.4 (Ball beyond the boundary)
(g) the ball is caught off an obstruction within the boundary provided the obstruction had not been designated a boundary by the umpires before the toss.

No catch.

 

[Howe_zat]

I haven't seen this catch, but I would think it's not out.

Imagine for example if the ball was coming to you at ankle height, and instead of bending down to take it you just firmly stepped on the ball; pressing it against the ground with your foot. That's obviously not out.

Well, in this case, if you press the ball against the ground with your hand as you're in the process of taking it, what's the real difference?

 

[benchmark00]

No, it's a catch.

Refer to Heath's comment re: changing interpretation.

Having control of the ball and the ball incidentally touching the grass is not the same as using the ground to gain control of the ball.

 

[uvelocity]

I said in the match thread I didn't like it.

Looked like a catch, but grounding the ball like that is no good imo

 

[uvelocity]

Sean Abbott catch vs Queensland 2010/11 KFC Big Bash - YouTube

You know what's funny? This isn't the same catch but it's at the same ground on nearly the same peice of grass, and he lands grounding the ball here too. Makes a habit of it imo. Had the ball for a bit longer in this catch.

 

[Daemon]

Well, in this case, if you press the ball against the ground with your hand as you're in the process of taking it, what's the real difference?

OP says he's already taken it though ("hold"), he just grounds it so he doesn't fall flat on his face.

 

[marc71178]

If he grounds it to avoid falling flat on his face then he's not got control of it IMO.

 

[sledger]

Clearly not a catch.

 

[Hurricane]

The video that Uvelocity has posted is almost a carbon copy of the catch in question.

 

[MrPrez]

Shouldn't be out. I first thought it should, but if you think about it, the ball could easily pop out of his hands if he didn't let it touch the ground (eg. if he held his arms in front of him). Therefore, he hasn't got full control of the catch.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

For the record, I put that it is a catch, but actually think it shouldn't be a catch.


If the fielder is truly in control of his body he should go to the effort of keeping the ball of the ground. With this catch I think he had control of his body, but just couldn't be arsed. Looks like it's a habit too.

 

[Hurricane]

No, it's a catch.

Refer to Heath's comment re: changing interpretation.

Having control of the ball and the ball incidentally touching the grass is not the same as using the ground to gain control of the ball.

There shouldn't be grey intepretations of the law that are "commonly understood". From Marcuss' post it appears it is not a catch. There ideally should not be intepretations layered on top of the law unless the law is unclear which it is not.

Also just reading what you have written in bold - you should not be deemed to have control of the ball until you have finished diving and have landed safely.

Finally is the intepretation documented anywhere?

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Not a catch. Grounding the ball - you just don't do it. A fielder should ALWAYS make every effort to keep something between the ball and the turf. That's the idea of catching (in any sport or situation) anyway, isn't it?