• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** New Zealand in India 2016

Shady Slim

International Coach
What so difference when it gets parried upwards and caught by another fielder.... I understand why the rule is there but intention should count as well. Similar to the obstructing the field...
i suppose it's just the fact they don't want to leave it to discretion because then it'll result in a side always waaaaahing afterwards
 

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
By no means.

The ball cannot be caught off external protective equipment worn by a fielder with the exception of the gloves and pads worn by a keeper (although some keepers now wear their pads under their trousers,

The ball remains live for the purpose of run scoring and the batsman can still be run out (providing there is a further act of fielding) and subject to one or two other forms of dismissal.
Can I grab a source for the bolded? The law I quoted above only mentions protective helmets, or are you using 'external protective equipment' as a synonym for protective helmet given fielders can't actually wear any further external protective equipment?
 

Top