Rules query - bowling/fielding

[eidde]

Had an idea at the nets the other night, and was pondering it's legality.

I was bowling very slow loopy offspin, and discovered that if i slowed them down enough, i could trot a reasonable way down the pitch before the ball got to the batsman. Is there anything actually wrong with running down the pitch (with the intent of pressuring the batsman as a fielder) after releasing the ball?
I was thinking of sending down a very slow ball with little to no revs, then sprinting down and setting up at short leg to take the inevitable slog/

I realise this may not be the smartest move, but for now I'd just like to know if its any kind of legal, so i can think it through a bit better and maybe even use it in a game.
On that note - are bowlers allowed to wear helmets?

Any help much appreciated.

 

[Burgey]

You can’t run down the middle of the pitch, but if you were concentrating that hard on what you’re going to do after you’ve bowled the ball you’re probably better off running to deep mid wicket so you’re closer to fetching the ball when it goes into the car park.

 

[cnerd123]

You can't run on the pitch beyond a certain point, so you'll need to get off the pitch first and then run towards the batsman on the strip next to it

Apart from that there is no problem

 

[stephen]

If you're going to do that you should try to lob the ball into the stumps over the batter's head.

 

[cnerd123]

If you're going to do that you should try to lob the ball into the stumps over the batter's head.

Would be a no-ball. A delivery crossing the batsman at his normal stance on the popping crease above waist height is a no-ball. If it goes on to hit the stumps it is still a no-ball, because the no-ball precedes whatever happens after that.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can't even imagine the level of cricket you'd have to be playing for a delivery travelling slower to the other end of the pitch than you can run to be an potentially effective tool

But hey if you've found a batsman that won't hit it into the river laughing then go for it

 

[cnerd123]

I can't even imagine the level of cricket you'd have to be playing for a delivery travelling slower to the other end of the pitch than you can run to be an potentially effective tool

But hey if you've found a batsman that won't hit it into the river laughing then go for it

For a ball to travel that slow to be a legal delivery, it would have to pitch really full - if it's short of a good length it would die after bouncing and not even reach the batsman.

To bowl a ball that slow and that full, it would need massive height, we're talking like 10 feet+ into the air in order to let it drop successfully down in front of the batsman.

If you loop a ball that high and that slow, if there is any wind it's going to catch the ball and cause it to wobble/drift around - so you need to be bowling a line just outside offstump to help prevent it being wide either side of the wicket.

So you've got a ball launched high into the air, dropping down, wobbling, so slow that a batsman has to put all the power into the shot himself.


IDK. Now that I think about it, I'd love to see someone actually bowl that ball to a reasonable batsman and see what happens.

 

[TheJediBrah]

For a ball to travel that slow to be a legal delivery, it would have to pitch really full - if it's short of a good length it would die after bouncing and not even reach the batsman.

To bowl a ball that slow and that full, it would need massive height, we're talking like 10 feet+ into the air in order to let it drop successfully down in front of the batsman.

If you loop a ball that high and that slow, if there is any wind it's going to catch the ball and cause it to wobble/drift around - so you need to be bowling a line just outside offstump to help prevent it being wide either side of the wicket.

So you've got a ball launched high into the air, dropping down, wobbling, so slow that a batsman has to put all the power into the shot himself.


IDK. Now that I think about it, I'd love to see someone actually bowl that ball to a reasonable batsman and see what happens.

I can tell you what happens, you can literally do whatever you want with it.

 

[cnerd123]

Well I assume you walk down the wicket and just smash it on the full, but that's still a bit of a challenge if a ball just goes straight up and drops vertically straight down

 

[Daemon]

Lmao you can easily generate enough power to belt something like that for six. My coach can basically hit one handed sixes while giving fielding practice.

Pretty sure plenty of hong kong club cricketers would manage to get out to that tho.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Well I assume you walk down the wicket and just smash it on the full, but that's still a bit of a challenge if a ball just goes straight up and drops vertically straight down

You're adding a lot more intrigue to the scenario than there is in reality

It's wouldn't be a challenge, trust me

 

[cnerd123]

Jeremy Snape used to bowl a 'moon ball' at 40 mph in domestic T20s didn't he? Sounds basically like this from what I've heard, but I haven't seen any videos of it.

BBC SPORT | Cricket | Snape's guide to Twenty20 bowling

I try to assess the situation but every ball is different and variety is the key.

This "moon-ball" that I bowl is a bit like Russian roulette - if it goes wrong at 40mph it can look pretty stupid because you can get hit out of the park.

But when you get it right it creates so much doubt in a batsman's mind that it can mess up their other shots as well.

It came out of bowling in the nets - I just lobbed it up as a test and people struggled to hit it.

When they did connect it was in more predictable areas, which means you can set a field to it.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'd take that with a grain of salt, but even then 40mph is a lot quicker than people can run

 

[cnerd123]

Is it even possible to bowl it slower than 40 mph. And if it was, has any batsman actually faced such bowling and been able to hit it? Have you? I know I've probably not faced anything slower than that - the only times I've batted to a bowler who struggles to get it across the pitch I know that personally, I haven't be able to generate a lot of power behind the shot. But I'm a crap batsman.

I just haven't seen any good batsman in that scenario either.

 

[Burgey]

For a ball to travel that slow to be a legal delivery, it would have to pitch really full - if it's short of a good length it would die after bouncing and not even reach the batsman.

To bowl a ball that slow and that full, it would need massive height, we're talking like 10 feet+ into the air in order to let it drop successfully down in front of the batsman.

If you loop a ball that high and that slow, if there is any wind it's going to catch the ball and cause it to wobble/drift around - so you need to be bowling a line just outside offstump to help prevent it being wide either side of the wicket.

So you've got a ball launched high into the air, dropping down, wobbling, so slow that a batsman has to put all the power into the shot himself.


IDK. Now that I think about it, I'd love to see someone actually bowl that ball to a reasonable batsman and see what happens.

Whenever I have the occasional bowl the team I'm playing in must already be in diabolical trouble, so there's nothing to lose. I often bowl these sorts of things as a variation, because it's the only variation I have. But I always make a point of telling the batsman and umpire they're coming.

Picked up 3 fer filling in doing this sort of thing in November. The usual **** - set your field and say to the bloke at deep mid wicket "come in about ten for the one he doesn't quite get to and top edges" etc etc.

Anyway, I said to the batsman and umpire "Watch this - more air than Qantas" and tossed this thing about 8-9 feet in the air. He ran down the deck, but there was a huge cross wind and it drifted away (completely by accident). He missed it and Burgeinho took an easy stumping. Another bloke tried to pull one and missed it - lbw, a third hit one straight to said deep mid wicket. Was pretty funny.

I mean, we lost by ten wickets, but 3-14 off four is decent.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Whenever I have the occasional bowl the team I'm playing in must already be in diabolical trouble, so there's nothing to lose. I often bowl these sorts of things as a variation, because it's the only variation I have. But I always make a point of telling the batsman and umpire they're coming.

Picked up 3 fer filling in doing this sort of thing in November. The usual **** - set your field and say to the bloke at deep mid wicket "come in about ten for the one he doesn't quite get to and top edges" etc etc.

Anyway, I said to the batsman and umpire "Watch this - more air than Qantas" and tossed this thing about 8-9 feet in the air. He ran down the deck, but there was a huge cross wind and it drifted away (completely by accident). He missed it and Burgeinho took an easy stumping. Another bloke tried to pull one and missed it - lbw, a third hit one straight to said deep mid wicket. Was pretty funny.

I mean, we lost by ten wickets, but 3-14 off four is decent.

story doesn't add up, if you lost by 10 wickets then your team didn't take any wickets

 

[Burgey]

It makes plenty of sense if we batted first, the wickets were taken in their first innings as they passed us before they declared overnight, we batted again and they passed us none down in the second dig.

 

[Adders]

Hang on,,,,,the **** is going on here?? Multiple innings cricket??? That's a great idea, they should try it.......reckon it could take off you know.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I still think they should do the 3 innings a side game that I suggested. 1 timeless Innings, one 50-over innings and 20-over innings. That would be great to watch.

 

[Victor Ian]

That would actually be very interesting as you'd have to go in with 5 bowlers. Good for Australia though with Smith scoring all his centuries in the first innings