Different ways to get a Batsman out in CRICKET
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 05. 2023
- In the sport of cricket, a batter or batsman can be dismissed by the fielding team in several ways. The cricketing laws are revised on a regular basis and in 2017, the laws were rewritten. At this time, a modification was made in the laws where the 11 ways of dismissing a batsman were cut short to 10. While one might believe this would cause some relief to the batsmen, but that wasn't the case. As the methods of dismissal were simply recategorized. So the batmen would still be out in the same ways as they would have before this change, it would just be called or categorized differently. In the video all ways of dismissals are mentioned along with which of the dismissal methods were combined under one category and what it is called now.
The most common and liked ways of dismissal are caught, LBW and bowled, whereas run out and stumping are quite common too. The rarest methods of dismissal are summed up in this video, so make sure to watch it till the end.
If you like what we're doing, encourage us by giving a Thumbs UP and hit the Subscribe button for regular updates on various topics.
Feel free to leave a nice comment below the video, we do our best to read them all.
Social media:
Facebook: / sublimesummaries
Twitter: / sublimesummarie
#cricket #cricketrules #wickets #bowled #caught #stumped - Sport
The D in DRS stands for Decision not Digital
I thought it stands for Dhoni😂
Fun fact about stumpings : if you walk away out of your crease before the ball is called "dead", you are a fine candidate for an easy stumping.
Should’ve told that to bairstow
Not in Yorkshire, apparently 😂
POV: Bairstow
Incessant personal sledging and liberal use of sandpaper are also other forms of dismissal.
@@michaelx3419Except that, in past, Yorkshire was proud of its hard line and wouldn't have thought twice about making that stumping.
On a serious note, it's a bit of a pattern: children of an unfortunate background getting over-supported / protected / praised leading to a certain preciousness in later life. From 1960s on, in English club cricket, even the non-league Sunday friendlies, that stumping was entirely legit and the teammates would give the keeper stick for not seeing the chance
LBW. It isn't if the umpire thinks the ball "might" have hit the wicket. It's if the umpire thinks the ball WOULD have hit the wicket.
Retired....is most unusual but there is a famous and noteworthy use of it. Australian Captain and opening batter Mark Taylor famously retired in Second Test 1998 in Pakistan. He was on 334 not out and did not want to break a long established Australian record held by the famous Sir Don Bradman from 1930....class and respect.
Hate to be picky but he didn't retire. He declared the innings. Still pretty classy though.
@@alanprouse2193 WG Grace once declared an innings when he was on 92 not out, because he realised it was the only score under 100 he'd never got!
Being caught off the glove only applies if the glove is in contact with the bat at the time
Leg Before Wicket (LBW) has many caveats that are quite complicated to explain, like whether it hits the batsman in line with the wickets, where the ball hit the ground and whether the batsman is playing a shot
DRS is Decision Review System, not Digital Review System
Timed Out is not defined as 3 minutes to enter the field, but 3 minutes to be ready to face the bowler. It used to be 2 minutes to enter the field, but this changed a few years back
You forgot to add that the on field umpire is not capable of determining a run out by himself unless the batsman is more than 21 yards away from the crease at the moment the wicket is broken. In all other cases, the umpire is required to stand there like a muppet making an air box signal to indicate he needs help. Many umpires suffer from fence sitters ar$e as a result, or John Motson's complaint as its more commonly known.
Oooooh bitchy, but I do see where you are coming from. Of course in the 99.999% of games in which there are no cameras or replay technology the umpires have to make the decision themselves without assistance.
There's no harm in making sure unless it's obvious. Dickie Bird used to say "I think that's out but let's just check".
@@andrewguthrie2 I'm referring to cases where the batsman is run out by yards and they still send it upstairs. I think when yon Dickie said it were out, it were out, no bother!
@@terranceparsons5185 Do they though? Perhaps if they've been unsighted or not been in the right place for a direct hit it can look obvious except to the one that matters.
Can either side call for a review if they disagree?
I remember Darryl Hare stitching up England twice on one tour by giving wrong decisions when he could have gone to the 3rd umpire.
Thanks. Having not played for nearly 40 years (age 68), I hadn't kept up with The Laws and didn't know about timed-out
Timed out has been around for a long time. I think the first instance was 1920?
About ten years ago in a county match a senior batsman was on 99 not out when the 9th wicket fell at the other end on the last bowl of the over . the last batsman was in the toilet when it fell was late onto the field and the fielding side appealed and the innings was over .... tghe sad thing was that the batsman on 99not out was in his last season as a pro and had NEVER scored a 1st class century
@@stevehandford5530 Yes, has been around a long time, although the Law was changed slightly in the 2000 code. In previous versions of the Laws, the batsman had to be on the field of play within two minutes of the previous wicket having fallen. From 2000 onwards the Laws say that the batsman has to be ready to face his first ball (having taken guard etc) within three minutes of the wicket having fallen.
The 'timed out' law came into being in 1980; a batsman had two minutes to come onto the field after the fall of a wicket. In 2000 it was amended to three minutes for a new batsman to come onto the field AND be ready to take strike or to allow the other batsman to be able to take strike.
Timed Out happened today. First timed out in cricket history. Angelo Mathews got timed out
One point that wasn’t explained is that you can only be caught off your glove if that glove is in contact with the bat, I.E. you’re holding the bat with the glove which is struck. And the ‘glove’ isn’t just the glove if you have an arm guard or sweatband which is connected to the glove without a clear view of skin above the top of the glove then that continuation is also considered to be ‘glove’.
But then you can be given out LBW if the Umpire thinks it was going on to hit the stumps,
Thanks! i needed this
One caveat on "Obstructing the field". If the non-striker obstructs a catch, it is the striker who is given out (i.e. as if the catch had been taken). This is to avoid the circumstance where a high-order batsman and a tailender are batting together and the tailender sacrifices his wicket by obstructing a catch to keep the high-order batsman in.
The 5 I know are bowled, caught, LBW, run out and my personal favorite, stumped
Nice video!
An old law not many people know is that if (for some reason) the bails have come off of the stumps but the batsman is not out, in order to run him/her out the fielder has to have the ball in hand and pull one of the stumps out of the ground with the same hand they are holding the ball.
Because the bails leaving the stumps are what dictates when the batsman should be in his crease or what constitutes as bowled.
If the bails aren't there, pulling the stump is required as simply making contact with the stumps isn't what gets measured.
Didn't have to be same hand - which would be next to impossible.
@@cuebj I understand it that the hand with the ball has to be in contact with the stump when the stump is pulled out.
For example, both hands (one with ball) cup around a stump and pull it around the ground.
Imagine having your arms widespread - pulling the stump out with the non-ball holding hand, with the ball (in other hand) well clear of the stumps is obviously not out.
This happened in India Sri Lanka match, so it's not an old law.
Also, if one bail is removed on first attempt, the fielder can remove the other on the next.
I think most club or school players know that
You cannot (should not be) given out lbw if the ball pitches outside leg stump before hitting the pad. You can be given out lbw if the ball pitches outside off & strikes the pad, but no shot is played & the umpire deems that it would have hit the stumps. You cannot be (should not be) given out caught, if the ball hits the glove & it is off the bat handle. You can technically hit the ball twice & not be given out if it is an accidental second connection. For example Shane Warne bowled a ball during a match & the batsmen played a sweep shot & actually hit the ball twice for a boundary. Warne actually smiled because he realised what had happened. This is the only time that I have seen the ball hit twice accidentally.
And the advent of predictive tech means far more LBW decisions given out than in my day. Of course, I didn't play televised games. I'll have to ask my qualified umpire neighbour if there's been an effect on club cricket decisions where the old adage was leg plonked down the wicket rendered LBW almost impossible
Unless you played against Pakistani in Pakistani during the eighties.
Bro even if ball touches gloves it is considered as our
Retired - out, is not really a mode of dismissal. In fact it should be recorded as 'retired' until the end of the innings because it is always possible under the laws to resume the innings (albeit with the other captain's agreement). If a batter is dismissed under any of the 9 modes of dismissal, it is not possible under the laws for that batter to return during that innings.
Not if they leave without the umpires permission
@@DrNoClu which law states that? Law 25 states the umpire must be informed of the reason for retirement - but that is primarily for determining if the reason is injury.
@@richjhart Law 25.4.3 reads as follows 'if the batter retires for any reason other than in 25.4.2, the innings of the batter may be resumed only with the consent of the opposing captain. If for any reason that his/her innings is not resumed, that batter is to be recorded as 'Retired- out''
For reference, Law 25.4.2 refers to when the batter has obtained an injury, illness or is affected by any other unavoidable circumstance, they are entitled to resume their innings, however, if for some reason the batter doesn't return, they will be recorded as 'Retired- not out
Additionally, Law 25.4.1 states that a batter may retire at any time if their innings when the ball is dead. The umpires, before starting play is to be informed of the reason for the batters retirement.
Whilst it doesn't explicitly state my prior point, it can reasonably be inferred to include as such.
@@DrNoClu I disagree with your interpretation. It does not require the umpire's consent. It simply states that they must be informed of the reason. There is nothing in the law which states that needs to happen prior to them leaving the field.
I was mainly referring to the odd chance that the batter simply walks off without even letting the umpires know.
Nice. Where do we place the scenario when bowler removes the bails at the non-striker’s end, even before the ball is delivered, and the batsman is backing up and out of his crease.
That is a Mankad and is regarded as run out.
What a game. Hope it takes off in the states. Sooo much better than baseball
It's an 8 minute video therefor we'll let the LBW explanation pass. You could do a 20 minute video on the nuances of LBW.
Can also be out for if player loses balance for example and their leg or foot, etc hits the wicket whilst hitting the ball.
Ones people miss include
Hit wicket
Handled the ball
Obstructed the field or ball
Timed out
Handled the ball has now been absorbed into obstructing the field, so it's no longer a separate mode of dismissal.
The one people most forget is probably Retired out because it's the only one that requires no intervention from the opposition.
@@wantage1973Neither does timed out ! Also, not all retirements count as out.
Hii! This video helped a lot can u please upload vids of hockey and football as well I really wanna ace my physical education exam
Yes..PLS!!!
The only one I don't think I have ever seen is the double hit...was actually at the Gooch handled the ball game as it happens I think
It is possible to have crossed the line in a run out and still be out, if, for example you have nothing in contact with the ground.
LBW is only out if the ball is definitely hitting the stumps, not if the umpire thinks it might, any doubt = not out
My favourite is where the wicketkeeper has to trot off to the boundary to retrieve the batsman's middle stump.
Over 99% of the outs come under first five. Others are so rare that sometimes everyone including players and commentators are confused.
Ten ways a batsman can be out told this year's ago.
There are further conditions that have to be met for a batsman to be out lbw: the ball hitting the batsman's body when it would have gone on to hit the stumps is necessary but not sufficient. Otherwise good video. Never knew that handled the ball had been amalgamated into obstruction.
I effin hate the pitches outside leg rule it's like yeah but if his leg wasn't in the way and the ball went from outside leg on to hit the stumps it's still out!
@@dagfinissocool It's to prevent consistent negative leg-side bowling.
@@cricketexplained8526 Then it should be possible to review it even if it hits the stumps and if it pitched outside leg then it's not out so it's consistent
@@dagfinissocoolNot all matches are televised from multiple angles with computers to predict ball travel. Millions of club games have no reviews. Umpires rely on eyes, ears, training, and experience. Like in football (soccer), the idea is to keep laws/rules consistent across all levels of the game
@@cuebj that's what I'm saying it should be consistent if the ball pitches outside leg it's either out or not out every time but that's not the way it is now
Caught, bowled, lbw, run out, stumped, handled the ball, hit the ball twice, hit wicket, obstructing the field, timed out.
Handled the ball now comes under obstructing the field.
I think you can also be outfit dissent
Just another thought. Has caught and bowled been removed ?
It's not a separate means of dismissal, just a quick way of saying that the catcher and the bowler are the same player.
Counts as caught out still.
Project the Bat-Signal into the sky, oh, you mean Batsman ?
Without watching I have 9. I thought I had 10 but writing them down, whether I forgot or counted 1 twice, I have 9. Curious what 11 is. Caught, bowled, lbw, run out, stumped, hit wicket, obstructing the field, handling the ball, timed out.
Having watched, retired out isn't being dismissed, so that does not count as a form of dismissal. Hit twice... I guess. I thought of that, maybe it's the one I missed when writing them down.
It's worth adding that run out doesn't go on the bowlers statistics even if he runs the batsman out. The 1975 world cup final ,where three Aussies were run out, only has seven wickets in the bowling statistics. On another point & it's just a personal one, I would have a dismissal called played on. It's always made me laugh that a ball that only hits the stumps because of a huge inside edge gets classed as bowled.
Also, run out is the only way a wicket can fall off a no-ball.
While I'd like to have played on counted separately from bowled, I would not like them to pause the game for UltraEdge to decide whether it was bowled or played on!
I'm now really curious to see if anyone has compiled overall totals on each of the modes of dismissal, say, for all test matches, or for individual batters or individual bowlers over their careers. 🤔 (I'm especially curious to see how many times those rarer types of dismissals come up - My guess is most of them would be measured in tiny fractions of 1%)
Look up starsguru
@@richjhartBINGO!
@@richjhart Hi. I posted a reply yesterday but it doesn't look like it showed up. Trying again. Thanks for the tip. I didn't know about statsguru website. Looks impressive and I had a bit of a play with it. I couldn't find an easy way to have it spit out exactly what I wanted in one go, but with running enough different queries I think it could. Here's one result... In all men's test matches from March 15th 1877 to 31st of July 2023, statsguru says there have been 163 dismissals for hit wicket, involving 145 batsman. (14 of those batsmen were dismissed more than once for hit wicket. I can't remember the names of any of the batsmen, but the "winner" was an English batsman who was dismissed five times for hit wicket. 2nd place went to an Indian batsman hit wicket three times. 12 other batsmen hit wicket twice). For comparison, It looks like the total number of players who batted in all those tests was just over 3100. So, over the years, about 5% of test batsman have been dismissed by hit wicket. Obviously the percentage of total dismissals that were "hit wicket" would be way less than that, but I didn't find an easy way to get that number, without doing more number crunching.
Former Test Umpire Don Oslear wrote in his book "The Laws of Cricket...." that in his whole career he'd never seen a Timed Out, and very rarely an Obstructed the Field or Handled the Ball
Of course if those particular Laws didn't exist, we'd probably see a lot of batsmen handling the ball, obstructing the field, etc.
Timed out never happened before... Until today. Angelo Matthews got timed out
As a badged Umpire at grade level your explanation of LBW starting @2:02 is sadly lacking. You do not even mention a left arm bowler coming over the wicket to a right hand batsmen (or vice versa) and needing to pitch the ball inline with stumps. This is just the start. LBW is such a tough subject to umpire or explain. Plus you stuffed up DRS. Its Decision Review System.
"Assuming you're new to Cricket, you probably know how the game is played". Were they meant to say "Assuming you're NOT new to Cricket"?
Not offering a shot, the only time you can be out LBW in indoor cricket.
4:41 who this bowler?
It is Karthik Tyagi
LBW
If you take a catch and then scrape the ball along the turf to stop yourself from falling, it's really not good etiquette to claim it as a catch, and then when shown to have cheated on review, to actually have the brass neck to double down on insisting it was taken cleanly.
Please note, Mr Starc and Mr McGrath.
as an American this is useful - I guess a lot of similarity to baseball especially getting out going for a home run- the obstructing the field is kinda cute and quaint . Jeez are you not supposed to try and stop your enemy doing stuff to you!
Of course it's similar to baseball. Baseball has the same common root as cricket because the English invented all popular sports. Just like American football has its origins in rugby.
It's only basketball the Americans invented in isolation so nobody else in the world bothers playing that as it's garbage.
@@sammyb1651 A sport is not a sport until it is codified i.e.the laws / rules are compiled. The OFFICIAL rules of baseball were adopted in NY in 1854.
The English seem to want to reference baseball as being derived from rounders but in doing so they show how little they know.
The modern day scoring of cricket was adopted from baseball which has always been much more comprehensive in the ability to compile statistics (although sometimes useless) They are similar but not comparible because baseball numbers the fielding positions and cricket only names them.
The modern grips used in bowling a ball are directly from baseball...knuckle ball, change up. slider, and so on. Developments that have come across by elite cricket organisations having former pro baseball coaches in their ranks. Look it up. it's all documented.
What about mankading
counts as bowled
@@roscoefilmshow can the non striker be bowled? Mankad is when the non striker leaves his crease before the ball has left the bowler's hand and the bowler runs him out and is now categorised under Run Out...
@@ruchikvirendrathakkar8191 I meant stumped sorry
IRRELEVANT
Forgot to mention Mankading Runout.
It's not a separate form of out.
Irrelevant
May come under being stumped but should remember the mankad
Thanks for pointing out! Technically Mankading is categorized as 'Run Out', which is one of the many ways to run a batsman out. Mankading is named after veteran Indian cricketer Vinoo Mankad who famously ran Australia's Bill Brown out it in a match played in 1947.
Mankading is one of those things I love to watch the arguments on. I’m like, don’t leave your ground until the bowler releases and there’s no Mankad. Stop trying to gain a head start…
@aaronmorris1513 yea I'm not even that strict on it it's when I'm still 2 or 3 steps from releasing it and there already edging out of the crease
@@aaronmorris1513 it is possible to sort of get a headstart as long as you hold the top of the handle and use the length of the bat to keep ground
I'd like the international games where the third umpire is now looking for front-foot no-balls through camera replays, to have the third umpire ALSO look at the non-striker backing up.
If the non-striker leaves their crease before the bowler delivers, any (non-boundary) runs scored would be marked "one short".
I reckon the number of Mankads would drop to zero.
Double hit .. I want clear on that
What about a Mankad?
Counts as run out.
first you say it's ok to hit the ball twice if it's going on to hit the stumps but then it can also be called out for obstruction? which is it??
It will be called out if the second time of hitting is for the purpose of hitting the ball away to try and score runs.
You can hit the ball a second time after the bowler has bowled if it was going to hit the wicket, but only before a fielder has touched it or is trying to touch it
When umpiring I had enormous difficulty coming to terms with this rule. Another umpire gave me some important advice. If the person hits it twice, to protect the wicket or in any other circumstance, and tries to run he should be given out on appeal. Rick Darling playing in a one day game for Australia gave the ball an almighty slog to protect the stumps after a defensive stroke. Subsequently the ball went out past point. His actions were fine as he didn't proceed to try and make a run. Missed pitching outside, and striking the pads outside of off stump being not out.
i think you missed 'Mankading'........... its a legit dismissal now !!!!!!!!!!!!!
It comes under run out.
It always has been a legitimate dismissal. The only difference is it's been moved from Law 42 to the run out Law.
Never seen retired out or double hit out.
Retired out is when a player deliberately quits to allow another batter into the game. It has happened exactly twice in international cricket (in a men's T20I game between Bhutan and Maldives and in a women's ODI between Sri Lanka and the West Indies), and once in the IPL, on all occasions tactically (when a batter was scoring slowly and was replaced by a more aggressive batter). Retired Hurt is quite common and I think everyone has seen it. Some batters don't recover quickly enough to return and the team can be all out with only nine wickets taken.
Hit the Ball twice has never been recorded in international cricket, but has happened 23 times in First-Class cricket and twice in List A 50-over cricket. It's never happened in Twenty20 cricket (the trademark for Twenty20 means that only matches at the equivalent of First Class / List A level are officially Twenty20; other 20-over matches are not Twenty20). None of the matches in which it happened appear to have been televised (only three were since 2000), or at least if they were, there doesn't seem to be any film publicly available.
What about hit the ball twice with the bat. I thought that was away to get yourself out in cricket?
That was literally shown. (As a computer model but the information is all there).
@@andrewleah1983 my bad must of missed that one
Caught & bowled?
It's not a separate form of dismissal.
I'm sure that the Aussies have a few more ways to get batsmen out
I think Australia should start cheating. Whether they do or not, they get accused of it constantly. Might as well get some advantage from it.
Yes and sledging sometimes helps but that is a trait handed down by English gentry and especially Dr. Grace.
@@flamingfrancis Perfected by Australians, among all the other dark arts.. used to try and win at all costs
MANKAD!!!!!
You didn’t describe hit wicket I think
He did, but he didn't show the most famous HW of them all - Ian Botham failing to step over his stumps at the Oval in 1991.
Retired out? That's not a way of getting 'OUT' atleast as far as I know
It is absolutely a way of getting out. A batsman nearly always retires hurt if he cannot continue batting, so it is rare for retired out to happen.
@@cricketexplained8526 It happened in the 2nd test between Sri Lanka & Bangladesh between September 6 -8 2001, when both Marvan Atapattu & Mahela Jayawardene retired out. The scorecard shows that both retired out.
@@puppy969 sorry, I was thinking of "retired hurt".
@@puppy969read law 25.4.3. Retired Out is simply a way for the scorers to record the fact that a batsman retired their innings for any other reason than being injured, illness or any other unavoidable cause. It is not a mode of dismissal.
@@andysibley1 Who cares? It is still out, just like being timed out.
LBW you have over simplified the rule. It depends where the ball lands. If it’s outside leg stump it can’t be out. Outside off, it can’t be out if they batsman plays a shot. If it hits the bat then the pad it can’t be out.
mankad?
Counts as run out.
Stumped and mankad are just varieties of run out. And you can only be caught of a hand that's handling the bat
Mankad is not even a technical term, it's just a popular term for a specific type of run out. Stumped may look like a variation, but technically stumping is categorized differently. Run-out wicket doesn't go to anyone, whereas stumped wicket goes to the bowler.
If the ball touches the bat not handling the bat, it's handling the ball.
stumped is different to run out
Not at all. A stumping will be attributed to the bowler as a wicket whereas a run out is not attributed to any bowler in the stats. Stumping takes bowling and keeping skill to draw the batsmen out of his crease to play a false shot.
Stumped is a separate mode of dismissal. Mankad & run out are both fall under run out.
@@zeedaankhan9181 And you can't be stumped off a no-ball, but you can be run out off one.
So many errors here.
I think u forgot Caught And Bowled
It comes under CAUGHT. Not a separate mode of dismissal.
How is it any different to being caught by any other fielder.
@@flamingfrancis Technically it's the same thing. Just that the scoreboard will say "c & b BOWLER'S NAME".
Retired hurt left the universe 😅
To be out Hit the Ball Twice it's not nevessary for it to be the bat both times, and it must be deliberately to try to score runs.
For example, if it pops up off your pad or body and you then smash it for 4 with the bat (or I guess kick it away too).
u forgot the mandaking way to get out
Terrible explanation of LBW.
u forgot mancad
That's run out
Fun fact about stumping, the wicket keeper needs to break the wickets in an underhand motion only. In no case is the wicketkeeper allowed to throw or stump over hand with a gloved hand.
I don't think that's correct. Look at compliations of MS Dhoni.
@@cricketexplained8526 you are right the OP is 100% WRONG!
nonsense
well that got old quick
No wrong
You've missed one pulling out a stump.
Stupid annoying music..
otherwise great video..