In a dramatic second in the course of the third quarter-final of the Vitality Blast 2024, Saif Zaib was denied a vital wicket resulting from an unusual no-ball name by the third umpire. Somerset went on to beat Northamptonshire by 17 runs, however the incident involving Zaib’s bowling within the 14th over of the primary innings caught the eye of cricket followers worldwide.
Zaib’s supply had Tom Kohler-Cadmore utterly overwhelmed by flight, main wicketkeeper Lewis McManus to take away the bails swiftly. Northamptonshire believed that they had claimed the wicket of a harmful batter, however the resolution was referred to the third umpire.
Upon evaluate, it was discovered that McManus had his gloves in entrance of the stumps earlier than receiving the ball—a violation of the MCC’s regulation 27.3 concerning wicketkeeping. Third umpire David Millns fastidiously reviewed the footage and dominated it a no-ball. To additional compound Northamptonshire’s misfortune, Kohler-Cadmore capitalized on the free hit by smashing a six.
Ashwin Expresses Sympathy for Pakistan Legends After Residence Whitewash by Bangladesh
What Does the MCC Legislation Say?
In keeping with MCC regulation 27.3, the wicketkeeper should stay behind the stumps till the ball both hits the bat or passes the batter. If the wicketkeeper breaches this rule, the umpire can name a no-ball, as was the case in Zaib’s supply.
This uncommon occasion introduced again reminiscences of an identical incident in the course of the second T20I between India Girls and South Africa Girls, the place wicketkeeper Uma Chetry was additionally denied a stumping because of the similar regulation.
Regardless of the controversy, Somerset superior to the semi-finals, leaving Northamptonshire to ponder what might need been.
Keep up to date with all of the cricketing motion, observe Cricadium on WhatsApp, Fb, Twitter, Telegram and Instagram
