Test Match Special
Ask The Umpire - with John Holder
This podcast is brought to you by E-Harmony. The dating app to find someone you can be yourself with. Why doesn't E-Harmony allow copy and paste in first messages? Because you are unique and your conversations should reflect that. E-Harmony wants you to find someone who will get you. How are you going to know who gets you? If people send you the same generic conversation starters, they message everyone else. Conversations that actually help you get to know each other. Imagine that. Get who gets you on E-Harmony. Sign up today. Ryan Reynolds here for I guess my hundredth mint commercial. No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no. Honestly when I started this I thought only have to do like four of these. I mean it's unlimited premium wireless for fifteen dollars and what power there's still people paying two or three times that much. I'm sorry I shouldn't be victim blaming here. Give it a try at midmobile.com/switch whatever you're ready. $45 up from payment equivalent to fifteen dollars per month new customers on first three month plan only taxes and fees extra speed slower above 40 gigabytes of details. BBC sounds music radio podcasts. You're listening to the TMS podcast from BBC Radio 5 Live. We settle in for one of the most it's always always a favorite slot this. Ask the umparts favorite for us as we get to see John again. It's lovely to keep up to speak with you John. It really is. Thank you for handling it really. And we gives you a chance to put some questions and it's also got some as well. And to sort of bury old hatchets, answer lingering questions or whatever it may be that may be festering away for years in some cases. Some of it will likely than others. You know the sort of thing. And if you want to join in it's not too late. TMS@bbc.co.uk is the email Andy. This is a question on behalf of my comedy colleague John Robbins who five live listeners will know from the Alison John show and podcast and he asked me to put this to you John. He said I was playing for Thornbury cricket club, a club that played host to two graces for the under 15s against the touring side. I began my second spell of bowling and the first ball was called no ball. So I moved my run up back. But again, the second ball was called no ball. So I moved it so far back that I was delivering almost behind the wickets. A third no ball. I asked the umpire what was wrong and he said I had failed to tell him my action. Before he called it no ball. This bearing him on. He was 14 years old at the time. He told the umpire at the other end of his action but hadn't told the umpire when he changed ends what his action was. Was the umpire right to call him no ball? Straightly speaking yes but I mean as an umpire you're not looking to penalise. He's not he's not trying to gain an unfair advantage. We all forget things. The umpire could have called that ball and just had to have a quiet word really. But some umpires can be a little bit of vicious. I'll pass that on because he said it's been burning in him for nearly 30 years. Well I hope that's answered. And one thing by the way you should do by the way, if you're a scene bowler don't always put the marker back with a bow no balls. Best of advice ever given to me by the great Richard Hadley. Move it forward just to buy a foot or so and you'll have smaller steps and so on. So there you go. Victor lovely to see you. Why don't you follow? Okay I think this is just a sort of hard folly to start you off. But it's an ice-quip from Paul Rustin and he says my question for umpire Holder has been prompted by an incident in this series. The ball broke the bottom of Oli Pope's bat which most have happened. If the piece of bat that the delivery broke off had hit the wicket and dislodged the bell, would Pope have been given out? Yes not. Yeah out. Because there's a small bit of the bat. Because the bat is part of his equipment or person. The bat, the piece out flew off is just hard luck. So even if the piece is not much bigger than the mat. It doesn't matter how big it is. If it breaks the wicket but there must be an appeal. Yeah yeah. If it breaks the wicket and there's an appeal the umpire has got to be given out. Well that's a good one to start with because I thought you were going to say something like dead ball or something like that. But it does. Really? Any part of the batsman's equipment or person hits the wicket in that situation and receiving it. Yeah he's out. So that's an unfortunate way to go, isn't it? If the helmet comes off when he's taking evasive action or something it rolls into the stumps on your way. Yeah you'll make sure you equip them to secure. Alright that was a good answer because I didn't really expect that one. Christopher Fernley, good day to you. This happened at a match at Redborne in Hertfordshire. The home team were batting. He did get some unlikely scenarios. In the away umpire carried a glass of water to the bowler's end and having emptied the glass placed it down behind the wicket but in front of his feet. So between the umpire and the stumps, this umpire put an empty glass of water. He drunk the water. The Redborne batsman played a nice drive back past the bowler who fielded excellently through that the bowler's end stumps. The batsman were mid-wicket when the ball hurtled towards the bowler's end wicket thrown by the bowler to turn him out and would have struck the wicket but it was impeded by the glass and bounced harmlessly away. The batsman made their ground, much of the annoyance of the fielding side who claimed penalty runs. The square leg bracket home umpire disputed this and suggested dead ball but the away umpire rather sheepishly backed the call for penalty runs which were not given. The away team went to lose by four runs and they wouldn't let the issue drop. I suggest that a gentleman's fine to the away umpire for a round of drinks in the bar later but this wasn't accepted either. What should have happened? But penalty runs for what? I'm not sure. In the first place, the umpire, the away umpire, who placed the glass on the ground was out of order. He's not supposed to take drinks onto the field like that and certainly not to put a glass on the ground. It was the away umpire as well. Well, either umpire, whether it be homework, the umpire is not supposed to put things on the ground. So the umpire caused the problem. He should have bought a round of drinks in the bar later. Absolutely. R2? Not out and at least two rounds of drinks there. Not out, no penalty runs. That is a dead ball situation. Yep. Absolutely. This is my question actually. I went to a dinner at a club called Bridge Town Creek Club which is in Exmore. Right. And it's a wonderful tiny little ground on one side of the river and on the other side of the boundary slopes very severely. So if you're a canny home fieldsman, you don't chase it up the hill. It either goes before it rolls back in again. And I think this involved, I think Harry Latchman played there once because I think they were telling me at this dinner. Anyway, this is the scenario. The batsman hits the ball and it goes up the hill. It doesn't go to the boundary. They start running. But the still, I promise you, I've been there. It's a lovely ground. It is steep. And I think Harry Latchman might have been playing with us by the Bible and shouted, "Don't touch that ball. Don't touch that ball." So it goes up the hill and then it rolls back, boom, boom, boom, boom. Back to the middle and blow me down. It hits the stumps at the batsman's end. No one else has touched that ball. So is the batsman out, bold? No. Well, what's the difference between that and an inside edge onto the stump? Totally different situation. Well, how are you going to justify that? Well, you can. I mean, the unpaired decision is final. I mean, it will be a farce. Because the ground slopes, the batsman hits the ball legally on the field and it rolls back onto the wicket. No, the fielder has touched the ball. That's not hitting the... it's not hitting the wicket or... It's not bold. No, not at all. What are the odds on that happening, by the way? Well, the odds are not slim. Correct. But it is possible on this ground that the ball could roll back down from the boundary onto the middle. Hit the stumps. They were intrigued. No. They are saying you must ask John. What the unpaired should have done before the game started was have a chat with both captains and say, "Look, because of the lie of the land, if the ball rolls, it goes up the hill and rolls back onto the wicket, it's not out." Okay. Very... Okay. So your answer is not a... Absolutely. Okay. Well, thank you. That'll keep them happy. It sounds an amazing ground. It is a wonderful ground. It is wonderful. John Sharp, hello. A batsman comes out a bat at the fall of a wicket, takes guard. Ready to face the first ball, went for superstitious reasons. They do a quick last minute adjustment of the helmet, and the helmet breaks. Not wanted to bat without a helmet. It calls for a new one. But at the time it takes the new helmet to come out three minutes have passed. Since the last batsman was out, and the fielding captain appeals for timed out. Think I know the answer to this. Should this be out or not? Not out. The umpires, it is the safety of the batsman, of the players on the field. It's a responsibility of the umpires. And you can't tell him that he's got, because the helmet didn't come out within three minutes. That he's got to take strike again. So he's got to wait until it comes out. And hopefully just add the time on to the end of the play. Doesn't timed out also stop when you walk over the boundary edge as a new batsman. Isn't that the start of, to get timed out from that point? Or is it when you actually get to the middle? When you've got to get to the middle and be in a position, in a position either to take strike or for your colleague to take strike. And it's very rare, but it happened to Andrew Matthews, didn't it? Yes, yes. In a test match, I suppose. Hello, Rao, wasn't it? This is from Nick Simmons, from Atlanta, Georgia. Oh, right. In a scenario where a middle or a batsman is batting with a number 11, and is looking to get a single to stay on strike for the next over, what would happen if he hits a single towards the boundary to keep the strike. But the fielding side kicked the ball over the rope to concede four runs, thereby putting the number 11, and then he puts in brackets for some reason. Imagine Field, Toughnell, back on strike, and potentially therefore taking, you know, being able to take the weaker batsman and get the weaker batsman out. Is there anything in the laws to prevent such skull-duggery? Not really. Not really. If he does it, he does it. If he kicks a ball over the boundary, there'll be penalty runs added because that's a deliberate app. Is penalty runs plus the four runs? So penalty runs five runs, is that? So the ball going over the boundary, having been kicked there, made one run, they say they won one, then they kick it over the boundary. So it is actually five penalty runs because that's illegal feeling. And plus four. Plus four, it's nine. But they have achieved, nonetheless, their goal of getting the weak batsman on strike for the next over. Yeah. So they're allowed to do that. That's right. Yeah, he's nothing. Stop you from kicking the ball over the road. Forming, committing. Have you ever been, have you ever been umpiring with us? No. Because you could imagine it would be, you know, it would be worthwhile fielding captain doing that to try and get that number 11 out. No. Okay. Well, they'll be doing it all over the country now. Here's an anonymous one. Men's cricket teams with the majority of beard wearers are now common. Who's this from, Maggie? Do you know? Cricket is an umpires. Indeed. Hello, Keith. I hope you're well. Men's cricket teams with the majority, I like the way he stresses men's with the majority of beard wearers are now common. A bowler finding that the ball needs drying, tosses the ball to a fielder with a beard. The player dries the ball using his substantial beard. However, he has previously applied beard oil. Should the umpire investigate if this means the condition of the ball has been tampered with? Yes. Because you're not supposed to drive the ball with your beard. You've got to use some sort of cloth. Could you blow on it? You can blow on it, absolutely. You can blow on it. That is not a problem. But you're not supposed to drive the ball with your beard because of what you just said. There could be an illegal substance on the beard. So that field would be in trouble? If once you start, it could be fibrous. That's the illegal fielding. The same as catching it in your cap or whatever. If you use your cap deliberately, that's five penalty runs. So the fielder there would have given away potentially five runs. But the ball, however, remains tampered with. It's got beard oil on it. So if the umpires have been in it when he does his inspection, the ball has got any... It's changed. It's changed. He's entitled to change it. It'll change the ball. Absolutely. Right. There you go. Thank you. This is from Tony Goulding, and we may have touched on it earlier. He says it's great to have John back to us the umpire. He says it's a high load of a test series. Thank you. There you are. He says we see a lot of batsmen in the one day format switching from right to left hand as the ball is about to deliver. Is there anything in the rules to prevent a bowler doing likewise? Is he running up, hiding the ball to ball a mix of right arm over and left arm around in the same over? It is illegal. He must inform the umpire, who will inform the striker. But there's... Okay. Yeah. I thought that was the answer. Yes. But there is nothing to stop a batsman who is right handed switching over before the ball is even delivered. That's okay, Ian. And whatever position he gets in when the ball is delivered, that's what he... That's what his stance is. So if he is a right-hander batting as right-handers do traditionally. Yeah. And then he switches and he becomes a left-hander. If he does it before the ball is full. If he does it, yes. Oh, I see. So you've got to bring into your head what is pitching outside leg stumps? That's right. That changes. That's right. But obviously most of these guys, when they play those shots, they kind of switch while the ball has just been really. But the ball is feeling a bit hard done by that suddenly they end up falling to a bloke who's suddenly batting left handed and hitting you for six. It is. But what was cover pulling? I mean, when it first started to become popular, there was a lot of discussion about it. And the lawmakers have decided that this... What we have now is what it's... That's the law. They've changed the law. Okay. Thank you, Tony. I remember discussing that because I created a scenario in which... A number 11 was going out to face somebody like Murali with everyone around the bat. You're losing the game. You're right-handed normally, but you take guard, left-handed. So you are a left-handed batsman. But then the last minute you turn to right and you can just kick every ball away because his ball will be pitching outside your... What is now your off-stump? But it was your leg-stump. So you could just kick it away and you couldn't be out of it. Yeah. Well, I mean, there was a something like that with... Derma... Reeve, I think there's... I can't remember if he was playing against Hampshire. But it was a county match where Derma ended up throwing his bat outside. That's right. And that caused a lot of controversy. Well, I thought Derma was okay. We've had this before. Because he was switching rounds. And then it was a question whether he threw his bat in the direction of one of the fielders. In which case he was obstructing the field or something. And Derma got a lot of flack, but I thought it was perfectly rational what he was trying to do. But if you're throwing your bat, I mean, you're supposed to hold your bat, hold on to it. I mean, you play the game within not only just the laws, but the spirit. And throwing your bat at the ball is not really in the spirit of it. Okay. Right, now here's an interesting one. And I must have heard the answer to this. Ryan's sailing in Plymouth, but not that Plymouth. Michigan. U.S.A. U.S.A. Is he today? In the recent T20 World Cup final, there was a moment that was part of the brilliance for finals match, but left an interpretation of a ruling question for me, he says. In the 20th over, South Africa's David Miller flogged a wide full toss down the ground. It was brilliantly taken on the boundary edge by Surakuma Yadav, if you remember. Yadav took the catch in bounds within the boundary. And his momentum tried to tiptoe the rope, carried him out of the field of play. But before he left the field of play, he did toss the ball in the air. And as he re-entered the field of play, he took the catch. As he jumped back in the field of play, he caught the ball before he had landed back in play. Ryan says, "I thought that prior to re-taking a catch, you had to re-establish yourself back inside the boundary prior to touching the ball. Please help this uniformed American agree, as he says, with Rule 19.1 and the boundary, bothering me since the T20 World Cup final. So his last contact with the ground was outside the field of play. Mm-hmm. Is the boundary a vertical thing that you can leap back into without actually grounding yourself within the... That is a great area, really, in the laws. That's a great area in the laws, because he's supposed to re-enter the field of play. Yes. And the field of play is not in the air. The field of play is on the ground. It is. So he should actually land back on the field and then catch the ball. Yeah. Look at it while he's in the air. It was spectacular. I'm watching it. But that was, yeah, so he wasn't back in again. Well, he was, strictly speaking, he was still off the field of play. The TMS Podcast from BBC Radio 5 Live. Ryan Reynolds here for, I guess, my hundredth mint commercial. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. My dad works in B2B marketing. He came by my school for career day and said he was a big row as man. Then he told everyone how much he loved calculating his return on ad spend. My friends still laughing at me to this day. Not everyone gets B2B. But with LinkedIn, you'll be able to reach people who do. Get a hundred dollar credit on your next ad campaign. Go to linkedin.com/results to claim your credit. That's linkedin.com/results. Terms and conditions apply. LinkedIn, the place to be, to be. I've got one from David Cuthbert. It won't happen this very often, perhaps in first-class cricket, but it does happen quite frequently. I think it says recently after standing at Square Lake for my son's under 15 team. The bowler bowler ball that bounced very short and bounced again. It bounced at least twice and almost certainly a third time. The bassman hit the ball and was caught out. The umpire looked at me and I said two bounces, not out. Was I correct? The ball has got about more... So can you be out after the ball's bounced twice? No, after the second bounce it should be called no wall. OK, that is the clear end of that. But it happens quite, you know, it may not happen at first-class level very often, but that sort of thing would happen in under 10 cricket quite often. Junior cricket. You can only be caught out if it's on the first bounce. If it's bounced twice, you can't... You call no ball, but can the batsman still score off it? Yeah, the ball is still live. The ball is still live, but you can't be caught. No, you can't, no. If it's a no ball, you can't be caught. OK. The only way you can be out after a run-off a no ball is apart from obstruction and so on is run-off attempting a run. OK. It can't be caught. Thank you. Duncan Beavis and Coventry Hello, a Warickshire League panel umpire. This happened in a recent Warickshire Premier League match. The batsman attempted a reverse pull stroke sweep. The ball bounced higher than he expected and hit the bat near the handle. But playing this shot, imagine a horizontal shot. And the follow-through that batsman accidentally connected perfectly with the ball a second time. Boom, boom. So it went fizzing over Gully for six. So you can imagine this time to bang. The fielding side wasn't happy and claimed it was a double hit. And the six should not be allowed. My colleague and I called Dead Ball to discuss what had happened. It's obviously a regular test match. We called Dead Ball to discuss it. What is the correct decision? We decided on Dead Ball runs not to count. And the ball to count is one for the over. No way. Six runs. Six runs. I mean, it wasn't a deliberate. It's just accidental. Yeah. Six runs. End of. And the ball, the ball counts as the ball. So is the deliberate thing a key factor? It's got to be seen by the umpires to be intentional. But a wall swing. Yeah, yeah. Just parked. Just locked. Yeah, you couldn't as a batsman kind of kick the ball up in the air. No. And then swat it for six. No, absolutely not. No. If they've ruled it as one for the over, for height, I guess, or this. I don't know. Then that would still -- they should have still called it one. Yes. If it's kind of one for the over, it's fine. Yeah. So it should have been six. Six runs. And one for the over. Yeah. Well, there you go. Thank you, Duncan. So this happened in our opening game of the season. Thornham versus Hadfield, St. Andrews. Our number six was going well, looking like he might win the game. When he hit one to long off and was caught, the opposition ran in to celebrate and our batsman started to walk off. At this point, the square leg umpire made it evident that a no ball had been signaled due to there being three players behind square on the next side. The batsman was halfway to the pavilion at the bowl as in. The ball was thrown into the way to keep removing the bells and, in quotes, running out the batsman who thought he had been caught. The umpire gave the batsman run out. Would you have done so? No. Once the umpire realizes that the batsman is leaving his crease under a misapprehension, you mustn't be given up. Yeah. That should not have been given up. Yeah. I remember actually, I remember witnessing a game in Australia, a test match. That's right. When, I think, one of the Pakistan batsman smashed the ball to square cover or something. It was caught, walked off the pitch, was set off and was then, you know, run out in this fashion and the umpire gave it out. That happened in the Caribbean. Yeah. But in his free Australia, Dean Jones played an attacking shot, was caught, didn't hear the umpire, didn't hear the, and Dean Jones didn't hear the no ball caught either at the bowl as in. And the batsman, that's what he walks away from, and he's the fielder then who's caught the ball through the ball in. Mm-hmm. And he was given run out. It was a run out. And it was a mistake. It was a mistake. It should have issued. So the seat. He thought, he thought he had been caught. Mm-hmm. Midwicket, didn't saw the, no ball caught, wasn't heard. Yeah. So he left his ground and the ball was thrown in to the keeper who ran him out and he was given out. Mm-hmm. And that should not have been given up. Right. Okay. Well, thanks. That clarifies that. And it does happen. It's happened at the highest level. Yeah. Now we know at least twice. I've got two here from Rob Deakin for you to adjudicate on John. Firstly, he says, when I was at school, I was bowling very slow, left arm spin. My best over was a triple wicket maiden, but it could have been four. But for an unpowering question. Okay. Rob says I was ripping it sideways. The only time I've ever really got big spin. I pushed the fifth ball of the over a little wider. It pitched outside the white lines, marking the edges of the pitch, about three yards short of the crease. The unpassed signaled wide before the ball pitched. And the batsmen shouldered arms. The ball pitched. Bit. And took the leg stump. I appealed and the unpass shrugged and gave it out, but the batsmen refused to walk. And the unpower, a teacher, agreed with him. The ball was dead as soon as it was signaled wide. He went next ball to one much tighter, called 'em bold. But did I have 'em earlier? And would the wide stand, therefore, spoiling the maiden? The unpower there actually, instead of waiting until the ball had passed the striker, called wide early. Yes. You're supposed to let the ball pass the striker before. But he should look, if the ball has pitched outside the... The pitch is ten feet wide. If the ball pitches outside the ten foot, it's a no ball. Correct. Even though it hits the stumps ultimately. It's a no ball because it's not supposed to put the ball to be pitched on that 22-year-old by ten feet wide. The area is supposed to be pitched on that, not on... So, in fact, they got the right decision, although it should have been a no ball. That's right. And so it wasn't a maiden over. That's right. So, yeah. Not away. The second one, Rob Wright, this is his last game in Yorkshire Village Cricket. On FA Cup final day, we had five players versus a full eleven. Our captain refused balancing the sides, won the toss and chose to bowl. After forty-oh was in the field, I tore my calf muscle and went into bat last. The bowl was sending down relatively slow, medium pace, straight down the middle. And I got bat on each of the first three, but I couldn't get anything past the very close field. Everyone, by the keeper, was in front of the bat. The fourth ball, he tried to get more pace on it and it came directly at me, I stepped across the stumps. And the ball caught the back of my trousers as it went past. My partner called me through and I slowly limped a single while the fielders trotted off to retrieve the ball from the outfield, the unpar singular leg by. But the opposition captain demanded I return and the run be struck from the books. I looked at our captain, who was unpiring at Square Leg and he concurred. Next over, my partner fell first ball and the innings was over. I was unable to play for the rest of the year on my leg recovered. How should the unpar are the bowlers end to ruled? Bearing in mind, this is village cricket. And the unpar was a young-ish lad. I can understand him deferring to the two captains, but was he wrong to give the leg by? There's one vital thing in here that he's omitted to say in my view. So tell me, let me go through this again. Yep. The delivery, the ball is bald. The median pace to look right. And the batsman. It says here, in his words, stepped across the stumps and the ball caught the back of his trousers. Right. That's the leg by. I mean, presumably he's in the process of playing a stroke. That's the point. It doesn't say here. In my interpretation, it doesn't say here whether he played a shot or not. If he hasn't played a shot, then this is dead ball. Correct. Immediately dead ball. That's right. And the only exception to that is if I'm right, is if you're taking evasive action. If you're taking evasive action. You can have the leg by. That's right. So I think we need a bit more detail, Robert Adler, whether you're actually playing a shot with your... Or not. ...strained calf muscle or not, because if you weren't playing a shot, then the young-ish lad was absolutely spot-on. Right. This one's from Greg Arand. What is the law on a captain placing a fielder behind the bowler for a straight hit, i.e. between mid-off and goal? I tried doing this in a recent league match and was informed by the umpire that this was not permitted as the fielder was in front of the sight-screen behind the bowler's arm. So can you station someone right in front of the sight-screen? You can, but that person mustn't move because he could be a distraction for the striker. If he's standing behind the umpire and moving around as the batsman is in the process... How are you going to know that? Well, that's... You're a square leg umpire. You've got a colleague. Yeah, you need your mate in. You've got a cut. That's why umpiring is always about two men working together. Because, I mean, when I was playing under ten cricket, OB-H was the standard fooling position. Oh, sir. Over the bowler's head. I assume you bow like I did. But it's come back. That position has come back. Some of these... They stick someone not long off or long on, but right behind and sort of trying covering all options. Don't use it in Pakistan. Quite a lot. So it's up... In that situation, then, it's permitted, but the square leg umpire has to keep an eye on the fact that this bloke is not trying to distract the batsman. The striker? Absolutely, because that is... That is a possibility. If the batsman said I want him moved, what about that? But, yeah, if he wants to have him moved, again, you'll go and confer with your colleague. Yeah, yeah. And if, in your opinion, he's causing a distraction from being there, yes, you tell the captain he can't stay there. OK. That's good. Thank you. It's often Charles, which is a good question, because it does happen a lot, this. We see it, and it could happen today. Fielding on the boundary edge is getting ever more critical to the outcomes of matches. With the use of TV replays to seek evidence for fair decisions, how should umpas treat the position of the boundary? When it's been moved by a fielder from a previous dive, or similar instant, we see it a lot. You see, the boundary rope, or the sort of the sponges, we call it here, moved. Are they knocked deeper, or perhaps a little closer? How does the umpire treat that boundary when the actual rope itself has been moved? I mean, if you, it depends on if you've seen, from where you are, you and your colleague are, if you realize that the boundary has been significantly moved. But sometimes the boundary may get moved by a foot, and you just leave it as it is. As it is. But you would hope that the fielder who is knocked it out of position, when he gets up and realizes that he would try and push it back somewhere close to where it was before. Otherwise, you take the original line, don't you? That's right. Yes, and you try and work off that. That's right. We've got an email from Russell in Devon. You can see there, actually, just in a, I can read it. In a recent women's professional domestic game, a batter was given out, caught in the weakkeeper's helmet grill. And the batter had edged it. Was this correct? So can you get caught if the ball lodges in the grill of the helmet? Well, the helmet is part of the bigkeeper's equipment. So the ball can be caught in the helmet. OK. The key for it. So the umpire got it right. Yeah. OK. What they generally do. I've got a similar one. Here we are from John Reynolds. We've seen this happen a few times. In a recent televised match, there was a stumping where the ball rebounded from the weakkeeper's chest and broke the wicked. I thought the weakkeeper had to be in control of the ball to make a stumping, says John. No, the ball can rebound from any part of the way he puts person or equipment. He had to put off the wicket. Absolutely. This thing about being in control is for the fielders in the out field. Taking a catch. Yeah, taking a catch. Has to be in control of the ball and it's further moving. That's right. OK. This is from Eugene Johnson. I was bowling and the batsman attempted to cut the ball, which went very high and not very far. The gully fielder trotted in, took the catch. The batsman, or he trotted in in order to take the catch. The batsman ran towards the fielder and screamed, "Drop it!" And the fielder truly did drop it. So I appealed on the grounds of obstructing the field. Yeah. He was given not out and the umpire criticised me for making a trip disappear. Who was right? The fielder yelled, "Drop it!" He had given out for obstruction. Obstruction. He had no right to do what he did. OK. So he's got to go. Obstruction. Absolutely. Oh, there. So don't try that again. And penalty runs. And penalty runs. Absolutely. This obstruction. Hit him, yeah. It's deliberate. OK. Yeah. There you are. I'd never remember you being as tough as you sat on the field, John. Well, that's because we were also gentle with it. That's our analysis. No. We never used to question anything you said. No. Peter French played in a game recently where a large brick wall forms part of the boundary. "I was bowling," says Peter. And the batsman whacked it towards the wall. But our fielder stopped it. And the ball bounced along the line but didn't touch the wall. So imagine that. I guess it's just right inside the line of the wall. It was all very confusing. The umpire signaled four. But the fielder threw it back to me after a lot of kerfuffle where the fielder said it hadn't hit the wall. The ball's returned to me over the stumps. The batsman was halfway down the pitch because he thought it was four. But technically I ran him out because the umpire revised the shot to an all run two. But he didn't give the run out. Who's correct? So the umpire initially... The fielder left his... Sorry, the striker, the batsman left his position at the wicket because he thought it was a boundary. Yes. Does the umpire have signaled that four? Had the umpire signaled? Erm... I don't know. The umpire signaled four. So the umpire... So... Not... That's it. Not a run out. Yeah. Similar thing was... The match was at Trent Bridge, wasn't it? Right. That's match. That's match. And... But the umpire had not signalled four. That was at Trent Bridge, you're right. Yes. And... And Belly left his... He thought the ball had gone for four. And he... Yes. And he walked off with two... That's right. And he was given out. Yeah. And then they had a great sort of teatime meeting. Scorsed statesmanship. Statesmanship. Yeah. The umpires would have been involved. Umpires... But the umpires actually could have insisted that the original decision of run out stood. Right. Because... He was run out. That was just a nonsense. I mean... There was a lot of kerfuffle about what had happened. The reality is that Belly had had a bit of a blackout and left his position... It left a crease. Not knowing what had... If the ball had... Gone for four. Gone for four. Yeah. So he was wrong. He walked off a tee. Yeah. He can't do that. And they must have had a kerfuffle, or not a kerfuffle, a meeting. And in a way, very graciously. The Indians stood with this. I understand. I understand. I understand. That tendoko was there and tendoko was one of the people who encouraged Donnie and Company to reverse the decision. To ask the umpires to reverse the decision. OK. So it was a bit of... Oddly enough, if that hadn't happened on the cusp of tea, he'd have been out, wouldn't he? Yes. Well done, John. Did you enjoy that? Indeed indeed. Of course he does. You've got a big surprise. Thanks for coming. Thanks to all of you for all your questions. Actually, Victor, there's a fair old... We couldn't get through them all. No. No, no, no. And it is a lovely segment. And I don't think we'll get another one penciled. We have got another one, an old traffic. Next test match. Indeed. John's back at his home game for him. So that's really nice. So, you've got advanced notice for the next test match, the first test match against Sri Lanka at Old Trafford. We're doing it all again. So, to dream them up or just remember... Oh, just tell us what happened. Because a lot of these are events that have peculiarly happened. Yeah. That's some scenarios. And we need the answer. Planning for your next trip? Elevate your travel style with Quince. Quince has all the jet setting essentials you'll want for your next getaway. Like European linen, premium luggage options, buttery soft Italian leather bags, and so much more. And it's all priced at 50 to 80 percent less than similar brands. Plus, Quince only works with factories that use safe and ethical manufacturing practices. Pack your bags with high quality essentials you'll be wearing for vacations to come with Quince. Go to quince.com/trip for free shipping at 365 day returns. Should we go electric? I think we should go electrified with Toyota. Electrified? Electrified means options. So electrified looks different for everyone. Yup. And with more options for reducing carbon emissions, Toyota is electrified, diversified. Learn more about our Beyond Zero vision for the future at Toyota.com/BeyondZero.