LBW | The Laws of Cricket Explained with Stephen Fry 

I mean, this World Cup...

Poor Rashid :(

@@shubbbb What happened this world cup? I don't remember any such case?

@@shahzaibishaque in this world cup, the bails that they used were so heavy that a total of 3 times, the ball hit the stumps but the bails didn't fall off. I don't exactly remember all 3 instances but I do believe one happened in the Ind v Aus match.

adsonkool Imagine if you would *have* used proper English

No, this is a International standard for overturning an umpire’s decision on DRS

Thanks for your input :) also, I checked up on it and it's up to the field umpire to decide on the wicket's outcome.

Yes, there are three umpires, but ultimately the non-striking umpire at the bowler's end has final verdict. He may consult with square leg umpire or third (TV) umpire for differing evidence, like slow motion replays and ball tracking, but its his word that goes. We hope that he is going to be impartial. It used to be that if he was unsure, he'd called for the third umpire to get his opinion, and that still can happen today, but now the teams can also call upon him in a review (DRS). This is where the "half the ball" standard comes into affect. The onfield umpire's call has more weighting, with the third umpire only being able to change a decision with conclusive proof that the decision was wrong (conclusive being these rules about where its pitching), and you'll here the third umpire over radio say to the on-field umpire to reverse his decision or to keep it, and why (eg found a small edge). The on-field's requirement for an LBW is literally his or her subjective but professionally informed opinion about it. Needing conclusive proof is also where a lot of DRS controversies lie, because the third umpire didn't have conclusive proof even though we think it was obvious eg Nathon Lyon vs NZ in 2015.

No

Fuckin hell...ive been trying to figure out cricket for years. I haven't gotten anywhere tho

Batting out of order rule in baseball is similarly complicated. There are three different outcomes, depending on when the appeal for batting out of order is made. This is one area where cricket is somewhat less complicated. There is no set batting order.

I think a British Parliamentary committee was set up to add this law

@@gurbindersekhon8240 Possibly, because it is not exactly accurate. A batsman can be out LBW if the ball does not pitch anywhere but hits him on front of the stumps if the umpire thinks that the delivery would have gone on to hit the stumps. An umpire should also take into account how far a ball has travelled from pitching to hitting the batsman before being relatively "certain" that the delivery would have hit the stumps. Imagine you are a batman playing a spinner well in front of your crease. If the ball only travels a foot after pitching before hitting you in front of the stumps, would you be entirely happy that an umpire "knew" it would hit the stumps? Some people have been watching too much Hawkeye where the ball always goes straight on and is always rising after it has pitched.

I think its pretty fair, not out if the ball pitches on the leg stump is pretty valid because the leg would always be in front of the bat which the bowlers would exploit

​@@user-sj9xq6hb9pThere was some debate about the leg stump bit back in the day. I remember one of the arguments being that it should be out regardless of whether or not the ball is pitched wicket to wicket because it's the responsibility of the batsman to stop the ball from hitting his leg and if he is beaten by the bowler then it is the right of the bowler to be able to claim the fruit of his hard work. The motion even got a majority, but it didn't get 2/3rd of the vote so it was rejected. Funnily enough, the supporters of the motion in those days (this was more than a 100 years ago) thought that this rule amendment was necessary in part because the batsmen were scoring too many runs. Imagine what they would say if we told them of the totals we see today in just 50 overs!

Dragon Fire dude I didn’t understand point 2 and4

@@venkatkarthik5172rule 2 states that the ball must pitch on the line or off- side of the off stump, if not it's straight away not out. Rule 4 states that if batsmen doesn't intended to play( left the ball on its way) then impact doesn't matter. Else the impact must be on the line for the batsmen to be out.

😂😂

Video will play for lifetime

Anand Sharma Try here. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-q-1HSZ3o6ow.html

I mean it's a pretty simple rule, the video would only need to be ten seconds long

There you explained it

Why you so butthurt like your team was in the finals

@@hijack69 haha

Such lines would give an advantage to the bowler making their balls almost always accurate.

i don't think the umpires would agree, everybody would see the umpires mistakes clearly. I know that it must hard to concentrate on every ball bowled all day but that is what their job is . Get it right or get out.

@@euphemiaadamson8375 That's exactly right. The rule gives the batter a break if he or she is trying to play a shot in the circumstances you describe.

There are 2 other circumstances where the ball would otherwise have hit the stumps, but the player is not out LBW. 1. The ball pitched outside the line of the leg stump, 2. The ball hit the batter outside the line of off stump. There's a further condition attached to this second situation that the batter needs to be attempting to play a shot. i.e. if the batter is not attempting to play a shot (they just stick their pad in the way for example) then even if the ball hits the batter outside the line of off stump, it can be given out LBW.

@@jonranger451 They're both in there if you read again

@@shuffleboardwizard For some reason I was only seeing your first sentence and not the other content. You are of course correct that you included these. Thanks for the correction.

Thanks Jon. Appreciate your comments @@jonranger451

Its true

It's a run scored as a result of the ball hitting the batsman's leg or gear. (Not hands). He can score runs as in a regular delivery. Provided it is not an LBW.

Yes, leg byes are runs scored after hitting the batsman anywhere accept the hand holding the bat, assuming they aren't out lbw

Unless the ball is a full-toss, the impact cannot be outside the line of the leg-stump.

Impact is important.

Whichever way the batsman was standing as the bowler runs in is how they determine it even if as the bowler releases it they switch

You salty geezer 😂😂

@@ryanathwal8819 yep still salty not gonna lie, brilliant innings from Stokes but Jesus Christ how is Wilson an ashes umpire?

nut0003 my first reaction was that it was plumb and it clearly was, nothing obstructed his view I don’t understand how he didn’t give it out haha

@@ryanathwal8819 mate I was in disbelief, don't think there was a more obvious lbw all match. Thank god he's not umpiring any more of the ashes lol

nut0003 I didn’t know that he’s not, at least now there should be better umpiring

You must be joking. I'm more confused now than I was before!

As long as they are running, they can knock the wickets over and it's not out

To be able to play. If you're standing on either sides of the wicket, exposing them completely, the batsman can simply get bowled out.

Batsmen, generally, hit the ball in front of them, whereas in baseball the ball is frequently hit to the sides. A technically correct batsman may have his head over the ball when he strikes it which would be a physical impossibility in Baseball.

Because the bowler would burn him by hitting the stumps

@@rc210397 Ok, but you being in the way will just result in LBW so it doesn't make a difference...

@@leonhardeuler675 exactly, if the ball hits the wickets directly or your leg (and if the trajectory was towards the wickets), you're out either way. But the batsman would position themselves in a place where they can hit the ball easily. Which is by standing right in front of the wickets.

Year late but in case you’re still confused here you are: -The ball cannot pitch OR hit you outside leg stump -It can pitch outside off stump BUT you can’t be playing a shot for you to be given out if it hits you outside off stump. -If it pitches and hits you inline, regardless of what you do, you can be given out -It can also pitch outside off and hit you inline with the stumps and you can be given out

@cricketexplained8526 You could be right, but just something about fry's personality lends a possible ersatz passion for cricket. Regardless of who he's related to.

Both rules still serve to balance the game out, though. In Football, offside prevents the attack from receiving long range passes just outside the goal. In Cricket, LBW prevents the Batsmen from 'waiting' out the good bowlers by standing in front of the stumps.

Wtf it's ridiculous to call them ridiculous

Stops negative bowling

Arun Sundar only if it is outside off

nagesh naik when a Player opts for review then the on field umpire decision is called as umpires call.

MONISH RAJ but some times when lbw ball not hit the wickets than umpires gives the wicket .because of umpires call why?

nagesh naik here the player has to opt for review, and the decision by the 3rd umpire can be overturned only if more than 48% against the umpire decision. If its less than 48% then the decision will remain as per the on field umpire call

MONISH RAJ if some videos there na than better understanding so ......

nagesh naik yes watch matches. You will understand it.

If impact is outside off the batsmen is out unless he plays a genuine shot

It's the rule. Just is. Why is a batsman out caught?

@@scientia.veritas if bowl is going to hit stump by ball tracking how can you use body not to get out.explain Mei.if drs is take.sometime people oversmart themself.varable are picking outside leg. Hitting outside off .that whats I am taking.more variables more you can fool system.

@@scientia.veritas variables like in drs lbw if bowl clip the stump it is umpire call. Drs is brought to reduce umpire mistake then how come a single condition can have 2 results

The maim reason why LBW rule was brought is to stop the batsman from using his body to stop the ball and to play each and every ball that is bowled to him. If you have played cricket in your life you wouldn't argue about it at all.

@@vaibhavjain-ht3zz I am saying just make rule if bowl is going to hit stump.its out . irrespective of hitting offside or pitching outside leg.i am not talking about the rule of lbw .I want it to make simple

@@vaibhavjain-ht3zz cricket like you are professional cricketer .gully cricket Mei lbw nahi hota hai.i have seen more cricket than you, you must be watching only indian match.i follow almost every match be it women or domestic league