The MCC has updated its laws around non-striker runouts following the controversy around Adam Zampa’s recent attempt to dismiss Tom Rogers during a BBL match. For the unversed, Adam Zampa tried to complete the run out at the non-striker’s end despite seemingly completing the majority of his bowling action in a BBL match.
Following the incident, there were a lot of calls for the MCC to clarify the laws regarding when a non-striker run out can be affected. Rogers was not given out because of Zampa’s bowling arm had already passed the highest point of his action, something which wasn’t explained in the Laws at the time.
Watch the video of the incident:
Adam Zampa with a run out at non striker’s end, but it’s not out! pic.twitter.com/Phrd6Q6B1t
— Mufaddal Vohra (@mufaddal_vohra) January 3, 2023
Meanwhile, the MCC has added two sub-clauses to Law 38.3.1 to clarify at what point in a delivery the bowler is entitled to run out the striker. The official statement by the MCC read:
“We acknowledge that while this Law has generally been understood well by players and umpires, there is ambiguity in the wording which could lead to confusion. MCC has therefore moved to change the wording of Law 38.3 to deliver better clarity,”
The statement further added that the wording doesn’t change the law in any manner. MCC clarified that a batter is advised to stay in the crease till the highest point of release from the bowler, after which the latter cannot pull out from the delivery. While the main law regarding the method of dismissal remains the same, Law 38.3.1.1 now reads:
“The instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball is defined as the moment the bowler’s arm reaches the highest point of his/her normal bowling action in the delivery swing,” MCC added in 38.3.1.
The MCC law suggests that till the bowler reaches his/her highest point in the action, the nonstriker is liable to get run out if he leaves his crease. The statement concluded: “This becomes Law immediately and is in effect from January 19, 2023. Because this is not a material change to the meaning of the Law, MCC will not be re-printing Law books, but the change has already been reflected in all online materials,”
)
While the MCC issued a statement following the Zampa incident that the previous wording of the law was meant to be interpreted to mean that: “The bowler is *not* entitled to go all the way around in the bowling action and then run the non-striker out.” This clause was previously not included anywhere in the Laws and the MCC faced calls to formally implement that statement.
A second additional clause to the main law reads: “Even if the non-striker had left his/her ground before the instant at which the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, once the bowler has reached that point it is no longer possible for the bowler to run out the non-striker under this Law.”
In a statement alongside the rule change, the MCC said: “We acknowledge that while this Law has generally been understood well by players and umpires, there is ambiguity in the wording which could lead to confusion. MCC has therefore moved to change the wording of Law 38.3 to deliver better clarity. The current wording led some to think that if the non-striker left his/her ground before the expected moment of release, then the Run out could happen at any moment, even after the bowler had gone through the bowling action. That was never the intention of this Law, nor the way it was ever interpreted by MCC.
“It is important to note that this does not change the way the Law should be interpreted – it has been interpreted that way for the past six years, without much misunderstanding. However, the intention is that this will make things clearer.”
