LBW Rull Clarification when struck on a Full Toss
After some reason debate at my cricket club some confusion has arised regarding the LBW rule when the batter is hit with on the pads with a full toss.
Now I know that the if a batter is hit full pitch by a spinner it is to be assumed by the umpire that the ball will continue straight on from it's path, and that the umpires is to not predict any spin that may have occured or movement off the pitch.
Assuming the following delivery by a pace bowler;
- that the ball is a legal delivery and it hit the pads on the full toss in line with the stumps (the line between wicket to wicket) such as on the leg stump, middle or offstump.
- the batsman did not hit the ball prior to it hitting the pad
- the ball was a big inswinging delivery and was bowled from along side the stumps (not wide on the crease) and hit the pad off a full toss.
1. Would this be given out LBW automatically as the ball is to be assumed to be going straight on towards the stumps after interception by the pad? OR
2. Do you assume the ball will continue on the same path after hitting the pad? I.E. if it is an inswinger (to a right hander) and hit the pad in front of middle stump do you assume it would have continued to swing following it hitting the pad, in which case it really would have missed the leg stump?
After the recent debate my understanding of this particular rule is no clearer as the LBW rule listed on Top Stories - News - Lord's has a few contradictions as to what is out with an full toss LBW appeal.
I hope what I am trying to ask is clear enough. Any links to a good explaination on this scenario or any info to back up one's opinion would be appreciated.
Jeff
After some reason debate at my cricket club some confusion has arised regarding the LBW rule when the batter is hit with on the pads with a full toss.
Now I know that the if a batter is hit full pitch by a spinner it is to be assumed by the umpire that the ball will continue straight on from it's path, and that the umpires is to not predict any spin that may have occured or movement off the pitch.
Assuming the following delivery by a pace bowler;
- that the ball is a legal delivery and it hit the pads on the full toss in line with the stumps (the line between wicket to wicket) such as on the leg stump, middle or offstump.
- the batsman did not hit the ball prior to it hitting the pad
- the ball was a big inswinging delivery and was bowled from along side the stumps (not wide on the crease) and hit the pad off a full toss.
1. Would this be given out LBW automatically as the ball is to be assumed to be going straight on towards the stumps after interception by the pad? OR
2. Do you assume the ball will continue on the same path after hitting the pad? I.E. if it is an inswinger (to a right hander) and hit the pad in front of middle stump do you assume it would have continued to swing following it hitting the pad, in which case it really would have missed the leg stump?
After the recent debate my understanding of this particular rule is no clearer as the LBW rule listed on Top Stories - News - Lord's has a few contradictions as to what is out with an full toss LBW appeal.
I hope what I am trying to ask is clear enough. Any links to a good explaination on this scenario or any info to back up one's opinion would be appreciated.
Jeff