The Corridor

Recent Posts

PLEASE NOTE The Corridor is moving grounds at the moment. This is the old site, and comments have been disabled. Check back tomorrow and we should be safely ensconced at our new home


Inzamam’s dismissal

By Scott 2 years ago, mid-February Leave a comment on this post

The most curious thing about the first ODI between India and Pakistan was Inzamam’s dismissal, given out obstructing the field. It’s a very rare dismissal.

If you didn’t see it, you can watch the video of it thanks to google video. He was given out under Law 37, Obstructing the field, which states:

1. Out Obstructing the field
Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It shall be regarded as obstruction if either batsman wilfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat, after the ball has touched a fielder. See 4 below.

2. Accidental obstruction
It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt.

Now it seems to be a clear cut case to me. Michael Holding questioned the spirit of the appeal, but to my mind, I have no complaints. I think Inzamam was being a bit of a smartarse, and he paid the price.

The other thing worth noting is that as cricket fans, we can now use tools like google video to replay and examine incidents like this. I think the future is bright for humanity in general. For cricket bloggers in particular, things are looking simply marvellous!

Tags: , , , , , |

21 Responses to “Inzamam’s dismissal”

  • worma wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 3.21 pm

    ..and even better for Google ;-)

    Ok about Inzi…the follow-up is that he not only openly declared his lack of awareness of the law in the post match interview, he has even made a huge issue of this in his next press conference (apparently today?) and openly accused Indian’s of being un-sportsmanlike.

    Now, an opposition captain speaking out in such an open manner is rare, and smacks of tactlessness (even if he felt rightfully aggrevied. I don’t think even Ponting made such a big issue of the runout in his press-conference?).

  • Mani wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 3.28 pm

    Well.. how about a link for the faisalabad dismissal too? there he was in his crease.. harmison absolutely fired the ball directly at him.. he jumped out of the way.. his foot lifted out of the crease for a second.. he was incorrectly given out.. so after that ppl must have told him that he should have just defended the ball with the bat if he was in his crease..
    this time he was just standing there not expecting the ball to be thrown at him.. the light was bad.. there was another fielder in front of the guy who threw the ball.. he sees this ball coming directly at him.. the reflex reaction was to block the ball with his bat.. when you see it in slomo it looks very deliberate.. watch it in full speed.. and you would realise that his intent was to keep the ball of his body.. very quick reflex reaction.. he wasn’t in his mind trying not to get out by blocking the ball…
    by the letter of the law he was given out…
    but now the problem is this:
    inzi gets in to this situation because of his record of runouts etc.. so ppl keep firing the ball at him.. he needs to be more aware of the crease and to get back in his crease.. at times he just takes a step forward and just stands there.. other players do this too.. but fielders don’t attack them because they are young guys who can just take a step back.. for inzi to get back takes an eternity with his bulk..
    so from now on if inzi is even an inch out of his crease with no intention to run you will see mean spirited cricketers firing the ball directly at inzi’s midrif.. what is going to do then? for a younger more agile person.. u can get out of the way.. but for inzi that’s not possible..
    serious injury can be caused.. if inzi had not stepped out of the way of harmisons furious throw.. he would definitely have had a broken wrist.. DO NOT throw at batsmen not looking to take runs is the right way to go.. otherwise it is going to be open season on firing throws at batsmen even an inch out of their ground.. and even at batsmen who are not out of the ground…
    this is just bad for cricket..
    inzi is getting the worst of it because of his past(runouts) and the fact that he can’t move about that quick..
    so yes under the law it is out.. but i do feel bad for inzi..
    in faisalabad he was incorrectly given out doing the right thing.. getting out of the way..
    here he did the wrong thing when the ball was coming directly at him.. he should have just turned around and got back in to his crease.. but if you see the video.. there was a fielder that was blocking his view of the fielder who was throwing the ball.. all of a sudden he sees this ball coming directly at him.. and just as a reflex he blocked it with his bat rather than get hit by it.. the light was really bad which caught him by surprise.. (the match was decided by D/L because of bad light)
    all these things combined created this problem for inzi..
    the only thing inzi can do from now is to get back into that crease asap.. but that still will not stop mean spirited ppl throwing back the ball directly at him.. just like harmison..
    i think this is against the spirit of the game..

  • Zainub wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 5.04 pm

    Now let’s not get carried away, shall we Mani?

    The Faisalabad and Peshawar incidents are entirely different. In Faisalabad Harmison tried to run out a batsman who was in his crease and never even attempted to take a run, instead he took evasive action against a throw that might well have knocked out his back. This is unsporting, because a batsman that never even tried to take a run, should never be run out! What happened at Peshawar is ENTIRELY different. Sreesanth tried to run Inzi after he had initially intended to take a run, and in this process landed a good yard or so out of his crease, and then on top of this, when the an opposition fielder tried to validly run him out, instead of trying to go back in his crease, he bats out the throw, which obviously accounts to him being out obstructing the field. I don’t understand what it unsporting in this. Or even mean spirited as you imply, trying to validly run out a batsman that is out of his crease is not mean spirited in my eyes.

    And to be perfectly honest, as I’ve said before, if Pakistan were in an identical position with say Tendulkar batting instead of Inzi, I doubt our fielders would not have appealed.

    I am actually quite disgusted that Inzi’s dragged this on so far, and talked about it at length in his The News column. Just reaffirms my believe that captains should never be allowed to write columns for websites while they’re still taking part in a series.

  • Alan R wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 6.26 pm

    Here in France I can’t get google video. They give a message: “Currently, the playback feature of Google Video isn’t available in your country.”

  • Wraye wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 7.24 pm

    Same thing in Germany. Damn.

  • Zainub wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 7.37 pm

    Worry not Alan and 3B.

    Google Vidoe can not directly playback in Pakistan also (and in China, UAE, Germany, Korea, France, India and several other regions) but you can work around it and still watch the video anyway. I came across the following easy to follow step by step guide a while ago, and by now, thanks to repeted usage, I’ve mastered it. Takes a bit of time, but worth it. And you get used to it in while.

    http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/01/download-watch-google-videos-in-any.html

  • Zainub wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 8.16 pm

    To cut the work out for you, you can directly paste this link into your broswer and it will play the video no matter where you are, Germany, France or even the Antarctic.

    http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?videoUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fvp.video.google.com%2Fvideodownload%3Fversion%3D0%26secureurl%3DlAAAADL50uB9ICfhxzVXPZibDp5FXkVs6abX25Iv__ZIiipA2mIFigiJZQqmXtBWDb-smG6LW2tlZE-99lwHt_65_ueD4UTVIdadvsYmNX9npbZUmp9fjwj5OrQE8uphD8oM-bqO0wVehx0qCLzl6GkQfRr1pLOnK74dSsXhulqkxmNHcoDBII9GKEcBeHb89_o_ZpJ_q0zFFwLS8exzkfb6MAQ%26sigh%3DkQ7MIhD_TzT3r7YVV8mU-JsXpjg%26begin%3D0%26len%3D148299%26docid%3D7291827629213340346&thumbnailUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2FThumbnailServer%3Fcontentid%3D3c8679104ca8beb5%26second%3D5%26itag%3Dw320%26urlcreated%3D1139428081%26sigh%3DU5pLGWnXgguvzSCVGoReN67IABs&playerId=7291827629213340346&playerMode=embedded“%20allowScriptAccess=”sameDomain”%20quality=”best”%20bgcolor=”#ffffff”%20scale=”noScale”%20wmode=”window”%20salign=”TL”%20>%20

  • Wraye wrote:
    February 8th, 2006 at 11.43 pm

    Thank you, Zany. You know something? You are a gem, and deserve all our eternal thanks.

    Thanks, be well, keep safe.

  • Wraye wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 12.06 am

    In Germany recently, at an indoor tournament, an umpire gave a wicket, stumped off a no-ball. We scorers objected, but the umpires decision had to be upheld, even though he was legally not out. Umpires decision. Actually, in this case, the dismissal did not seriously affect the score of the batting team, who lost by a large margin, but what if …

    I ask myself, as a scorer, what if? I get constantly tested about these rare occasions as part of my regular checks for being on duty at International level. Umpires must also go through this, surely?

    Why on earth is there not a test for cricket commentators? Or even captains before they face the press? When even Test captains no longer know the rules, and commentators make it up as they go along, are we heading for the long, dark age of cricket despair?

  • SpryCorpse wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 2.49 am

    From my view of the video, Inzi could make a case that he was defending himself. If he’d turned around and gone back to his crease keeping himself between the ball and the stumps, nobody would have given it a second thought. That he chose not to accept the bruise and instead play a lovely backfoot defensive has resulted in this kerfuffle. To me this was a line ball call that should traditionally go in favour of the batsman.
    There was certainly no poor sportsmanship in my view, particularly from the fielders. The appeal was justified, and the umpires could make a case for their decision.
    I would’ve been inclined to go the other way.

  • DesiPundit » A little controversy wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 3.52 am

    […] Scott at The Corridor of Uncertainty writes about Inzamam’s controversial dismissal in the first India-Pakistan ODI and links to a Google Video clip of the dismissal.  […]

  • Hammy wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 4.42 am

    Was that the Jones Boy (Deano) commentating? Mani certainly has put a lot of thought into this but a reflex action doesn’t allow for a perfect defence shot to be played. Inzi was out of his ground and had no right to hit the ball and was given out correctly.

  • Shalimar wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 7.02 am

    The fact is that Indians were so desperate to win the match that they would do any thing. The real problem with Inzimam was that just few months ago, England’s bowler Harmison threw same sort of ball at Inzamam, to avoide injury inzamam moved away. Inzamam was given out, I think to avoide injury more than any thing else he put the ball on the bad. There is absloutely no way he was trying to take a run. poor inzamam doesn’t know what to do defend or be given out, or , not defend and still be given out.

  • Zainub wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 7.56 am

    Yes, unfortunately that was Deano. My requests for sending him back to Australia continue to fall on deaf ears. As I mentioned to Scott the other night, even he could do a better job then Deano.

  • Hammy wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 8.50 am

    Hey Zainub,

    I named my kid after Dean Jones. He he.

  • Alan R wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 10.29 am

    Thanks for the tip, Zainub. Unfortunately, they seem to have removed the “Add to site” link, presumably to close this loophole. But the google translate loophole still works.

    As for the dismissal, now that I’ve seen it, it’s a bit harsh but seems like a good call. How do we know the throw would not have hit the stumps before he got back? You’ve got to expect that any world class cricket side will atack a player’s weakness. Inzy’s weakness is his relative lack of mobility between the wickets. Not knowing the rules is apparently another - a bad weakness for a captain.

  • Alan R wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 2.43 pm

    Looks like I was mistaken about the closed loophole. The “add to site” link seems to be optional, at the discretion of the poster, so some videos don’t have it.

  • aNTi wrote:
    February 9th, 2006 at 3.50 pm

    there was a fielder that was blocking his view of the fielder who was throwing the ball.. all of a sudden he sees this ball coming directly at him.. and just as a reflex he blocked it with his bat rather than get hit by it..
    Mani: Look at the video that Zai has linked to here. Between Raina picks the ball up at mid off and when Raina is ready to throw the ball at 1:10, Kaif is almost at his place at the non striker’s end and Sree Santh is walking back. So when Raina throws the ball, you can see Inzy watching the flight of the ball and meeting it with the middle of the bat with both hands still gripping the handle. IMHO, if he was fending off a blow to his body, only his left hand will be on the handle (as a cricketer, I know MY instincts). Even if Inzy was not thinking about the ramifications, he certainly was watching the ball and Raina was betwen Kaif and Sreesanth and not obscured by either of the other players.
    Other than all that, what pissed me off was the way Ramiz Raja broached the topic in the post match ceremony! And that might be why Inzy chose to launch this diatribe.
    Moin though, is another matter altogther. He is probably Pakistan’s version of Bedi, who is always farting his mouth off!

  • karthik wrote:
    February 18th, 2006 at 7.17 am

    we know wat unsportmanship appeal is? in 1999 shoaib pulled down out sachin out of grease who has already completed run and given was out.

    in chennai test ijaz ahmed took a catch of ganguly which has already found the grass and went for appeal in the crunch situation.

    memebers part of the appeal r speakin abt sportmanship.ppl tend to forget things happened in ground while holdin the mike.

  • RJ wrote:
    February 23rd, 2006 at 8.03 pm

    @ Wray and Alan R:
    the reason that certain Google Videos are not available (after Zainub’s hack, it doesn’t make a fig of diff anyway!) is that the original uploader of the particular clip can specify which countries can see and which cannot.

    But then Zainub’s got one over Google Video on that!

  • Wraye wrote:
    February 23rd, 2006 at 9.18 pm

    thanks JR, too true. Works for me every time now - yahoo :)


    • « Ponting’s humour failure | Main | What Statsguru can tell us about the first final between Australia and Sri Lanka »