03-02-2023, 10:53 AM
Interesting new tactic which is obviously only relevant when the keeper is keeping up at the stumps when the spinners are bowling. If the keeper thinks the batsman nicked a catch to him or was trapped LBW, take off the bails and claim a stumping. The umpire at square leg will send it upstairs if the batsman was playing forward to check if the back foot lifted. Then on the review, they check firstly for caught behind or LBW before checking for the stumping. Even if the eventual decision is not out, the fielding side doesn’t lose a challenge. Of course, if the umpire at square leg turns down the appeal for stumping without sending it upstairs, the fielding captain can challenge.
Not a bad little lurk. If I were a Test cricket coach, I’d be telling my keeper he has to take the bails if there’s any chance of an LBW or caught behind and appeal even if there’s no doubt the batsman kept his foot behind the line.
I would have thought the 3rd umpire should only decide the stumping. If there was no stumping, he should tell the square leg umpire to say not out. But if the batsman was stumped and it wasn’t a no ball then check for caught or LBW as they would take precedence.
Not a bad little lurk. If I were a Test cricket coach, I’d be telling my keeper he has to take the bails if there’s any chance of an LBW or caught behind and appeal even if there’s no doubt the batsman kept his foot behind the line.
I would have thought the 3rd umpire should only decide the stumping. If there was no stumping, he should tell the square leg umpire to say not out. But if the batsman was stumped and it wasn’t a no ball then check for caught or LBW as they would take precedence.