Print

[400notout]

Our league uses the standard front foot no ball free hit rule.

Last year we had a situation I'd love to know who was in the right.

Seamer bowling with a keeper up to the stumps.
No ball, so free hit to the batting side.
No run taken so field has to stay the same.
Keeper goes to stand back in normal position (not standing up)
Umpire not happy with this and makes him stand up to the stumps for the delivery.

Not a major issue thats going to change the course of a game, more of a curious one, I feel that a keeper is part of setting the field, but then the keeper is obviously not part of the 2 catchers in side the circle rule or included in any of the x number of fielders inside the circle type powerplays.

Anyone care to shed any light?

[Sam]

Very interesting question, I know it may not be correct but wikipedia states this :

The fielding team is not allowed to change the field on the free hit ball, if the same batsman (who received the original no ball) is on strike. However if the wicketkeeper is standing up at the stumps he is allowed to move back to a more traditional position for safety reasons.

Otherwise I'm not too sure.

[benny231]

As a keeper myself, if i'm standing up for his normal delivery then I don't see the point of going back for the free hit... I guess if you're being nitpicky then, because the field is not allowed to change, the keeper has to stay up? Is it different to a short cover going back to regulation cover for the free hit? Because effectively the keeper is going back because he doesn't want to concede byes, in the same way that a short cover would go back to regulation in order to stop runs?

[benny231]

@Sam, that's an interesting reason for the keeper being allowed to go back. By that reasoning a short cover or midwicket should be allowed back too? 

[smilley792]

International cricket some years agom swann was at short leg. A no ball was bowled.

He certaibly wasnt standing there for a free hit. But they cant change the field?

So he went and sat off the field for that ball. And then returned after.



Going on that basis. If a stumper does not feel safe. He can always leave the field.

[400notout]

So does it go down to safety? or Umpires discretion?

[benny231]

If a keeper is confident enough to stand up to a normal delivery then what changes with a free hit?

[400notout]

The fact that if the bat gets bat/pad or anything to deflect it past he has little/no chance of stopping it, whereas stood back he does?

[benny231]

Yeah, but isn't that the whole point of the field not changing on a free hit if the striker doesn't change? If a fielder at short cover isn't allowed to move back to the 30 yard circle then why should the keeper be allowed to move back?

Honestly it's a very interesting question you pose, whether or not the keeper is allowed to change his position, and to me it seems as if the keeper would gain an advantage by moving back, therefore he should not be allowed to do so.

[ProCricketer1982]

Keeper has to stay up. Otherwise he is trying to go back to be in a better position for the miss or edge for 4 etc.

Stupid rule anyway