MCC tweaks wording of non-striker run-out law after confusion over Adam Zampa-Tom Rogers incident

The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) has tweaked the wording of the law pertaining to the run-out of a batter at the non-striker's end. The development comes days after confusion over Adam Zampa’s attempt to run out Tom Rogers during the Big Bash League (BBL).

In a game between the Melbourne Stars and the Melbourne Renegades on January 3, Stars skipper Zampa completed his follow-through and was about to release the ball when he turned back and dislodged the bails at the bowler’s end. Zampa appealed for a run-out, but the same was turned down as the leg-spinner completed his bowling action before deciding to whip off the bails.

Following the controversy, the MCC issued a statement, confirming that the right decision was made. The guardians of cricket laws explained that the "point" at which the ball comes into existence is "the highest point in that bowler's action".

On Thursday, January 19, the MCC added the wordings in Law 38.3, while also clarifying that the rule isn’t being changed and that the minor tweak is to clear the confusion. Law 38.3.2 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.

"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."

Incidents of bowlers trying to run out batters have been on the rise lately. And though it is a legal form of dismissal, the cricketing fraternity is split over the matter.

---

Adam Zampa defended act to try and run out Tom Rogers

While Zampa’s run-out attempt led to some criticism from a few former Australian cricketers, the leg-spinner defended his actions. He told SEN:

"I think I was well within my right to do it, it's in the rule book, it's well within the rules.Tom Rogers (was) running out of the crease before I had bowled... it (is) to his advantage.

"I bowled a good ball to Mackenzie Harvey which should have been one (run instead of two) if he (Rogers) hadn't done that. I thought he's definitely done something he shouldn't have."

The leg-spinner ended the game with figures of 1/18, but the Stars failed to chase down a target of 142. They were held to 108 for nine as Rogers claimed a five-fer.