5 elementary laws in cricket that make the game look like a joke

#2 Its called Leg-Before-Wicket (LBW), but should a batsman get struck on the body, he could still be given Out

An LBW verdict is controversial more often than not.

Law 36 is by far the most complicated and therefore, the most contested regulation in Cricket. Just as several environmental factors ought to conspire in unison to ensure a “snow fall”, the LBW is an event that plays out only if the cricketing gods are in perfect “alignment”.

The ball has to not just pitch in line with the stumps, but strike the batsman in line with the stumps as well. And in doing so, it ought to not be any higher than the height of the stumps and the interception must not be too far down the wicket so as to create doubt in the mind of the umpire over the impending trajectory of the ball. That is as close to rocket science that cricket can possibly get.

That such a law prevails and is left to the umpire’s human eye to discern over a split-second period is truly remarkable in itself. The complexity of the law is further validated by the several factors that are to be considered while playing out the “hawk-eye” drill prior to adjudication.

If these intricate elements were hard enough for my German colleagues to digest, they broke into spontaneous laughter at the mention of the infamous Sachin Tendulkar dismissal (in Australia to Glenn McGrath) as an example of a batsman being declared out-LBW despite not being struck on the legs.

Precision in terminology plays a vital role in the very construct of Cricket. Which is why you have an “in-swing”, “leg-cutter” and “cover-drive” among other correctly worded positions and occurrences in the game.

That the British invented the game makes it all the more important that the vocabulary used doesn’t undermine, if not mock, the very institutions of the game. Alas, in the case of the hallowed LBW law, the complexities notwithstanding, the slapdash terminology makes for amusing reading.