Did Vignesh Puthur Get Away with a Mitchell Starc-Like Back-Foot No Ball?
Key highlights
- Mitchell Starc Bowled a Back-Foot No-Ball vs RR
- The laws of a back-foot and front-foot no-ball are different
- Vignesh puthur’s old visuals have gone viral on social media
The capitals registered their fifth win in six matches as they matched top spot on the table and became the first team to register 10 points on the board this season. Starc won the player of the match (Potm) Award for the second time this season following a sensational last over where he ensured rr was unable to chase nine Runs. Later, he bowled a stunning super over to ensure the 2008 champions managed to get just 11 runs on the board.
On the fourth ball of the super as the umpire signalled a no-ball. However, it was a rare one as neither was starc’s front foot ahead of the crease, Nor was the delivery a waist-hight full toss. INTEAD, The Third Umpire Spotted that Australian Pacer Had Bowled A Back-Foot No-Ball.
Fact Check: Did the Umpire Make the Wrong Call Against Vignesh Puthur?
While The Claims Have Gone Viral on Social Media with the Umpires Being Accused The Five-Time Champions a let off but are they true? Well, a closer look at the rules shows that the decision by the Umpires Against Both Starc and Puthur is Correct.
Mcc Laws of the Game – Backfoot No -Ball
According to law 21.5
For a delivery to be fair in response of the face, in the delivery stride
(21.5.1) The bowler’s back foot must with with and not touching the return crease apperting to his/her stated mode of delivery.
(21.5.2) The bowler’s front foot must with some part of the foot of the foot of the foot, whoser grounded or raised
– on the same side of the imaginary line joining the two middle stumps as the return crease described in 21.5.1, and
– Behind the Popping Crease.
A closer look at the clip of puthur’s alleged no-ball shows that the 24-yar-old lands on his toes before his feet go across the backfoot crease. As the Above-Mentioned Law Sugges That The Backfoot No-Ball, Unlike The Front-Foot No-Ball is Considered at the first point of contact and not when the delivery is bowled.
In Puthur’s case, the initial landing point is inside the crease, and hence it is a legal delivery despite his feet going across the line when the ball is delivered.
An official statement from the ipl or match officials is still awailed on the latest controversy but the available information and visuals sugges that the call was made within the laws.
