Should wicket keepers be allowed to be replaced during a game?

By Once Upon a Time on the Roar / Roar Guru

The bowler runs in and bowls, and the batsman lets it go through to the keeper.

The keeper passes it to first slip, and the ball makes its way through gully, cover, mid-off and back to the bowler.

This might happen roughly two balls of every over.

The bowler runs in and the batsman plays it defensively on the offside. It’s picked up by a fielder at cover who throws it to the keeper, and because he is up at the stumps, he by passes the slips and tosses it to silly mid-on, who then throws it up to mid-on who then gives it back to the bowler.

Next ball, the batsman plays defensively up to mid-on or mid-off, who pauses to confirm no run will be attempted, and then he starts shining it on his creams and as the bowler passes him on his way back to his mark he gives it to him ready for the next delivery.

The last two balls of the over sees runs scored, down the ground in the first instance and the chasing fielder picks it up inside the boundary and throws it to the bowler’s end – because it’s closer – and then both batsmen and fielding side turn their attention to the next delivery.

The next scoring shot is to fine leg for a comfortable single, so naturally this time the throw is to the keeper’s end. The ball is dead and the umpire calls “over”.

The ball can go dead for at least a couple of dozen reasons under the Laws of the Game, and the most common way for the ball to go dead is when both the batsmen at the wicket and the fielding side both consider it to be no longer in play.

If we take a stab in the dark and say that the average Test innings lasts about 100 overs and the average total about 300 – and perhaps 120 of those in boundaries – then 40 times out of 600, the ball will go dead because either it has reached the boundary, or a batsman has been dismissed.

The other 560 times is equivalent to about 93 completed overs.

I would take another stab in the dark and say that on the 95 per cent of occasions that the ball does not reach the boundary, nor is a batsman dismissed, that one in three times the keeper is the only member of the fielding side to handle the ball before it goes dead, a la the batsman simply let’s it go through.

Perhaps one in three times the keeper is the last to handle the ball before it goes dead, having previously been handled by another member of the fielding side, while also one in three times, one of the other ten fielders handles the ball but returns it straight back to the bowler.

What I am getting at is that the keeper probably handles the ball in play an equal amount of time to all other ten members of the fielding side combined.

(Photo by Morne de Klerk/Getty Images)

Regarding the law change in late 2017 that now allows a substitute fielder to wicket keep, I have surmised in various comments’ sections around The Roar that perhaps it was because that to forbid a substitute from keeping was as illogical as forbidding one to field in slips. Similarly, it would be like preventing a substitute fielder from lurking in the covers or short midwicket, possessing a dead-eyed dick of accuracy in hitting the stumps or even to patrol the boundary because the substitute fielder has a particularly strong throwing arm.

I have also yawned on more than one occasion when someone has suggested that India played the last Test with 12 players against our 11. After all, substitute fielders are still prohibited from bowling, acting as captain and of course batting (except as a like for like replacement in the case of ascertained concussion).

What got me thinking was my previously held belief that one could argue either way in this particular case. However, now I am leaning back towards considering that 2017 alteration to this particular law to be a mistake.

Although it is true that keeping is a specialist fielding position just like fielding in the slips or in the covers or anywhere else. There are several things that make it a unique fielding position. The obvious one is that the keeper is allowed to field the ball and catch wearing protective gloves as well as external padding on the legs.

Another is that a keeper stays in the same position the entire innings, whereas slips can be removed and then reinstated – and this is the same for any other fielding position.

We can add to that the fact that there is also a Law of Cricket that says that if a keeper did happen to move into a position that would be considered an abnormal place for a keeper to expect to take a delivery from the bowler then the keeper is no longer allowed to wear the gloves and external leg padding.

I am assuming that this law came about as a result of what Mike Brearley did in an ODI at the SCG in the first ever World Series Cup in 1979-80, the first Aussie summer after reunification.

With the West Indies needing three to win off the final delivery, Brearley dispatched all ten fielders (apart from the bowler of course) to the boundary, including wicket keeper David Bairstow, father of Johnny. It’s a pretty fair assumption that this incident is also what gave rise to the fielding circle.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

And then of course, there is also my previous estimation that the wicket keeper probably handles the ball in play an equal number of times with all other ten members of the fielding side combined.

Certainly, India can’t be considered to have played the third Test with 12 players because as I have said a number of times, Saha was neither allowed to bowl, bat or act as captain. However, there is a very good argument to be had that India did play the second half of the third Test with approximately 11.3 players.

Finally, the post 2017 law on the subject obviously leaves huge potential for abuse, even with the stipulation that the injury sustained by the original keeper must be the result of an external blow.

The Crowd Says:

2021-01-15T22:47:05+00:00

Rob

Guest


It isn’t any different. It’s a 12 man team. Concussion replacement okay but you don’t make a miracle recovery you sit out for 2 weeks minimum and it doubles there after.

AUTHOR

2021-01-15T14:11:44+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Yeah, I don't have a problem with that point of view.

2021-01-15T08:21:29+00:00

Melwyn Fernandes

Guest


In my view, the substitution Laws in Cricket must be changed to allow substitutions for all types of injuries to any player in the XI of either side..just like it is allowed in all other team sports. These restrictions / conditions are not only create confusion but are causing players to be exposed to the risk of aggravating injury by being forced to continue playing despite being injured. No self respecting player will fake injury to get someone to substitute for him. The call to allow or disallow must be left with the match officials who can take inputs from medical staff before making the decision. Wilful misrepresentation or faking injury should be severely punished.

AUTHOR

2021-01-15T01:30:03+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Maybe he thought Haddin might still make some runs with the bat, remembering runners were still allowed then ....

2021-01-15T01:27:58+00:00

JohnB

Roar Rookie


I'd forgotten that - an even more extreme situation and very greatly to Strauss' credit, because he most certainly didn't have to allow that change.

2021-01-15T00:52:52+00:00

DTM

Roar Rookie


All rules are likely to be manipulated by someone. Three test matches is a bit tough but I get where you are coming from. However, if Australia has a 4 test series against India then a 3 test series against say, Sri Lanka and by substituting a player in the 4th (and deciding) Indian test, that player misses the SL series, they may still take advantage of the rule. Also, will a fringe player hide an injury (or the severity of the injury) from his team management so he doesn't miss 3 tests and get forgotten about? Smith, Warner, Kohli or Bumrah would come back after a 3 test exile but would Burns, Head, Vihari etc?

2021-01-15T00:30:24+00:00

WillowWiz

Roar Rookie


:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

2021-01-14T23:00:58+00:00

Morsie

Roar Rookie


Are you Darren Gough?

2021-01-14T19:01:37+00:00

Extra Short Leg

Roar Rookie


Probably the easiest way to get the rule changed is for Australia to repeatedly 'game it' for a few tests, as India did in Sydney. When the Aussies pull a few tests out of the fire, the rest of the cricketing nations will be outraged and petition the ICC because it's unfair. Simple.

2021-01-14T18:07:02+00:00

Bimbster

Roar Rookie


Every injured player should be allowed a substitute. To prevent teams from misusing this rule, the injured player should be ineligible to play for the next 3 tests even if they recover before that

2021-01-14T17:10:12+00:00

Mikegreene

Guest


Yeah I may have gone ahead with the better batsman argument but i still think Saha was a better option than Pant considering his hit or miss approach. Pant's innings actually caught everyone by surprise which midway made India think that they have a chance to win but i don't think that thought was there when he came to bat. He came before Vihari because Vihari himself was not looking comfortable at all based on his first innings performance.

2021-01-14T17:04:22+00:00

Mikegreene

Guest


Pant surely has better average than Saha but Pant wasn't considered to be a dependable batsman considering his hit or miss approach and I don't think India was planning to go for the win when Pant came which was quite visible in the way he started his innings.

AUTHOR

2021-01-14T12:02:47+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Unless perhaps one of the original 11 on the team sheet before the toss takes the gloves in his absence?

AUTHOR

2021-01-14T11:48:56+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


He did THAT run out taking Steve Waugh’s outfield throw when India were scrambling for a 3rd run off the final ball to tie the match! They needed 4 to win off last ball, the run out preventing the 3rd, so they won by 1 run. Allan Border in his autobiography wrote ‘ … nobody was silly enough to call him Rod (Marsh) afterwards – we all thought ‘God’ might actually be more appropriate … ‘ (or words to that effect).

2021-01-14T11:45:56+00:00

Pope Paul VII

Roar Rookie


Don't remember that one. Did he take a catch?

2021-01-14T10:59:06+00:00

dat

Roar Rookie


I agree with most points except the one about saha being the better batsman. Though tbf this wicket didn't deteriorate as much and remained mostly flat even on day 5. Ashwin had been out of form with the bat for a while, so if he could score runs and push a case for a win had Vihari not messed up his hamstring, then i imagine Saha would have enjoyed batting on this wicket as well. It's on wickets where the ball moves around where he looks lost,otherwise he is adept at sticking around and batting for a while, as seen with his 100 against this Australian attack in Ranchi.

2021-01-14T10:43:35+00:00

dat

Roar Rookie


Not really, in the same sense as i have no issue with no warning given for mankad. I do think maybe banning underarm bowling a bit earlier before the incident took place and having a system for 1 warning before a mankad would have been fairer. But would i be bothered enough to rant about it repeatedly and say the other team cheated bring up a 'played 12 players' etc because the result didn't go the way some expected it to? No. If Wade was the designated keeper for this game and got hurt and Paine had to keep,i would have felt it be just as fair, Jadeja while not a keeper himself is also quite impactful on the field in terms of saving runs(saved the most amount of runs in the wc ),catching and creating opportunities for getting key batsmen out as seen with Smith's dismissal,but i imagine not many had any issue with him not taking the field and being padded up to bat as well. I don't get why this is getting overblown tbh,even from a keeping perspective Pant while not extraordinary by any means, isn't a part time keeper either. It's his keeping to spinners where he is terrible at, which is why Saha plays ahead of him in the subcontinent.Against pace he is still sort of passable. On the previous tour,in Adelaide ,on a surface which had more help for the quicks than this one,he tied the record for most dismissals by a keeper in a single game. With Jadeja not bowling and ashwin's dismissals being lbw any advantage india got from saha keeping in that innings was minimal at best.

AUTHOR

2021-01-14T09:44:39+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Underarm bowling was allowed in the rules on 2 Feb 1981 ... do you not have too many issues with what happened that day?

2021-01-14T09:22:09+00:00

dat

Roar Rookie


Cause he was taken for scans soon after he got out? I imagine both him and management were worried he broke something initially and wanted to get it checked early on and only when it was confirmed it wasn’t as bad as they initially thought he came into bat the next day. Even on day 5 Pant wasn’t exactly going berserk early on which is uncharacteristic of him,especially on a wicket which didn’t offer anything much to the bowlers. It took a while before he just decided to go out swinging. India didn’t field Jadeja as well ,who despite not being a keeper, has shown in this test as well how impactful he is on the field and was still padded up waiting to come in next despite being ruled out for a month ,but no one had any issues with him not taking the field(not directed you Paul, but for those who bring up the whole ‘india played 12 men’ nonsense).

2021-01-14T08:42:45+00:00

WillowWiz

Roar Rookie


Agree with you 100 % on that.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar