Why do emotions run high when a bowler dismisses a non-striker for venturing out before the ball is released? Perhaps the discontent stems from the fact that this action anticipates everything else: no delivery has been bowled, the batsman hasn’t engaged in the play, and spectators feel “cheated” by the non-execution of the cricketing ritual. Recently, at Lord’s, the crowd voiced their disapproval, and players like James Anderson expressed similar sentiments on Twitter when Indian bowler Deepti Sharma dislodged the bails at the non-striker’s end, catching England’s batter Charlotte Dean stepping out prematurely.
To state the obvious first, Sharma committed no wrongdoing; if anything, she exhibited presence of mind and the courage to embrace the “cheater” stigma. Contrary to popular belief, Dean wasn’t attempting to deceive. In the midst of nationalistic fervor, nuanced perspectives often get lost.
Dean had her bat inside the crease when Sharma not only landed her back foot but almost pressed down her front foot as well. Only then did Dean lift her bat out of the crease. The moment when the bowler’s front foot lands as the right arm goes up to release the ball, observed through peripheral vision, is when non-strikers typically begin leaving the crease. This habit is something they now need to reconsider.
Sharma spotted Dean, who only had her bat in the crease, and opted to pause, allowing her to stroll out. The gray area lies in intent: the non-striker wasn’t charging out to steal a run but merely assumed that the ball had been released.
This ambiguity of intent raises questions, akin to Shane Warne’s objection to Ashwin’s run-out of Jos Buttler in the IPL, arguing it should have been declared a dead ball. A similar sentiment was echoed by England’s James Anderson regarding Sharma’s action. However, Sunil Gavaskar disagrees, asserting that bowlers should be assessed based on their actions when releasing the ball, not on the batsman’s movements.
Cricket laws don’t entertain sympathy, foolishness, or a lack of intent as grounds to overlook a dismissal. Should the punishment be lenient for cases where there’s no intent to steal a run, as in Dean’s situation?
Cricket, as the cliché goes, is a funny game where intent doesn’t necessarily matter. Instances like Krishnamachari Srikkanth’s absent-minded run-out or Brendon McCullum’s dismissal of Muttiah Muralitharan for leaving the crease to congratulate his partner attest to this fact.
The debate around running out non-strikers continues, reflecting diverse opinions and revealing individual perspectives on the essence of the game. It’s a matter of personal interpretation in a sport where the rules clearly place the responsibility on the batsman not to leave the crease until the ball is delivered, leaving a divisive taste in the mouths of spectators and players alike.
