EXTRA COVER: It's in the rules...
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Law 27: Obstructing the field.
Rarely employed, this law - qualified by the word "wilful" - exists largely so a batsman cannot barge over a fielder in order to prevent a run-out, knock him down in the execution of a catch, or even shout "Let's see you catch that one, sunshine" since it also defines distraction "by word or action" as equivalent to obstruction.
It might be worth an appeal next time Dermot Reeve indulges in the bat-throwing tactic he employed last week against Hampshire. By dropping the bat as he kicked the ball away with his left pad, Reeve immunised himself against being caught off the glove.
Rajesh Maru complained the tactic was unfair because it distracted silly point, who stepped away, unsure that Reeve's bat would not hit him. It was definitely wilful and arguably obstruction.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments