Test Match Special - Ashes Daily: Ask The Umpire - with John Holder

Episode Date: July 25, 2023

Jonathan Agnew and Vic Marks ask former international umpire John Holder your questions on the laws of cricket

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. The Dakar Rally is the ultimate off-road challenge. Perfect for the ultimate defender. The high-performance Defender Octa, 626 horsepower twin turbo V8 engine and intelligent 6D dynamics air suspension. Learn more at landrover.ca. BBC Sounds, music, radio, podcast. The TMS Podcast.

Take the Ashes with you this summer. Hear Every Ball, live on BBC Sounds. So, as promised, here we go, it's our first one of the year. Yes, indeed. First of course, John, how are you keeping, first of all? I am very well, thank you. You're looking fit and strong. Thank you.

Good man, I hope you're ready for this. I am. It's always a highlight, you know. It's always a highlight of the summer doing our arsey umpires. Because people, it's amazing how far back going through the sheets of emails that we have. How far back people go? There's a sort of resentment about something that happened 35 years ago in a friendly Sunday match, village game somewhere.

Was I out or not? You know, it sort of still burns away. So it's great fun. And as usual, there's our, I think, our collection of actually things that did happen. And ones that possibly didn't, but could have done. So not too many dead balls, thank you. Victor, as always, is my lovely assistant. You're a glamorous assistant.

I think he always used to say. Why don't you kick off? Well, I will kick off with... When we relate to this Azure series, we talked about briefly before that Mitchell's start catch. We'll get onto that in a second. Okay. This is from Stuart Ward.

A few years ago I was fielding at Cow Corner, corner and our visiting Aussie was fielding long on. The ball got hit out to him on the boundary and in Aussie fashion he caught the ball with his reverse hands in front of his face, perfectly secure. But in the same motion, he brought his hands down and dropped the ball to the floor as we all went to celebrate the catch. The ball hit the floor, rolled over the boundary, which the umpire said was now, it was a four. Although we obviously thought he was in control, we accepted the decision, ended up going on to tie the match. So was it a four, or was it out, is the question?

And we're in the same sort of territory as that Mitchell Stark catch, or dismissal of who was at Lords, aren't we? Mitchell Stark's catch. Well, let's talk about that one, then. It was a fact. The law says not only has the catcher got to catch the ball, we control the ball having caught it. But he or she must be able, must also control his or her further movement. So having caught the ball, you should be able to move to the right, to the left, wherever you want to move. The problem with Stark is that the only direction he could move was to fall.

He had no control over it. And then in falling, if in falling, he'd actually kept hold of the ball, but he grounded it. it. So it's not out. So Berea's Erasmus on that crime got it exactly right. Absolutely spot on. And it sounds, judging from Stewart's question,

that the umpire was probably right to say that is dark it is more difficult. What the umpire had to say to himself was did he have control of the ball and throw it on the ground? Yeah, yeah. And obviously it's a matter

of the umpire's opinion. And in his opinion, based on what he saw, he thought it was not, the ball was still alive. And I suppose, if you're going back to that Mitchell Stark catch, is that if he was aware of the law and he was in control, he wouldn't have taken the risk of sliding along like he did. Yeah, and he'd have put his hand under the ball. Yeah, he'd have been alright, but the ball was on the ground.

From what I saw, it was clearly a case of not out. There was an interesting one involving Joe Root in the next game, who dropped a couple. He took a catch at slip, And immediately, out of frustration at the ones who dropped, he hurled it to the ground. Well, that's different. He's got control of the ball, and he was able to throw it where he wanted to. So that was out.

And there was no problem. There was no problem with his movement. His movement was fine. He was under control. But he had the ball controlled enough to throw it to the ground. He threw it to the ground because he dropped the ball before. Exactly. That's right.

Okay. Well, that's good clarification. Thank you. It's a good start, I'd say. So it is to do with your own movements, yourself, as the field. You've got to be able to move in any direction you so deserve, and the umpires have got to, that's how the umpires see it. So I hope that helps Stuart.

It does. Now here's one from Richard Carrington, and this happened to us just before Christmas, Victor, in Pakistan. Right, yeah. And he relays it perfectly, very tense final hour, the last day, the first test played in Pakistan. Jack Leach finally got that final wicket. The point was here. The sun was already going down.

It was a fantastic scene, actually. It really was. I remember it so well, the sun started to set. Pakistan running out of batsmen. When Muhammad Ali, a quick bowler, splendid name, he was one of the two final Pakistan batsmen at the crease. He suddenly left the field for several minutes. We assumed it was a bathroom break.

But as the minutes ticked by, and this is actually this did happen. As the minutes ticked away, the sun went down. It was going to be bad light stop play. It was so tense. Let's say what was going to happen first. Would it take the final wicket, or would it be too dark and the umpires would take them off?

The England players are waiting, hands on hips. We in the comedy box saying, where is he? He just vanished. He just went off and left. So inevitably, and we did think about this at the time. We looked to ask you, how long could our old friend Muhammad be in the gents before you had to go and get him out

or can you time somebody out when he's already in? I mean, what would have been the scenario there if he had locked himself away and didn't come out? No, you've got me really something. I've never heard that before. There's nothing in the laws of cricket. No. I mean, all the umpires could do

really in the final analysis, if he didn't come back, was to say that, and it's complete. But it's not in the laws of cricket. There's nothing in the laws of cricket for that scenario. No. I mean, the umpires will have to go to the dressing room to see where he was. But if by then, the sun has gone down and it's become dangerous.

Then it's all too late. Absolutely. You can't start the game when people can't see the ball. Flush him out, I say, John. So have you had a scenario where you were umpiring him, the batsman saying, I'm telling me sorry, I'm just got to go to the loo. I've got to rush off. I've had that.

Yeah, yeah. I've had that. And you would obviously as a humane sort of person say, well, off you go, but quick as you can. You don't want the result happening on the pitch. No. But this did happen. Yeah. And it took some time for him to come back.

And there was a lot of unease around what was going on. Because of the sun, you know, that part of the world, it drops like a stone, doesn't it? Well, if you remember, there was a test match in Pakistan before a few years, but when... Made in the dark. Moin Kahn, the Pakistan keeper, was that because they were struggling, and England were winning the match,

and he was walking from behind the wicket slowly to walk our units that were at the end, deliberate to waste time. Steve Buckner dealt with that. Absolutely. This actually is a scenario that needs to be looked at because if it nine wickets down,

the sun going down, someone goes rushing off and doesn't come back. It needs to be... Right. That's going on a special file. This one is, again, something that relates to this series in particular. You know, there's been a lot of Bancers' bowl. And we've seen Alex Carey sometimes, unusually. He's standing on the leg side, say, to a left-handed batsman

because he knows the bowl that's going to bowl at leg stump or just outside, so he's looking for that leg-side. But it also says you can only have two men behind square on the leg side in the laws on post-body line. what I want to clarify is it is it okay for the wicket-keeper to stand outside leg stump as the bowler runs into bowl and still have two men behind square on the leg's side yeah but he must stand he must stand behind the pitch okay the pitch is 10 feet wide and if he goes outside that 10 foot he becomes a field he's not standing behind the wicket

but he's quite entitled to stand outside leg stump you'll say he can stand outside the leg stump yeah yeah but you've got to stand to be to be deemed the wicketkeeper you must be standing behind the pitch, behind the stumps, but in line with the width of the pitch. Okay. But on that subject, all the tail enders now are getting bounced, ball after ball after ball. And seemingly the umpires don't seem to intervene. But when you were playing, there would have been the odd moment perhaps where a tail ender in particular is getting bounced. And have you had to intervene, John? Well, we actually, I actually had the a game at Lourdes between Middlesex and Durham.

When Tuffers was being bounced by a chap Andy Simmington, Symington had lost his rag because Tuffer's was hanging around. Right. So he bowled back Tuffers two bounces in succession. So I said, that's the first one. That's the second one. That's it for the over. But the next ball, he ran up and bowled another bounces of Tuffers,

which I know balled, and gave him a first warning for dangerous and unfair bowling. And the Durham captain, John Lewis, wasn't very happy with me because that's what the law says. You would have taken into account, Tuftus' ability with the bat. Tuffus' lack of ability with the bat. It used to be, though, didn't it? I mean, now, number 11s now just get absolutely peppered with it. In actual fact, the law says that the emperor has got to take into consideration the batsman's ability

to handle that sort of bowling. Yes. So if there's a danger and you don't want someone getting injured, which is very, very likely. So the umpires really should be, if you're getting somebody constantly bowling at the batsman's rib cage

and he's struggling, the umpires can step in. Nothing these days. They don't. You've got helmet, you've got chest guard, you've got arm guard, you've got virtually every part of your body

is protected. I mean, you get, Travis Head got hit really hard on the helmet yesterday stood up I mean he seems to be okay I mean there seems to be less less reason for

a number 11 not to be able to or to avoid physical You say that now John You wouldn't say that if you were still playing Well I wouldn't and actually Dickie Byrd rescued me once by saying stop stop To whichever West Indian fastover it was So this man is incapable of defending himself

It was great so I said thank you Dickie Yeah that's what the law says Yeah well okay Now, Trevor Warner, you'll be chuckling at this. This is actually, this also goes back to Lords. Okay. To the incident. Trevor Warner from Wales.

He says, go and have a go at saying where I live. Okay. Klanderthewyn? Yeah, maybe. We've got a Welsh engineer who's shaking his head. O'Awayne, tell me what it is in my headphones. Can he say it? I've got to get it right in a minute.

But, Clander, I can't, I can't spell it. saying spell it. We'll get that. Anyway, Trevor knows where he's from from Wales. Now, could you please ask John Holder whether he considers that the verdict should have been run out rather than crediting the bowler with a rather dubious wicket, as in stumped? Because he was given out stumped, wasn't he? Correctly. Right. So can you explain the difference between why he was stumped and why he wasn't run out? But you can only be run out if you're attempting or run.

That's as simple as that. Absolutely. End of story. Absolutely. Right. So simple as that? Simple. I mean, he wasn't attempting a run.

No. He's wondering about, any thoughts on spirit of the game? Or does that put you... It's not nothing to do with the spirit of the game. The problem at Lourdes and Hedingly, with the two incidents, were a lack of knowledge of the laws of cricket. Simple. I mean, I saw the one at Lords as well, when close the player, Ponting, when it was raving about him, he knows several empires who would have given it out.

No, that's not true because he was, he controlled the ball, sort of, but he didn't control himself. He fell on the ground and grounded the ball, not out. Okay. I've got one. Go cast for this one as well. So it comes to John Shepard. And we were talking about this, again, earlier this summer. Are fielders allowed to wear bucket hats while fielding?

This is a new trend. You'll see the England players all wearing these bucket hats. There's nothing illegal about wearing a bucket hat? There's not. Nothing whatsoever. Is there anything illegal about any type of hat that you can wear when you're fielding? You can go in a sort of a... Because a hat can't give you an unfair advantage.

Right. So a hat is just protection, fear. for you, hey, that's all it is. Okay, excellent. I'm a bit surprised they don't wear them because we were talking about it with the wall, the fielding wall around Usman Quarja at Birmingham, and they're

just trying to put him off, and they're sitting there talking. So in my mind, I had it actually all put bucket hats on as well. You think they're a distraction. They're actually putting him off. But anyway, so they could have done that. Well, as long as they don't, as long as the fielders don't walk onto the pitch,

they can stand close by. No problem with bucket hats. Yeah, absolutely. It'd be quite a good sight, that. No, Victor. Okay, well, this doesn't have a reference to the current Aschus series, I don't think. It's from George, who's listening from home in Devon. He says, growing up playing cricket in Essex,

I remember a particular village green on the border with Hertfordshire, which had a road running through it inside the boundary. What I've always wondered is what would happen if mid-game, on a scorching hot day, A batter hits the ball in the air, just as a convertible car with its roof down, drives along the road intersecting the ground. The ball lands inside the back seat of the car. The driver, unaware, because they are blasting out loud music, and can't hear what is going on around them, drives off and takes the match ball with them. What should happen?

Does it count as a four? Is the ball considered dead as soon as the motorist drives away with it? Yes. Keep up the good work? Yes. Dead ball. No runs at all? Dead ball.

Well, we knew you'd get a dead ball in somewhere. That's it. So that's it. No runs. No runs. Just dead ball. Ball the ball again. Okay.

Thank you. Fiona from Canberra. Let's not forget we're broadcasting to Australia as well. Oh, Fiona. I hope you're enjoying your night down there. I'm wondering what I'm wondering what I'm wondering. happens and we hadn't a case today actually almost where this happened if a ball struck off the ground gets caught in a plastic bag that's floating in the air and it gets the wind carries it over

the boundary is that a six or is it a dead ball again we had a case down here this plastic bag was blowing around this morning which maybe is what Fiona was thinking about but if it i mean it's it's again maybe an unlikely scenario but but there happens to be a sort of shopping bag or something something in the air, the ball goes into it and the momentum takes it over the boundary. What are you giving? Well, I mean, that is a very difficult

because it's because of the momentum of the shot. The young Parker said that was a ball that carried the bag over because of the power of the shot. So I would imagine it would be six runs. I thought you'd go dead ball for that.

I don't see how you can call dead ball. No. Okay. Well, that's the first. He's rejected the dead ball conclusion. Shall I do this one? Yeah, because I've often wondered about this. Paul Shirley, really interesting question. I've been wondering for a while, he says, where the match ball is kept overnight? Is it in a suitable environment relative to the match conditions? I think I know the answer to this, certainly when you and I were together, John. I'm going to say it was just stuck in your umpire's coat pocket. overnight. Absolutely.

Or whichever umpire is going to start the following morning, he put in his case. Yeah, just sit there overnight in the umpire's room. That's right. I wonder what happens now. Do you think it's under lock and key and all sorts of marks made on it and... I don't know. I mean, I worked with ICC up to 2010 and as far as I remember,

the umpire's just to put... Because the umpire's room is locked up because of all the security now. the umpires would just have the ball in whichever umpire is going to start the following day he'll put the ball in his case and his lot. His bag and that was it? He's left in the umpire's room.

That's where cricket's so lovely isn't it? On one hand, everything's so high-tech and, you know, replays for this and minuscule analysis of that. But the match ball, a most central part of the whole thing is lobbed at a bag overnight and that's the end of it. I've got one here from Dan in Bath and he says this.

Imagine a situation where the scores are tied and the batting side is nine wickets down. The batter comes down the track. The bowler sees him coming and fires it wide beyond his reach. The keeper takes the ball and whips off the bales. The square leg umpire gives the batsman out stumped. correctly he says the standing umpire gives a wide also correctly he says obviously you can be

stumped off a wide but which team would win the same ball has enabled the batting side to surpass the target while the bowling side has successfully taken 10 wickets the the wide the wide counts the wide counts okay the white count the bat's right the white the white happened before before the stumping. Okay, so in that instance, the batting side has won. Yep. What have they won by, one wicket?

So that split second between the wide and the boils being... The stumping doesn't count. A stumping doesn't count. The stumping doesn't count. The wide comes first. That's right. Okay. White comes first because the wide is deemed to have started

at the moment it left the baller's hand. Okay. to win the Ashes. The untold stories of three key Ashes series is available now on BBC IPlayer. Money, glamour, politics, spying, violence, takeovers, kidnapping, and photocopying. This is sports, strangest crimes.

From the man who tried to buy cricket. One night, one game, one or take all, 20 US million dollars. The kidnap of a superhorse. It must have been terrifying. Of course it was. How we got through all that on. A trillion dollar takeover, which never took off.

Broadsters of this level, they will never stop. And an ill-advised errands changing F1 forever. It will haunt the people involved for as long as they live. Sports, strangest crimes. Listen on BBC Sounds. Here's one from James Fawcett. Hello James. who was umpiring an under 15s game this year

and something happened he'd never seen before a bowler bowled hit the stumps and one bail came out now this did actually happen the bail then landed and settled on the leg stump forming a tea this did happen

Oh, okay. As the bail didn't settle in both stumps, I believe it was broken. But my fellow umpire, brackets, from the batsman's school, close bracket. A sort of dicky bird, really. They're not out.

I acquiesced, but I felt that the bowler, it doesn't actually say from my school closed brackets. was denied a rightful wicked. Now, I mean, how did it land and forming a tea? But apparently this happened. How do these bales have to be in a stump? The bail must be removed completely from the top of the wicket.

So it could go up and land again. Yeah. And the stumps have not been broken. That's right. The bale must be removed completely from the top of the wickets. James, you're wrong. I'm afraid despite the square-le come pumping for the batswood school, He was correct.

Well, there you go. Thank you, John. Here's a quick one from Ian in North Yorkshire. Given the express pace and bounce from Mark Wood, Headingley, if a short pitch ball travels so far that it doesn't again bounce before crossing the boundary, this is the first bit. Is it six bys or four?

Six runs have got to come off the bat. So it's only four. so and likewise he gives another example if one of his dismissals had clipped the bales but it was a no ball and then cross the boundary

without bouncing that would be five no balls not seven no it's five because there's one for no ball automatically plus the four okay but the non-bouncing

ball that passes over the keeper and just keeps going and going which is just about possible when they're bowling Mark Woods Bay. He's still four. It's still four. Six runs can only come off the back.

Okay. Okay. It's apparently Graham McKenzie. Ray Lingleth always tells a story. Oh, right. In a Sunday league game as well, of a short run. Apparently, at Lord's, he pinged one straight into the sight screen. I mean, it's a long way to go.

He's a strong man. But he was. He had a really strong action. Didn't he? Huge shoulders. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Gavin McCartney, good morning, he writes. My question occurs in a friendly game a couple of seasons ago.

The bowler bowled a ball and the batsman tucked into the leg side and took off for a run. Our fielder at square leg went like lightning, collected the ball and threw it towards the stumps at the wicket-keeper's end. While this was happening, the wicket-keeper raced up to the stumps and knocked one of the bales off. The throw from the fielder was a direct hit, knocking the other bail off with the batsman short of his ground. the square leg umpah gave the batsman run out is this correct

I was captain on the day and decided not to withdraw the appeal so in regards there was one bail left on that was knocked off by the direct throw but the other one was already on the ground that's a good question one bail remains

you break if you knock it off years out. Is he? If he, if he, it's not broken with one bail

on the ground? The wicked is broken. So then, no, if the wicked is broken, then you've got to pull a stump out of the ground but make sure

that the ball is in the hand that you grab the stump with. So, on this occasion with one bail left. Yeah. Does that, so I still haven't quite worked out whether he's in

He's out this morning. He's out. No, he's not out because the only way he would have been out is if he struck one, the wicket one of the stumps that remain out of the ground. So you've got to, you've got to, you've got to strike it. Either strike it out with a ball, which you could if you hit it hard enough, or pull it out. All right, so one bail only left on the stumps constitutes the wicket having been broken.

The wicket is broken. The wicket is broken. you've got to take the alternative, more complicated route of grabbing the ball and wrenching the stumbling. I was throwing it out. So he was not out. He was not out. I wonder if there was bit of a rumpus, Gavin. He do say here, I decided

not to withdraw the appeal, which suggests the fans would have been very happy about it. But anyway, that could do for another day. Thank you for writing. Okay, I've got one from Graham Peters, from Middlesex, and a lot seems to be happening here the bowler

with his bowling hand accidentally breaks the bowler's end wicket in his delivery stride I told you there's a lot happening at the same time you notice that the non-striker has left his crease

you call signal no ball I presume because these broke in the stumps is that right the striker Here's the ball for six. Hang on, he says now you signal no ball

and a six followed by a free hit. He must be playing some sort of one-day game, this. At this point, however, forget that last bit. I think it complicates it. The fielder appeals for a runout. What do you do? That is no ball followed by dead ball.

Ah, that solves it. So that ball, once he's broken the stump... It's the ball as an emperor calls the end of that delivery. So you call no ball and then dead ball. So the fact that he's hit it as six is irrelevant. Absolutely. Because once he calls no dead ball, nothing else can happen. And life is much simpler after you call dead ball.

Yeah. So that's the six and everything that happens after that. Don't matter. It doesn't matter. What about the notion, though? What about the run out? You know, you know. He's called dead ball.

So the ball is dead. So there's no run out. Yeah, but he, the bowler, wittingly or not, by mistake or accident or not, has broken the stumps with the ball in his hand as he tries to deliver. Like a sort of what we used to call a man cab, is, you know, a run out of the non-striker. He didn't mean to do it, but nonetheless he has done it. But the non-striking batsman is out of his ground. Can he be run out? You have to appeal for one of those.

You have to appeal? Okay, let's say you appeal. Once he has broken the wicket. Yeah, yeah. The ball, there's no ball, immediately dead ball. Nothing can happen. For breaking the wicket in your delivery stride. But then there's a gray area between when you try and run someone out who's the non-striker,

you are kind of in your delivery stride, aren't you? No, but that is different from trying to delivering the ball. That's totally different from delivering the ball. This, I think, is known as the Steve Finn rule, isn't it? Yeah. It's up to Graham Smith and Steve Finn. That's right. The bales with your hand had nothing that would happen,

and Graham Smith argued absurdly as putting him off. That was a complete farce. What happened? It was a farce, yes. What happened was a farce. It should never have been a no ball, and it should never have been dead ball. It's a nonsense.

Dead ball to start with, which would be more ridiculous. Dead ball was rubbish. Yeah, yeah. And then to change the law, and for it to become a no. lot. It was nonsense. I'm with you on there, John. There was no distraction whatsoever. It was Graham Smith, just getting into it. It was a deliberate play to put Steve Finn off his trade.

Absolutely, John. Well said. Andy Kirby and Carmarthenshire, I once bowled someone out in a match in Swansea, but the ball went through the stumps. It hadn't been set up properly. The umpard gave the bouts of not out, much to my chagran, and the next ball got hit for four. Was he right? Well, absolutely, because what the umpire should have done is having realized that the stumps were too wide should have stopped the game and set the stumps correctly. Would you have checked yourself before the match started with a ball and just made sure they go through? Because once you put the bails on, the bills should fit snugly and you realize that the stumps are properly set up. A giveaway, the bails don't fit.

Absolutely. If the bills are, you've got great big gaps, you know the wicket is not set properly. So he's not out? Yeah, absolutely. On straight through. Absolutely. The umpire should have egg,

would have egg on his face, really, because... I've got one here from Julian Thomas, but actually, to be fair, it's not one for an umpire explicitly. But it relates to this game a bit. In the modern age with high accuracy weather forecasts, we hope. when we know that rain will curtail a test match

why don't we play on while the light is good on the days with no rain yesterday seemed like a prime example we could have played on to ensure we get as many scheduled overs as possible I'm not suggesting he says we change the scheduled number of overs in the match just that we should do more to preempt what will follow interested to hear what the team thinks I know you can't say

it's not it's beyond your pay pay share scale. That's the decision for the ICC. Yeah, but what do you think? Is it worth? I don't agree with that. Okay. I don't. I mean, because there's also a situation. How long are you going to play for? I mean, the players have been off running around

let us say it's a boiling hot. Yeah, yeah. Players have been running around bowling. You need a rest as well. So, I think. There's a limit. There's a limit to the amount of extra time you can play anyhow. Right. Here's our, here's our crazy one for the day. George Spooner.

in Cambridge. Hello, George. Here, good luck with this one, John. A batsman hits a ball towards the boundary. The pitch is near a farm. A bull walks onto the field and the ball gets speared onto one of the bull's horn. The field was nowhere near the ball, but he goes up to the bull,

removes the ball and claims the catch. Is he out? He's out of his mind, but I know if he's actually out of him. He's very brave. As soon as the bull came onto the field of play, dead ball. The game stops. And run for your lives.

Absolutely. No, you wouldn't allow that to happen. It's the same as a dog running on to the field of play and grabbing the ball. I suppose... And running around. I mean, that's a farce. I suppose when a bull or a dog intervenes that way,

it is up to the umpire, really, in the end, to retrieve the ball, is it not? My question is, what is that ball made of? And it gets spared on the bull's horns there? the horn punches it Well, it's been sharpening those horns as well That's a bit of a worry Have you ever seen that?

I mean there must be cases Out there in village cricket Club cricket, Sunday cricket Where a dog does come on and run off of the ball I mean it must happen quite a lot Isn't it? Probably I mean I have no idea

But I would imagine Yeah Then it's up to the ball Are you go and try and get hold of them Absolutely And you clean it up The problem is do the umpires And all the laws

Well exactly It's quite often they don't Here's an interesting one. Again, it's not, what is kind of your territory from Ben Pesto in North London. How much sledging is too much sledging? Does the umpire have a duty to intervene when it turns into more than good-natured chaff?

What are the options? Can he be dismissed or removed from the field for excessive sledging? It's interesting. You can now if the umpires, the laws have changed a few years ago and you can actually send a player off to Sinban now for bad behaviour.

what you deem as badly here, but yeah. How long for? Your own discretion, you send him off. You can send him off for the rest of the innings. If the transgression is serious enough, I think there are four levels of offences, and the most serious offence you can remove the border from the field of play for the rest of the innings.

So that didn't apply when you were on party. No, there must have been the odd instance when you were standing where you thought the sledging is out of, No, no. No. No. As soon as you see that sort of thing start, you either speak to the offender or to the fielding

or the offender's captain. I say, Skipper, I am not prepared to put it with sort of behaviour. Right. And then it's up to the captain probably or the batsman. Yeah. Usually the fielding captain. Fielding captain. If it's his place.

And you would depend on the fielding captain to take responsibility. That's right. The behaviour of his team. Last one is from Alfred Simons. Simons. During a game, Oh, Bola was taken away by police for questioning. Halfway through, he's over. Should they have waited till the end of the over, John?

There's one for you to finish on. Thank you for all your suggestions on the various scale of experiences that actually happened, and I'm particularly interested by that Muhammad Ali one. And the fact that the number 11 can start his innings, disappear to the gents and not come back. That is not covered in the lawsuit. They can't get him back out again.

I mean, that seems remarkable. podcast from BBC Radio 5 live Whether you call it football or soccer in your part of the world Match of the Day Africa Top 10 is the podcast from the BBC World Service ranking the best African players This guy is recognised as the best in the world Teams will come in turn boom And the biggest moments in African football

The whole world remembers that yet It's not just African and fans Match of the Day Africa top 10 Find it wherever you get your BBC podcasts