Test Match Special - Ask The Umpire - with John Holder

Episode Date: August 22, 2024

Former international umpire John Holder joins Jonathan Agnew and Vic Marks for answers to your cricketing predicaments.What if the ball hits a pigeon? How big does an animal have to be to stop play? And can a question 50 years in the making be answered?Plus, John has an announcement to make...

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. To embrace the impossible requires a vehicle that pushes what's possible. Defender 110 boasts a towing capacity of 3,500 kilograms, a weighting depth of 900 millimeters and a roof load up to 300 kilograms. Learn more at landrover.ca. BBC sounds, music, radio, podcasts. You're listening to the TMS Podcasts. from BBC Radio 5 Live.

Hello, I'm Jonathan Agnew, and welcome to a bonus test match special podcast. It's that slots we all love, ask the umpire. Vic Marks and I asked John Holder, your cricketing quandaries, and there's a special announcement from John in here as well. You're listening to the TMS podcast from BBC Radio 5 Live. Look, we have got a sackful, a sackful of questions here. for Ask the Umpire, which I know it's a thing that you've loved doing. Are they all serious questions?

No. They're not. So you'll have some fun. We've got to, exactly, which is what this slot is. But it does resolve disputes and so on as well. It's not all about trying to, as I say, trying to get you to make a mistake or something or to rule something silly. It's about, actually, it's about sorting out things that have rumbled on in some cases for years, isn't it?

And that's what I've enjoyed. I mean, I mean, the laws of cricket can be quite complex. Very. And with my experience and I suppose my knowledge of the laws and so on, it's been good to come on and explain to people who love the game exactly what the employer can and can't do. I've enjoyed that. Yeah, yeah.

Good, right. Well, should we start? You and James is the first one on. If a batsman hits a six or a shot for six. But it hits a passing pigeon. and then drops to the fielder at Cow Corner. Is this considered out? Or is it a dead ball?

It might be a dead pigeon. But is it, so what's the situation there? That's out caught. I mean, it's an act of God. I mean, there was a test match in Australia many years ago where Clave Lloyd killed a pigeon flying past. And I think the ball might have been caught. But it's just regard as an act of God.

So any sort of act of God, I mean, are passing anything if it deflects? Something up there, you can't control that. We've got no control over that. The exception is trees, isn't it? Like Canterbury. But trees are planted in the ground. Yes. The pigeon is in, the bird is in the air.

No relation to the ground at all. So there are rules about trees that are drawn up and agreed and it's known as local rules, I guess. Yeah, I mean, what the two umpires should do before the match starts, is to, and when you do your pre-match inspection, and you go around and you determine where the boundary is or isn't, and let both captains know so that when you start the game, you know exactly where you stand as far as boundaries and so on are concerned. Didn't it happen before county games?

I can't ever remember seeing umpars go around and look at things. Oh, we do, we do, we do. First day, I mean, I would, when I was umpiring, I would get to the ground by nine, half past nine, and you go, I mean, and you'll go to have a look around. have a chat with a groundsman. That's vitally important for umpires. Have a chat with the ground.

He knows all the local ins and outs of things and so on. So yeah. Even as the ground that you've stood on scores of time? If you've been there before, you don't need to go into that sort of detail. But if you, especially new grounds, the grounds you've never been on before, where there are potential obstacles like trees and so on,

you need to do an inspection. If there is any doubt, you need to do an inspection. Right, there you go. I mean that's amazing because I've got one from Sam Palmer who was asking almost exactly the same question about if you hit a pigeon and it stops the ball going for six because you've hit it really well but it hits the pigeon and it's caught. How are luck? Well I'm on pigeon. It just reminds me of a story actually that it's not a question we've had but I think it involved John Snow playing a test match at the Oval which England were losing and they wanted to waste time. So he took out a whole bunch of food stuff, little nibbles.

And, of course, at the Oval, there's always birds on the pitch, aren't there? Or pigeons? And he would sprinkle these sort of breadcrumbs all around the Oval. And I suspect, you know, someone like Dickie would have been umpiring. Would have been panicking. So, but if as a hawk-eyed umpire, you can spot John Snow or anyone else, really, just sprinkling breadcrumbs on the square. Have you got any, are you allowed to intervene there?

It's not, it's not covered in the laws of cricket. But the umpire is actually in charge of the game. Yeah. So anything that impacts on the game, you would reprimand him. Well, absolutely. And if it's serious enough and it does cause in a situation where time is important and it causes a delay, then you've got to report it as well. Okay, yeah. We had jelly beans on the pitch at Trent Bridgeton. That's right.

Zahir Khan wasn't very pleased about that. We spent a long time trying to work out. Who'd planted them there, didn't we? And why? Anyway, okay. This is from Robin Clark, from Worcestershire. It's the final over before an interval, and it's bold, and the umpire calls over and play stops.

But during the interval, the umpire is informed that he or she miscounted, and the over contained just five valid balls. What happens at the beginning of the next session? Nothing. The scorer's will record it in their book as a complete over, six balls, even though only five have been bowed. Okay.

That's the end of it. Fair enough. I've got one on a similar vein there that I'm just looking for, or I'm going to have to... Oh, here we are. Alan Sutton, we had a disagreement earlier in the season. I always like these ones at start like this. We had a disagreement earlier in the season

during a 45-over-league match which has a nine-over limit per bowler. Unfortunately, there was not a league umpire. One of our bowlers took a wicket on the third ball of the over, the batsman's caught at cover, and he left the field. As the new batsman entered the field, the scorer's pointed out that the bowler was now in his 10th over.

the limit of nine what should have happened what do they do there's nothing you can do in fact that happened I did that in a game at Cardiff with Glomorgon a limited over game

and I should have only bowled whether it be eight or nine over but I actually bowled the extra over forgot completely this is when you're playing yeah no I was umpiring at Cardiff and what happened

yeah I must have been enjoying it too much Well, apart from that, what happened? But as far as the game's concerned, that's it. It was just recorded as an offer. Okay. Yeah. So there weren't any extra overs bowled. Yeah.

But one bowler had actually bowled one over too many. And I just missed it. I'd missed that, the fact of that. Okay. Yeah, that he did. But, I mean, I'm just getting excited here. I mean, if it was the Somerset team of my era, and it transpired that Joe Garner,

opposed to me, bowed an extra over. The opposition would be very unhappy. So be it. So be it. Aren't I right in saying? I'm just thinking completely off the cuff here. And we were talking about it yesterday because of that delivery that was bold, the LBW, the P roller.

Wasn't the one that Hooper bolted and NASA, seventh ball of the over? I think that was the final ignominy of the whole event. It actually shouldn't have bowed it anyway. Well, that made us even more sympathetic to NASA. I'm pretty sure that's right. But I need to check out. Results, you can tinkle with your computer. You can't go back and...

Yeah, undo it. It's happened. It's happened and it's part of the game. You just get on with it. Yeah. Oh, well. I've got one here from James in Norfolk, I think. And it's quite a long one, but it's worth pursuing.

I was umpiring an under 13 club match. At the start of the game, the opposition umpire, who seemed a friendly chat, told me that he'd only this year started umpiring. as his boy was in the team. He also said he had no real background in cricket, but he's really enjoying it. Anyway, my team were chasing 120 off 20 overs

and had reached 85 for 8 with eight overs left. It was going to be a tight finish. I was standing at the bowler's end, this is important, when my team's best player, who was going nicely, attempted a flamboyant cover driver and missed the ball by about half a foot. The bottom of his bat did, however, hit the ground

as he played the shot. The ball was caught by the wicket-keeper. Hearing a noise, as is typical at this level, a couple of fielders, but not the keeper nor the bowler, appealed. I didn't comment on their ridiculous appeal. I just looked down to mark the dot in the scorebook who's scoring as well, it seems. It was at this point that the batsman, well, the difficulty began. I became aware of some celebratory noises from the fielders, and also of our batsmen asking, am I really out? It took me few seconds to realize that the square leg umpire had while i was looking down at the schoolbook given the batsman out caught behind indeed the umpire then said loudly to the batsman we all heard you hit it that's don't argue being well schooled in cricket etiquette by his knowledgeable coach

that's me he said the batsman began to walk off shaking his head in disbelief what should have happened next the square leg umpire has no authority to give a batsman out that is the bowl his ends. So he can only give him out stumped, say. Yeah, stopped or run out. Yeah. But it's got nothing at all to do with the square leg umpire. It is the strikers end umpire. The, um, the, the baller's end umpire. That's his jurisdiction. Yeah. So he batsman should not have been given, should not have been given out. So if you, I mean, I suppose it would have happened more likely in a first class game sometimes. You're at square leg. And someone's been given out for a sort of caught behind down the leg side, possibly off the glove.

And you might have actually at square leg a better view. Absolutely. You might be able to just give a wink to the, if he looks at you at the umpire, but basically it's not your business. Absolutely not. That's the bowlers and umpires decision. Okay. I suppose if you're a really good umpire and you have a good rapport, you might look

at the, if you're the bowling umpire, you might look at the square leg umpire to see whether he can help. And that's what a lot of umpires do. Yeah, they do. Before the match starts, you, you sit down in the dressing room with your colleague. with your colleague and you decide how best you can operate and help you help one another so if he and if yeah if you will have agreed with him that because as you said he's got a better perspective of what happened than the bowler's end umpire and if if that's what you agree that's what you

agree but strictly speaking it's the that is it is the bowler's end umpire decision right okay thank you hello miles mcculloch a long-time listener first-time emailer I was facing a spin bowler on a village green pitch with a healthy slope. I was going along a lovely rate approaching triple figures. I faced a filthy half-tracker and tried to hammer it to the boundary. Instead, I miskewed it. Bottom-edged the ball hard into the ground. The ball bounced up off the pitch and was heading towards my stumps.

In a moment, I turned and took urgent evasive. action, hitting the ball again to stop my stumps from being disrupted. But in my enthusiasm, I hit the ball so hard it flew down the hill and the ball went for four. A fielder appealed, almost jokingly, but I was given out for hitting the ball twice. I protested with the umpire. It wasn't my intention to score runs, but rather just to stop myself from getting out. I even struck a bargain with the opposing captain agreeing not to play an attacking shot for the next six ball. that I faced if he withdrew the appeal. Thankfully, he accepted.

But this leads me to two questions. First, should the umpire have given me out? No. Not if it's a case of defending your wicket. Yes, genuinely defending. You can use your bat. You can kick the ball away, but you can... Have you ever given an umpire, a batsman out hitting the ball twice?

No, no, but I... I don't think I've ever seen it. It happened here in a test match with Australia. Graham Goode. Graham Gooch? Of course. And he, and he edged, he played defensively. They bounced up.

The ball came, yeah, and he knocked it away with his hand. Yes. So that, yes. He could have knocked it away with his bat. It would have been fine. But you can't take your hand off the bat and knock the ball. You can't touch it. That's a good shout.

I remember seeing that. Yeah. I was the third umpire, so I remember it. Secondly, is it within the spirit and ethics of the game for me to have struck up such a bargain? Not really. I mean, that... It's quite cunning though, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. He's obviously been able to think on his feet very quickly. He didn't get his hundred, he's out for 97. So there you are.

Some sort of retribution there. Go on, Victor. This is from Paul Whitney from Dunsfold Creek Club. A bowler bowls an above waist-high full toss. to a batsman which the batsman duly dispatches towards the square leg boundary on the full oh well this is not sure he's doing this the square leg umpire signals it at a no bore i think this wouldn't have happened until the following sentence is finished the fielder on the boundary takes the catch but being a switched on chap he realizes that the runout is still on i he

recognises it's a no ball and he pulls his arm back to fire in a bullet throw above the stumps but in his haste the ball slips from his hand and drops over the boundary is this a six no no it's just it's just four no balls four no balls of six can only come off the back a full off the bat you can't you can yet you can only get a six if the ball if the ball comes leaves a bat and goes full over the boundary you can't get a six like otherwise any other way no well what you can't get a six if a field attempts to catch it and it touches his fingers but still goes over the boundary if if it's a legal delivery yes but if it's an illegal delivery it's a if it's an illegal delivery hang on

Hang on. So this is a no ball, which has gone full off the... The oddity about the question is that you wouldn't have signalled no ball until that period of play is finished, I suspect, would you? Well, for a sort of... If the bowlers and empire was uncertain about the height of the delivery, obviously he would confer with his colleague afterwards. Yeah, but if the ball has come full off the bat and gone full over the boundary, it's got to be six. But if it's... even though this is an odd one because he's caught it the field on the boundary has caught it

but then opted to throw it but it wasn't a deliberate thing no no no it's not deliberate it's just fallen out of his hand and ended up on the wrongs on the far side of the rope was he in control of all six no balls yeah yeah he wasn't in control in further movement was he at the ball in fact that would have been six no okay so that's six six plus the no ball in seven runs in truth you would have um it's come full off the back you wouldn't have called the no ball until all that was completed in reality i don't suppose well it's not necessarily it all depends on how how alert the the umpola's an empire was and and he as soon as he sees the trajectory of the ball he might very well have called no ball yeah so the

ball has been hit full off the bat and it's got hit the field and gone over the boundary it's six no balls in fact it's seven no balls seven oh he's getting better six plus one Hit the jackpot there. I mean, oddly enough, in this, in this era, because of the, I'm thinking now the professional game, the fielding on the boundary is astonishing. Unbelievable. And the way that they conjure these catches by taking the ball, throwing it up at the air. I mean, it's a nightmare for umpires, actually, isn't it?

But you have to. You've got a, well, it's, if there are no cameras there, you, it's very hard to search. Absolutely, yeah, yeah. In fact, they've practiced this now. Yeah, yeah. And they are brilliant. They're brilliant. Yeah.

They are brilliant. And result. Just quickly on the NASA Hussainna W, it looks like it was the second ball of the over, not the seventh. Good story, though. It must be the wrong one. What, John, if no ball is bold, but hits the top of off stump on the full and rebounds off the top of the stump over the boundary without bouncing. Four runs.

Just four. Four runs. Just never touched the ground. That's right. Conditions are overcast. a fine mizzle, drizzle, falling. It's not enough for the umpires to take the players off.

However, a batsman who is the crease and wearing a WG Grace-style beard finds that his beard is becoming increasingly waterlogged. It's hampering his ability to concentrate and to play effectively.

Can he retire hurt, blow dry his beard in the pavilion, and then return to the crease at the fall of the next wicked. Well, if the umpires agree that the beard, this big, heavy beard is causing him problems.

Of course he can, force he can... Go and blow dry it. If the umpires think that that's fine, then that's fine. There you go. I'm sure... Who was that from by any? That was from Keith Flet. Oh, really? I mean, I'm sure W. G must have played

taken that ployed at one point for some reason or another. He actually could, he must have used it as an excuse. But surely, I mean, come on, Keith, you just wring it out, don't you? I've no idea. You just bring it out and you carry on batting, don't you? I would think the water will be constantly dripping down anyhow. Well, I mean, how?

Well, it'd be dripping. He could be dripping on a length. I mean, what's it? Yeah. How many bats have hair dryers? I don't know. Perhaps they do. Well, a lot more now than they're used to, I reckon.

Thank you, Keith. Good to hear from you. Okay, this is obviously more sensible. this is from Alex in Stratford I came into bat as a number 11 making up the numbers in the first team with the sole intention of getting a single as quickly as possible

so the better bat could score some runs in the last over the first two balls outside of the off stub I missed far too quick for me the third ball going down the leg side hit me on the thigh and we ran a leg by the umpire sent me back saying you're not having a run for that you played it off your bottom i was confused by this because

it wasn't intentional and i did try and hit the ball but maybe too slowly for this paid umpire i took quite what he means like that i missed the next three balls and walked off so the simple question is was the umpire right to take away the leg by even though he says i played some sort of shot well if he said you play some sort of shot then he shouldn't be taking the leg by away You only take the runaway if in your opinion the backspin didn't make an effort to play the ball. You just allow the ball to hit him. Then you take it, you just call dead ball. But there's even then it's complicated, isn't it?

Because, you know, if you're not playing a shot and it goes off your body, you can't run, can you? You can't run because you've got to give the field inside a chance to run you out. Okay, but you can't get a run. But there is the thing about if that, but if you're taking what is called. evasive action you can get the run. Yeah but evasive action really is quite obvious they're just trying to get out of way Agus would know about

evasion well yeah yeah yeah well he took he took early evasive action he reckoned that he took evasive action against Imran and I failed to give him out oh really yeah I guess used to take advantage of that in a minute before the ball was balled before the ball started his run up

good this is an interesting one John Everett, thank you for this one. We've already had sort of part of this scenario. The batsman swipes at the ball, goes vertically up in the air above the stumps. The batsman cross for a quick single, and as the non-striker gets towards the crease, he realizes that the ball is about to hit the stumps. Can he, i.e. the non-striker, kick the ball away, use his bat to do the same, or use his hand? No, he can't, he can't touch the ball at all.

It's got nothing to do with him, the non-striker. So he's gone, he's obstructing the field? Absolutely. On appeal, there must be an appeal. But yes, if he touches the ball, the ball is alive. He has no authority to touch the ball. What would happen if he went for the ball, which then went into the stumps, who would be out?

Which one of the two would be out? The striker. Stryker's out? Yeah, if the non-striker hasn't touched the ball. But if he does touch it, if he thinks I'm going to knock it out the way, but he hits it into the stunt. Well, he can be done for obstruction. He's out.

He's out for obstruction. Right. Yeah. He's got no right to touch that ball when it's live. There you are, John. Thank you. This is from Jason. In a recent 100 game, Marizanne Cap was bowling.

The batter knocked it back to her. Cap, believing she may have, the batsman may have, or bats batter, may have stepped outside her crease, threw the ball down at the stumps, hoping to run her out. It hit the batter, or was very close to hitting her, can't quite remember, he says. And the umpire stopped the game, had a discussion and penalised Cap and the fielding team five runs. Commentators felt this was harsh, blah, blah, blah. is the general, is there a general rule about endangering an opposition player in that sort of situation when, you know, I suppose it's the straight drive, it comes back in, hurl it back. I remember Roger Harper doing it in that match against Coochee. That's right. Yes. But if you are endangering the batsman as you do that, is that an issue? If in the umpire's opinion, you were in, you were endangering the batsman instead of throwing the ball at the wicket, then you can be penal. Absolutely.

But I suppose if the bats, what if the batsman is standing between you, the thrower of the ball and the wicket? The batsman is entitled to stand there. The batman. Do you remember Innsomal about? There's a case where Harmeson bowled to him. Yeah. And Insey being in he was just out of his ground a bit.

Harmie picked the ball up, hurled the stumps down. Insey, I'm pretty sure I'm right in saying this, was actually in his crease, but he jumped out of the way because the ball was coming. Yes. The umpire Tauffel was at the bowler's end. Right. And I thought he got this wrong because he then went to Daryl Hare, who was at square leg. Yeah. He really had nothing to do with any of this.

But Daryl, having been consulted, then gave the third umpire a call, who actually was a local as a Pakistani umpire. And he ruled that Inzman was out of his crease. Daryl Hare gave him out. And it was massively criticized for ever since. But Interim was clearly taking evasive action. He should not have been given. No, he shouldn't be given. Self-preservation.

You're entitled to leave your ground if you're in a case where you're trying to regret itself being injured. That was a mistake. I've got a conversation of that evening of the umpars about that. But that was wrong.

But the only reason I mention it is that Naryl hair, whatever. He got the flack. He got the flack for that, which actually he was the least guilty of all of them. Anyway, this is from Eugene

Johnson. That's not, it's from Tom Green. How does that work out? Anyway, okay, hello Tom. I was bowling and the batsman attempted to cut the ball. It went very high, but not very far. The gully fielder trotted in to take a simple catch. The batsman ran towards the fielder and screamed, drop it! The fielder obliged. And I appealed on the grounds of obstructing the field. Correct. He was given, not out, and the umpire criticised me for making a frivolous appeal. Nonsense. Umpire is out of order. In a case like that, where you run towards the potential catcher and scream not out, that's obstruction. Yeah. Well, obstruction is not just physical, it's verbal as well, can be verbal as well. Well, they are, Tom, that settles that one. And especially when he's obviously run, run towards the gully. So he's run, I mean, he should be running up and down the side of the pitch.

Quite deliberately. But he runs towards the gully to where the fielder is. That's blatant obstruction. There you go. The TMS podcast from BBC Radio 5 Live. This is from Peter Anas. I've pondered this for 50 years. 50 years.

Come on, picture. That's even before you started umpiring, I think so. Playing in an evening 20 over game, I went to sweep the ball, but it hit my pad first. The back continued on, but the bat continued on and hit the ball for four. The bowler appealed for LBW, was given not out, and the four runs were scored. So my question is, if the batsman deliberately but cunningly let the ball hit his pad first, judging it would not be LBW, and then hit the ball with his bat, would the runs be counted. That is up to the, in the pin, and the opinion of the umpire, if that was done,

if the umpire could say it himself for certain that, that happened, that he allowed the ball to hit the bat, his pad, and then hit it. Then the runs will be canceled. There'd be no, no runs. Because it's deliberate. It's deliberate. It's deliberate. You have, you have one go at the ball. Okay. And you can't let the ball hit your pads deliberately. And then lack the ball. for. Dead ball. It'd be very clever if you could do it. Dead boy. It is a dead ball. It's probably the first dead ball of this session.

I think it is. I think it is the first dead ball in session. Well done, John. Thank you. Nice thinking though, Pete. Thomas Halley writes, Dear John, a batting team has nine wickets down and needs one run

to win off the last ball. A good finish. Then there is a stumping off a wide. Do they lose? Otherwise, the batting team lose or is it a tie? The batting team wins

because a wide precedes the stumping. So the wide is one run so the batting site has won. There you go. One wicket in hand. Nice one. Could finish that, wouldn't it?

There's probably a round. There'll be grumpiness about it. But there is the obvious logic, isn't it? I'm not sure how the shaking of hands went has all walked off. Good finish. Thank you, gosh, indeed. It actually doesn't say necessarily what happened on that occasion. But thank you, Tom.

Here is from, this is from John in Cheshire. A quick one, there was a second team cricket match. Each batting team providing the umpires, our opening bowler ran in and bowled, and there was the immediate call of no ball. There was some puzzlement. We asked the umpire what the no ball was for. He said the umpire had not told him the action he was going to bowl.

I said, I believe the lords put the owners on the umpire to ascertain the action and not on the bowler to advise it. I was overruled and the batting team kept that extra run. What do the laws require? So the umpire, before the start of play, before you call play, you ask the bowler, are you right arm or left arm? Yeah, yeah. That is part of your job in the umpire. as the umpire you would always I mean it's slightly bizarre really because if I

went out of bat and Michael holding was bowling I knew he bowled right arm over but you are obliged as the umpire even in county professional cricket you would say that's middle and leg and right arm over

the umpire was negligent in not ascertaining whether the bowler was the right arm or left arm yeah what happens here then John we've got Camindu Mendez playing for Sri Lanka, who bowls with either arm. Right. So what has to happen in the course of an over,

so like at the start of the over, is the umpire going to say, well, what are you bowling, Kimmend? Yes, you do? And then when he changes, is it up to the bowler then to say to the umpire, I'm now going to bowl with my left arm? Yes, because he's told you that he's a right arm,

bowling right arm over, or bowling right arm. If he wants to change the left, he's got to tell the umpire. Yeah, and he can do it in course for an over. Oh, yeah, you can do it. You can do every other ball, but then you might get done for time wasting. Ah, yes. So the onus is on the bowler in that situation?

I've been told the umpire that he's a right-arm bowler. If you want to bowl left-arm, the fielder, the player, has to tell the umpair. Who will then tell the batsman? I'd rather hope we say it, actually. Richard Smith from Oldham, hello Richard. When a new batsman comes to the crease to take guard, what exactly are they asking the umpire? to do. And what are the more unusual requests that you might have had?

Well, I've never really, the most, usually bats, the striker asked the umpire for, usually stand on middle, middle and off, not middle and leg or middle and, yeah. Or leg stump. Or leg stump. Yeah. The only, I mean, some, some, some strikers don't bother to ask at all, especially if you got a week, a week number 11. Yeah. Poor batsmen, they don't, you. A lot of them don't bother to ask. It's not worth the effort. But I've never really, apart from asking for off-stump,

I've never really had any strange request for guard. I never really knew what the difference was. It didn't seem to make a difference to the batting. Here's a question. What did you take, Victor? I think I took either, I think I took centre most of the time. But if you tell me this then, as an umpire. So I think some batsmen like to be clever

and say, you know, I'm batting on leg stump or something, or I'm backing on off, to say, so the umpire files that in his brain, or this man is batting on off stump, so he's more likely to be LBW playing across the line than he would if he's on the leg. Do you take that into account when you just look at it? You just stand where you are and you give what you see.

That's all you can do. But you must sort of think when someone's, I mean, it didn't happen so much when you were umpire, But someone's taking off Stumpy thinking, Blimey, this one is it an LBW candidate. Yes, you do. Yes, absolutely. He says you might get outside the line more.

Yeah, yeah, well, that's also true. Yeah, yeah. Some of the Essex, John Lever and those people raised to go out to bat, they just not bother taking care. Well, no, I remember it, yeah. J.K. was very bothered, rarely bothered. And no one was quite ready. Oh, ready? Where are you?

Well, you have to understand that cricket is played in all sorts of weird and wonderful places. And Sam prompts me to say that because when playing on the campsite, if you hit the camper van on the full, you're out. If the bike rack is still attached and you hit that, you're out. But if the bike rack is not attached the camper van, you hit it on full, are you still out then? Good luck without you on. Don't worry. Thank you, Sam. It sounds good care of cricket though. Yeah, but it's good to hear that on campsites

they're still playing cricket. The ball goes in the campfire. As the youngster growing up in Barbados and we played in the streets outside our house and if you hit the balls full on to the house, you're out. Because there'd be trouble if you kept doing that. And on the other side, there's a feel of sugar cane and if they hit the ball in the sugar cane,

you're out as well because the ball is lost. And was that a good deterrent then? Oh, so you're trying to learn to play straight. London we often watch cricket and we see birds such as pigeons and gulls in the outfield play continues with no problem i've seen umpires stop a game for a dog running on the pitch i was wondering what the official line is on animals on the pitch would would cats stop play horses birds would actually stop play sometimes say i mean pigeons are often pecking around at the oval there's hundreds of pigeons on the square at the oval i suppose it's a bit of

common sense is it if you see it but they they just they just disappear when the ball comes in their direction what about I remember doing a test match in a lovely old border ground in Georgetown when a dog came running on not onto the pitch but he was

actually probably halfway between the pitch and the sight screen where he actually unfortunately rather disgraced himself the ground had to come over with a shovel but would you have stopped play in that instance for a dog coming on like that Yes.

You would, until he got him off. Absolutely. I mean, a dog, a cat. Smaller thing about a dog can be a big object. So you would stop away. As soon as he came on. And also there's a risk of a player being bitten by a dog anyhow, so you don't want that to happen.

In fact, it's been twice, Vischer Capatnam. At the time of the dog came running on there and shot into the dressing rooms and came out again. It was all very exciting. You do occasionally get dogs on fields, even in test matches. Yeah. Well, this is a slightly old one, but it's from Dennis Smyth, from the Isle of Wight. First ball of a match, the bowler runs in and angrily attempt, see, must be a nasty bowler of this,

to mankad the non-striker by throwing down the stumps in his follow-through with the ball. The non-striker hasn't left the crease, so isn't out. But the ball is now on the ground near the stumps. Can the quick-thinking batting side take a run despite no legal delivery having been bold and the only thing that which has happened is this failed attempt and dastardly attempt actually at a man cat what what should happen really is the because he's thrown the ball at the wicket yeah it's square like comparison to call no ball because he's thrown the ball he's supposed to bowl the ball you're not supposed to throw the ball oh right okay but yeah

I mean if if if there's no one around the ball is still alive so he can they could have trumped this nasty attempt to mang had someone who wasn't out of his crates by taking a quick single. Punish them, I say. Thomas emails us. I've had this question in my mind for several years. I've sent it in a couple of times, but it's never been answered. Perhaps today is my lucky day. That it is, Tom. At what point is a six?

A six. Is it when the ball hits an object that is attached to the ground after going beyond the rope? So, for example, if a player hits the ball into the stand, it bounces back off a stand and into a fielder's hand. Is that classed as a catch or not? Because the stand is attached to the ground, is it classed as a six? Alternatively, the player smacks the ball into a stand.

A spectator catches the ball while they are airborne. It would be quite a sight. But whilst they're still mid-air, they throw the ball back to a fielder who catches it? A spectator has got nothing to do with the... So if a spectator, if the ball goes over the boundary road, Yeah, and it's caught by a spectator, it's outside the field of player. So is the boundary rope sort of vertical, just all the way up to space?

As soon as it goes over that point. Well, so on, yeah, but I mean, you could get a situation where the ball, and this might be actually blows, let's say there's a strong wind, so it's gone over, but it blows back into the field of player because it hasn't touched out there, it is not a six. No, I see. And if it could be caught then. A bit stronger.

Absolutely. But yeah, as a spectator, anything out here is outside the field of play. And if it touches somebody or something over that line, then it's a six. That clears that one up. There you are. It was your lucky day. John, you've decided that you want to hang your white coat up. As it were, your broadcasting white coat after all these years of asked the umpire. So, well, Victor and I are going to be bereft without you, and our listeners are going to miss you enormously. But thank you for all these years of contributing to this slot, which at times is nonsense. Time is very serious, and at times it settles disputes going back in years. But you've always done it with always the good humor that we both remember from your time as umpire.

Well, cricket is a game that I have loved from the time I was a toddler. and I was lucky enough to play the first glance cricket and umpired at the highest level. It's been better than working. It's been brilliant. I've loved it. But I've also, I understand that the laws are quite complex as well. And a lot of people who love the game don't know the laws.

In fact, there are a lot of players who play the game don't know the law. Players are a hopeless attitude. So if I was able to explain to players and to increase their knowledge of the game and so on and love of the game, I'd be happy to do that. It's been good to be working with the two fellows

and having fun as well. That's what it is. When you went from player to umpire, you had to do a lot of, did you have to do a lot of work to get alongside it? You were like most players that were lots of hazy areas that you didn't know about. I realized, once I decided that I want to become an umpire,

I realized that I didn't know the laws of cricket despite having played on Thelais in my mid-30s. So I went, that winter at 1980 I went to the University of Manchester Sports Ground where they were running

courses for umpires on the laws of cricket and I thought I need to learn the laws of the game so that's what and that's what I did and I passed the test and so on but then having

done that and been appointed I realize there's a lot more to umpiring than just learning the laws you didn't have to learn to umpire. And I was lucky enough to have people like Barry Mayer, David Shepard, Murph Kitchen,

Kenny Palmer, Alan Whitehead. They were my mentors. I mentioned Kenny, he died recently. Yeah, a wonderful character. And at the best and at the professional, it was very much a sort of a team. Oh, yeah. You know, you must have looked forward to certain umpires

and without naming it as the odd umpire, you thought, oh no, I've got three days. Only certain umpires. But by and large, it was of, you know, they became great mates, but a good umpiring setup involves the pair kind of working together. That's right, that's right. Unpiring is always about two men, all women, on the field, working together, always.

And then what I'd afterwards, I mean, I think we can quite honestly say that in the 80s and when we were playing, actually, it was more of, it felt more collective, it felt more, and I always had this argument with Stuart Broad as all you always went to the pub after the game. Well, we kind of did, but we didn't go there to be downing pints. It went to, because it was social, we're chatting, we're talking. I've been learning about bowling from Richard Hadley or whatever it may be. And the umpires were always involved in that social setting. Yeah.

It really felt that everyone was together. Absolutely. I mean, Mike Gatting, for example, when he was England captain. He's the only captain in my time of umpire who was actually come to at the end of a match. I remember he was taking a team to Australia. and he came, I was umparing with Shep at Cardiff and Gat came to the umpires room to ask us fellas and taken a team to Australia

have you seen any players that you'll recommend? Oh right, yes. He was very good at that. Yes. Gat would come to the crease and he would say to me, John, have a look at my back lift. Am I picking up the bat? Just have a rapport with the players.

That's vitally important for umpires. There was that rapport. Well, I mean, I can remember, I actually saw him the weekend, a friend of yours as well, no doubt, but I bumped into Jack Berkinshaw. Oh, yeah. He coached a number, but he's an off spinner. And I used to love bowling at Jack's end, not because I was going to get any LBWs necessarily, but basically I used him as a coach, and Jack loves the game. And, you know, I'd probably go and field at Square Lake, and, you know, he just unwittingly, or pass on the odd tip here and there. Yeah, absolutely.

He just loved bowling and still looking for the ball. perfect husband and now at the age of 80 years. And if you was an umpire, you have a young player, you can help him. Yeah, yeah. Because as I said, you know, it's a player's game and if you can help a young player to improve and you see something which is obvious, you have a quiet word. And you would have found that, I mean, it's a legitimate question that when you were umpiring, nobles are obviously a big issue.

In those days you had to decide what the noble was. That's right. And I guess if someone like John was bowling, you would be asking the umpire, where's that front foot? And you would be happy to pass on that information to make your life easier as well as here. It's interesting. I've been doing this one time a few years ago

and someone got quite angry and wrote in the fact that there shouldn't be this sort of rapporte. That's a nonsense. Of course it's a nonsense. You want the game to flow. And you sometimes can't see where your foot's landing. I mean, that sort of rapport is actually what it's all about. And there were umpires.

I mean, we used to turn up it. at the start of a counter game and not know who's going to be umpouring. And there was always that, oh, who's here today? Oh, I think it's, yeah, John Holder's here today. It was always a, it was always, you know, a really lovely part of playing in those years, John. And I would always go your end. I don't know why he never gave me anything.

You've got a lot you deserve, don't? But it was always, I'd always got to do Sam Cooke's end. Oh, yes. Yeah, as soon as someone would sweat with him. Somepires did have reputations and all of that. But, John, thank you. Thank you for all you've already done with cricket going all the way back. And it's been a real pleasure to have enjoyed your company.

Well, it's been a pleasure for me as well. I've enjoyed it. You'll come and see us, won't you? I will, I will. I'll keep in touch. Good lad. Thank you very much. I should have been LBW to Imran. I should have been...

Well, no, I don't. I don't agree. I would have been so chuffed if I'd been LBW to Imbrough. You would have been chuffed because you were scared. I know. I reckon I was LBW, you still gave it not out. I could have dined out on that for years. John, take care of yourself. Thanks so much for coming.

Good man. The TMS podcast from BBC Radio 5 Live.