By Scyld Berry
It was a disgraceful blot on the sport of cricket that Australia’s Matthew Wade got away with blatantly obstructing the field – in this case England’s Mark Wood – in the Twenty20 international in Perth.
Wade stuck his left arm out to stop Wood reaching the ball. It was as clear a case of “obstructing the field” as you could ever wish not to see. The Laws of Cricket have to be altered. At present, they state that the umpire can dismiss “a batter” only if the bowling side make an appeal. This law has to be changed so that the umpires can intervene, as in this case, and send Wade off, whether the bowling side appeal or not. What happens if everyone starts doing what Wade did?
What happens if children in their next game of cricket stick their arm out to stop a batsman returning to the crease?
Cricket crosses a crucial line and becomes a contact sport.
That is how it used to be, at one point back in the 18th century. In some parts of England, when local rules applied before MCC took charge of the laws in 1787, the batsman could barge the fielder out of the way when going for a catch. But wiser heads prevailed: cricket played that way would have been a far less inclusive sport.
It has been good to see how indignant readers have been about Wade online – and it was not only the incident itself that was appalling. The reaction of the Australian commentators was pathetically pusillanimous: in effect, “Matty is a mate, so we must not criticise him” – for something that was clearly wrong.
Wicketkeeper and batsman Matthew Wade after being dismissed during Australia’s T20 loss to England in Perth on Saturday.Credit:Getty
Isabel Williams was spot on: “Shows cricket in poor light again. Umpires should have just dismissed him.”
“Short of rugby-tackling Wood, it couldn’t have been more blatant,” was Simon Aston’s comment.
Yes, it could not have been more blatant – except in the eyes of the Australian commentators.
“Why on earth should the England captain have to appeal for that? The umpires should have been able to judge that themselves and sent him packing,” another reader wrote.
England’s Jos Buttler and Australian wicketkeeper Matthew Wade watch the ball go for six at Optus Stadium.Credit:Getty Images
“It was an awful look for the game. Please Jos [Buttler], learn from that and never let that go without an appeal again.”
Absolutely right. What happened in that game in Perth sets a terrible example to the whole world of cricket.
The funniest comment came from Paul Clements, who initially quoted the song that was popularised in the Hollies stand at Edgbaston in the 2019 Ashes Test: “Same old Aussies, always cheating. Still, at least Wade did not apply sandpaper to Wood’s arm whilst he was pushing him.”
In Test cricket, there has ever been only one example of obstructing the field, and it is good to know that the batsman concerned – Len Hutton – was a lot more penitent than Wade.
It occurred in the Oval Test in 1951, the deciding match of the five-Test series between England and South Africa. Wisden, calling it “the Hutton sensation and calamity”, recorded as follows:
“A ball from Athol Rowan lifted abruptly and struck Hutton on the glove. It ran up his arm and, when he looked round, it appeared to him, as he afterwards explained, to be falling on to his wicket.
“In that split second, Hutton never thought about the wicketkeeper making a catch. He flicked at the ball with his bat and missed it, but it fell neither on to his stumps nor into [Russell] Endean’s gloves.
“The wicketkeeper had been obstructed and the South Africans rightly appealed. Just as rightly, Dai Davies signalled Hutton out. Hutton did not wilfully obstruct the wicketkeeper, but wilfully waved his bat, an action which prevented the wicketkeeper from getting to the ball.”
An open-and-shut case, my lord. As was the Wade incident. Except, Wade was allowed to get away with it.
PS: England won narrowly in both games – by four wickets at the Oval in 1951 and by eight runs in Perth on Sunday.
Telegraph, London
