Mark Watt’s “Long Ball” Tactic Sparks Debate Over Cricket Law
In the inaugural T20I between Australia and Scotland, the spotlight shifted from Travis Head’s explosive batting to the unconventional tactics of left-arm spinner Mark Watt. Watt’s “long ball” strategy, where he delivers the ball from a distance of 25 yards, has sparked debate over the interpretation of Law 20.4.2.5.
During the match, Watt’s delivery to Josh Inglis resulted in a “dead ball” call after Inglis stepped away late. The umpire deemed Inglis unprepared, but Watt believed he was ready to face the ball. A similar incident occurred with Marcus Stoinis, prompting boos from the crowd.
The Law states that a “dead ball” should be called when the striker is not ready and makes no attempt to play the ball. However, the definition of “adequate reason” for the batter to pull away is left to the umpire’s discretion.
Watt’s tactic aims to catch batters off guard by delivering the ball before they are fully prepared. In the T20 World Cup earlier this year, a similar situation arose when Oman batter Khalid Kail was “bowled” after stepping away. Umpire Chris Brown called dead ball, but commentator Tom Moody argued that Kail was ready.
Australia was aware of Watt’s tactic from their previous encounter in the T20 World Cup. Inglis and Stoinis, who were part of the Australian squad, had faced Watt’s “long ball” deliveries.
The debate over Watt’s tactic highlights the gray areas in the Law and the challenges umpires face in interpreting it. While the “dead ball” calls may not have impacted the result, they have sparked discussions about the balance between innovation and fair play in cricket.
