Angelo Mathews timeout controversy: MCC says referees correctly sent off Sri Lankan against Bangladesh

Angelo Mathews became the first batsman in the history of international cricket to be timed out.

London: The umpires had rightly ruled that Angelo Matthew had ‘timed out’, but the Sri Lankan batsman could have avoided being dismissed that way by consulting the umpires before asking for a new helmet, Marylebone Cricket Club said, the keeper of the rules of the game. Saturday. Mathews had become the first batsman to be dismissed ‘in timeout’ in international cricket when he failed to strike within the stipulated two-minute time following the dismissal of Sadeera Samarawickrama in their World Cup match against Bangladesh on Monday, causing a huge controversy.

Mathews realized his helmet strap was broken and requested a new helmet. The delay prompted Bangladesh to appeal and the umpires upheld it despite Mathews’ repeated pleas. “When the helmet broke, it appears that Mathews did not consult with the officials, which is expected of a player when seeking new equipment. Instead, he merely signaled to the locker room for a replacement,” the MCC said in a statement.

“If he had explained to the officials what had happened and asked for time to resolve it, they might have let him change the helmet, perhaps calling Time and eliminating any possibility of a timeout.

“Considering that Time had not been called and that more than two minutes had elapsed at the time of the appeal, the officials correctly gave Mathews a foul. In fact, the umpires could take no other action within the laws of cricket,” the statement said.

South Africa’s Marais Erasmus and England’s Richard Illingworth were the two on-field referees in that match. An irritated Mathews had termed Bangladesh’s decision to dismiss him through a timeout “disgraceful”. The two teams did not shake hands after the game on November 7.

Bangladesh captain Shakib Al Hasan said he did not regret his decision to appeal, which he refused to withdraw even after the umpires asked him to do so. The MCC emphasized that such a law is certainly necessary because in its absence “a batsman could waste time at the fall of a wicket.”

“This is particularly problematic in timed cricket, when the light can fade and a draw is a favorable outcome, but it is also relevant in limited-overs cricket, where the fielding side is often punished for slow over-rates.

“Even if the specific intention is not to waste time, a law is needed to keep the game moving and avoid significant delays between wickets.” The ICC also claimed that the Spirit of Cricket is not the property of any particular player, country or culture and that the game is played with subtle differences around the world.

“…there will often be shades of gray in interpretation and not all scenarios can be anticipated and specifically codified. In these cases it is the players who will ultimately determine how their game should be played.”