MCC Deliver Their Verdict On Shiva Singh's 360-Degree Bowling Action

The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), on Thursday, gave its verdict after Shiva Singh grabbed the headlines for his peculiar bowling action.

Over the years, the world of cricket has several unusual bowling actions. Paul Adams, Sohail Tanvir, Shivil Kaushik or even Jasprit Bumrah caught the attention with their weird bowling action. But perhaps the world never saw anything like Shiva Singh’s action.

His bowling action on the third day of a CK Nayudu Trophy match between Bengal and Uttar Pradesh in Kalyani has created quite a stir. During Bengal’s second innings, Shiva jogged in and completed a 360-degree turn before delivering the ball. It was then followed by a drama as umpire Vinod Seshan promptly signalled dead ball. Not surprisingly, the bowlers as well as his teammates were left bemused.

Later, Shiva said that it was not the first time he bowled like that and also revealed the conversation with the umpire.

“I use different variations in one-dayers and T20s so I thought of doing the same because the Bengal batsmen were developing a partnership,” Shiva told ESPNcricinfo. “The umpires said dead ball, so I asked “why are you calling it a dead ball?”

“I delivered this 360-degree ball against Kerala in the Vijay Hazare Trophy as well, where it was fine. Batsman always go for the reverse-sweep or the switch-hit against bowlers. But when bowlers do something like this it’s deemed a dead ball.”

Weirdo…!! Have a close look..!! pic.twitter.com/jK6ChzyH2T

— Bishan Bedi (@BishanBedi) November 7, 2018

Well, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), which lays downs rules for international cricket worldwide, has now delivered its verdict on the issue. The MCC was asked to deliver its verdict on whether the ball can be deemed legal or not.

According to the law published in the Lord’s website on Thursday, it does not dictate what a bowler’s run-up should look like.

It states:

Under Law 21.1, the bowler must state his/her mode of delivery, which seems to have been left arm round the wicket in this case, but does not state how conventional the bowler’s approach should be.

Law 41.4 states:

41.4.1 It is unfair for any fielder deliberately to attempt to distract the striker while he/she is preparing to receive or receiving a delivery.

41.4.2 If either umpire considers that any action by a fielder is such an attempt, he/she shall immediately call and signal Dead ball and inform the other umpire of the reason for the call.

Well, the law makes it clear that a ball should be declared dead only if an attempt is made to distract the batsman.

The law further added that only if 360-degree twirl should be part of the bowler’s run-up for every delivery, then can the umpire step in to deem if the action was done to distract the batsman.

If the batsman is distracted, he can withdraw from his stance and if the umpire does feel that the bowler’s action was done purposefully to distract the batsman, then Law 41.1 will be followed and a penalty of five runs is awarded.