Yorkshire Vikings were gearing up to face off against the table-toppers, Lancashire Lightning, in a highly anticipated Roses showdown on June 20. In this high-stakes North Group clash, the ‘White Roses’ won the toss but faced early setbacks, losing Adam Lyth and Dawid Malan.
However, a solid 104-run partnership between Joe Root and Shan Masood steadied the innings, enabling Yorkshire to post a total of 173 runs. The Vikings ultimately clinched a narrow seven-run victory. Yet, the match was marred by controversy due to a contentious hit wicket decision involving Masood, which reignited discussions around MCC laws among fans.
The controversy unfolded on the first ball of the 15th over when Jack Blatherwick delivered a short ball outside the stumps. Masood, well-set on 58*, attempted to shuffle across and ramp the ball, but it took a thick edge, deflected off his helmet grill, and rolled towards short third man.
Unaware of the ball’s trajectory, Masood stepped back, accidentally dislodging the bails before attempting a run. Joe Root, at the non-striker’s end, quickly crossed over, but Masood, perplexed and disoriented, was easily run out by the fielder.
The field descended into chaos with Masood, the on-field umpire, and the Lancashire players at the center of the commotion at Headingley. Ultimately, the umpire ruled in favor of the Pakistani batter, citing Law 31.7 of the MCC, which addresses situations where a batter leaves the wicket under a misapprehension.
Shan Masood steps on his stumps off a no ball, Lancashire take the bails off at the other end – but Masood remained not out under law 31.7 pic.twitter.com/yQG6gP6Rac
— Vitality Blast (@VitalityBlast) June 20, 2024
Law 31.7 states: “An umpire shall intervene if satisfied that a batter, not having been given out, has left the wicket under a misapprehension of being out. The umpire intervening shall call and signal Dead ball to prevent any further action by the fielding side and shall recall the batter.”
The Lightning missed a crucial breakthrough due to this loophole in the law, sparking a heated debate on Twitter.
