Image Credit- AP
While the Indian team’s World Cup campaign ended
heartbreakingly last Sunday, there was still excitement in the game’s shortest
format as India’s opening Twenty20 international match against Australia on
Thursday saw an exciting conclusion in Visakhapatnam. Josh Inglis’ outstanding
110 off only 50 balls helped the Australians smash a massive score of 208/3 in
20 overs. Captain Suryakumar Yadav and Ishan Kishan then played outstanding
half-century efforts to get the hosts very close to victory.
But the loss of the two brought the Australians back
into the contest, and Nathan Ellis’s tight penultimate over, in which he gave
up just six overs, ensured that the match would finish with a bang. India
needed seven runs off the final over, thus the odds were still in their favour.
Rinku Singh actually reduced the necessary score to three runs off of five
balls when he hit a four off Sean Abbott’s opening ball of the over. Abbott
dragged his length on the second delivery, which prevented the left-hander from
connecting, but he still managed to snag a single when Matthew Wade, the
wicketkeeper, erred in his collection.
Rinku completed the task in the most pleasing way
possible, hitting the ball for a maximum over far on with one out of the last
ball. However, the three umpires’ confirmation that Abbott had overstepped
seconds later prevented the six runs from being scored. It wasn’t a ball. The
match was over before the ball could reach Rinku Singh because India only
needed one run to win thanks to the no-ball. Because India had already won the
match, the left-hander’s beautiful six that he hit down the ground was not included
in either his personal scorecard or the team’s total.
According to ICC Men’s T20I Playing Conditions 16.5.1:
“As soon as a result is reached as defined in clauses 16.1, 16.2 or 16.3.1, the
match is at an end. Nothing that happens thereafter, except as in clause
41.17.2 (Penalty runs), shall be regarded as part of it.”
Fascinatingly, if India had required more than a run
to win, Rinku’s six would have been valid. Abbott’s no-ball in those situation
would have, at most, knotted the scores and kept the game alive.
“If a boundary is scored before the batters have
completed sufficient runs to win the match, the whole of the boundary allowance
shall be credited to the side’s total and, in the case of a hit by the bat, to
the striker’s score.”