Explained: What is the 24-yard ball? Did Mark Watt do something wrong?
Cricket has a lot of gray areas, and new shades of it are always conjured up with each passing year, and Mark Watt's controversial '24-yard' ball is among the recent additions to it. The Scotland spinner has earned the reputation of outfoxing the batters with his unconventional delivery bowled well behind the popping crease.
Just like Bumrah's bowling action reduces the ball's path and unsettles the batter, the long ball also has the same principle, but with a longer route. At the end of the day, the purpose of such innovation is to unsettle the batter in a batter's game.
On that note, let us take a deep dive into what Mark Watt actually did and why is it causing so much stir in the cricketing world?
Why has the long ball come into light now despite Mark Watt using it in the past as well?
The first T20I between Australia and Scotland in Edinburgh witnessed Mark Watt dismissing Josh Inglis with a delivery bowled behind the crease. The wicket-keeper batter had chosen to pull out at the last minute, leading for the on-field umpire to declare it as a dead ball.
The left-arm spinner proceeded to bowl a similar delivery in his next over to Marcus Stoinis, who like his teammate, chose to pull out. Once again, the umpire adjudged the delivery as a no-ball.
This is not even close to the first time that Watt has attempted the long ball in a contest. The unorthodox delivery is no less than a variation for him, but he is yet to convince the officials and the batters over its legality.
In the recently held 2024 T20 World Cup in the West Indies and the United States of America, Watt tried the same stunt during the group stage clash against Oman. The spinner bowled it on a back-to-back basis, even dismissing the batter in the second attempt, but the umpire on that occasion as well, gave a dead ball verdict.
However, Watt was able to get a batter to play his 25-yard delivery and get a wicket during the T20 Blast. As Alex Hales chose to play the ball, instead of pulling out, the dead ball scenario did not come into the picture. The opening batter was surprised by the delivery and ended up missing it, and was bowled.
In the past occasions, the batters have often not been ready while facing the surprise delivery. Often the ball has travelled half of its path before the batter looks up to face. What makes Inglis' case different is that he was seemingly ready to face the delivery, but pulled out, only because it was bowled from well behind the crease.
What does the law state?
"Either umpire shall call and signal Dead ball when…the striker is not ready for the delivery of the ball and, if the ball is delivered, makes no attempt to play it. Provided the umpire is satisfied that the striker had adequate reason for not being ready, the ball shall not count as one of the over," MCC Law, 20.4.2.5 states
Furthermore, the umpire cannot check the backfoot of a bowler if the ball is being released behind him. In that instance, it will be a no-ball. However, Mark Watt has managed to keep his release point between the umpire and the stumps' position,
Is Mark Watt the only bowler who does it?
In the era of innovation, and a desperate time for bowlers, where they will resort to any measures to tilt the game even by just a bit, Mark Watt is neither the first nor the last bowler to try out the long ball.
West Indies' Kieron Pollard has bowled medium pace bowling from behind the crease on so many occasions in the past. Similarly, Bhuvneshwar Kumar had bowled from way behind the crease to counter Aaron Finch standing outside the batting crease to negate swing movement in an ODI clash in 2019. On that occasion too, the umpire had adjudged the delivery as a dead ball because Aaron Finch pulled out at the last minute upon sensing that the delivery was different.
Recently, Nepal's Karan KC bowled from behind the stumps in the Asian Games 2023 clash against India. The delivery caught Yashasvi Jaiswal by surprise, but he did not pull out as the ball was being bowled.
Looking at it closely, it comes down largely to two factors. Is the batter genuinely not ready or not, along with the umpire's awareness to judge and interpret the ruling for the same. If a batter is not ready to play the ball, they have every right to pull out of it, they want to face each ball with a particular degree of focus, and that is understandable. They anyway pull out of normal deliveries if there is an issue with the sightscreen or anything else, however, the timing is essential.
Now pulling out of a delivery where readiness is not a factor, and leaving it just because it is an unconventional one is questionable, particularly considering that 'unconventional or unorthodox' does not mean illegal. Bowlers pulling out of their stride upon realizing that the batter has switched his stance to play the reverse sweep or other frisky shot falls under the same category.