When is a match over?

There have been 2 instances in recent days when there has been controversy at the end of a match.

In the T/20 Final, the injured striker ran as well as the runner and non-striker. Nobody threw the ball to the wicket-keeper's end. Wasn't the match over when the Runner and Non-striker completed a run?

In a ODI, Sehwag hit a No ball for 6 when the scores were level and he was 99 not out. Why did Sehwag not get the 6 runs?

The playing conditions for the Friends Provident t20 Final say that, if the match is tied, the side having lost the fewer wickets is the winner. The MCC Laws of Cricket tell us that a match is tied if the scores are level at the end of the match provided the innings of the side batting last has been completed. In t20, unless the side batting last is all out earlier, or has scored enough runs to win the match, it's innings ends when the ball becomes dead after 20 overs have been bowled.

In the t20 final the incident in question happened on the last ball of the match. The batting side, Hampshire, required two runs to win. The striker, even though he had a runner, in the excitement of the moment ran himself and was out of his ground - which, as he had a runner, could only be at the wicket-keeper's end - when the runner and the non-striker completed the run that brought the scores level. No further run was possible. Was the match now over, or could the fielding side, Somerset, have run the striker out? Both under the Laws of Cricket and under the t20 regulations for that match the innings did not end at the instant the scores were tied; it ended only when the ball subsequently became dead. The umpire gave time for the fielding side to attempt a dismissal. As they did not do that, the umpire decided that, as both batsmen and the fielding side had ceased to regard the ball as being in play, the ball was dead and the match was over. Time was called and the playing conditions gave Hampshire the victory. Had the striker been dismissed, the one run completed by the runner and the non-striker would have been disallowed and Somerset would have won.

The case of the 6 hit not counting is much simpler. Under the Laws of Cricket, the one run penalty for the No ball is awarded at the instant that the call is made. At that moment, therefore, the batting side, India, had won and, again under the Laws, the match was over and nothing that happened thereafter, including the ball being hit clean over the boundary, counted. So, one run goes to the team and no runs to the admirable Sehwag.


Read more about Law 21 (The result) and Law 24 (No ball) at the MCC website