**Inzamam Obstructing the Field
****Inzi becomes the 2nd Pakistani (after Rameez Raja) to be given out for obstructing the field. The video contains the offending play, Inzi’s reaction in the pavilion and the post-match ceremony. Enjoy!
http://www.justupit.com/a14d1c0f0adb0015db0f9c39e9619965 (640x480, WMV, 2 mins 25 secs, 23.1 MB)**
Inzamam’s bizarre dismissal
Pakistan v India, 1st ODI, Peshawar
Inzamam’s bizarre dismissal
Kanishkaa Balachandran
February 6, 2006
Inzamam-ul-Haq is only the third batsman to be dismissed obstructing the field in ODIs. Rameez Raja was the first, against England at Karachi in 1987-88. He suffered the agony of being dismissed on 99, when he hit the ball with his bat to avoid being run out while attempting a second run to complete his hundred off the final ball of the match. Mohinder Amarnath was the second, when he kicked the ball away from the bowler to prevent being run out, against Sri Lanka at Ahmedabad in 1989-90.
When Sachin Tendulkar reached 91, he became the first batsman to go past the 14,000-run mark in ODIs. Click here for the list of highest run-getters in ODIs.
India’s total of 328 is the highest at Peshawar, beating the previous best of 296 for 4 by England against Sri Lanka in the1987 World Cup.
The partnership of 151 between Salman Butt and Shoaib Malik is the highest for the second-wicket at Peshawar, going past the earlier record of 94 between Sachin Tendulkar and Irfan Pathan in the same match.
Salman Butt is another Pakistan batsman who relishes the Indian bowling, having scored all his three ODI centuries against them. His average against India stands at 63.42. However, he has been found wanting against other teams, averaging just 24.94.
Kanishkaa Balachandran is editorial assistant of Cricinfo. For some stats he was helped by Arun Gopalakrishnan
© Cricinfo
Re: Inzamam’s bizarre dismissal
well well wht a person
He likes to be funny with his words and run outs i think he was not blocking the ball i think he was saving himself and tht happened very quickly tht didnt recognize wht he was doing but the law suggest he was out
Inzi Tum kaab baray hoo gaye:cb: 
Re: Inzamam's bizarre dismissal
"Yeah, I can't understand the rule because in Faislabad, we lefts the ball and I am out and now stop the ball is I am out I don't know what's the exact rule, I don't why can't understand the rule" - Exact words of Inzamam during post-match ceremony.
Had to stop and re-take several times after all the "is's". Thankfully, "the boyzzz" didn't come into play here, as usually expected.
Re: Inzamam's bizarre dismissal
what is the exact rule?
Point of View
Pakistan’s Victroy in the First one day… …
I could not see the inzi’s dismissal and the end of the game, but now that I have seen it.. my thougts:
The way inzimam was given out and the way indians showed desperation for the wicket, even though it was according to law… I think Pakistan threw the answering slap right at their face when asked for the light..
You took away one wicket cheaply, we take away the whole game away from you. 
Re: Inzamam's bizarre dismissal
^ That you can't play French cricket in the middle of the pitch.
Re: Point of View
An 'away' too many. Thanks for the valuable insight. More thanks for starting a separate thread for it. The others were getting pretty nauseating with all that Indians running around unchecked.
Re: Point of View
thanX. that was the precise reason to open a fresh thread, until otherwise and not to mention unless a mod feels the otherway.
Re: Inzamam's bizarre dismissal
Hey fellow Guppies;
It was really amazing watching Inzi being out in that fashion. I couldn't understand his dismissal for the first minute as I thought he was run out. Believe men, I was stunned for the first instant as what in the world was Indian team appealing for!!
Anyways, in my opinion, Inzi didn't do it intentionally but the bat came like a defense against his body. Now, in Cricketing terms, he wasn't preventing his body but the throw from striking the wicket. Not only that, Indian team had the right to appeal and umpire Simon Taufel consulted with umpire Asad Rauf to declare Inzi out. The crowd went silent and I was also upset about the spirit it produced for the remaining ODIs.
It was interesting after Inzi got out that he consulted the umpires and he might be reprimanded for doing that even though he was just asking about his decision. But, let's face it. It was given out rightly and Pak team would have done the same had it been the opposition batting. The Inzi dismissal was always the key but it was Allah's will for Pak to win...
Umer579
Re: Point of View
I wonder if some Indian guppy has posted something like, Younis and Rana's decision to take umpire light offer was against the 'spirit' of the game:D
Well it was according to the rules of the game, just like inzi's wicket.
Re: Point of View
Ok i still don't get it. What exactly are you supposed to do when something like that happens? You just run into the ball chest first or something?
Re: Point of View
^ just make sure you are grounded behind the popping crease and don't play the ball with your bat. As a matter of fact, Inzi would still be out OTF even if he was within the crease. A batsman at no point should interfere with the field. He only gets ONE chance to hit the ball per delivery.
Re: Point of View
Inzi not knowing about this rule is pretty shocking. He's played over 300 ODI's and 100 Tests. There is no excuse for such ignorance.
Re: Point of View
skhan, it's no surprise that the only other two OTF in ODIs are also from the sub continent - Ramiz Raja on 99 and Mohinder Amarnath.
I don't think desi cricketers ever read the 42 laws of cricket or the ten ways of getting out. Specially, a captain should be well versed with those laws inside out.
Re: Inzamam's bizarre dismissal
any one has the video clip????
Re: Inzamam’s bizarre dismissal
The commentators in the game, including Straight Drive (Manjrekar, Rameez, Imran etc) kind of showed their own ignorance when they tried to differentiate between Inzi’s dismissal against England (incorrectly given by the umpires) with the one against India on the basis that here Inzi was out of the crease, whereas against England he was inside the crease. Wrong!
It helps to know the laws of cricket. These two instances are covered by two different laws. Lets look at the first one.
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-37-obstructing-the-field,63,AR.html
Law 37 (Obstructing the field)
1. Out Obstructing the field
Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It shall be regarded as obstruction if either batsman wilfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat, after the ball has touched a fielder.
2. Accidental obstruction
It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt.
There is no mention of being in or out of the crease. You “willfully” obstruct the opposing side and you will be given out. Simple as that. The key terms are “willfully” and “without the consent of the fielding side”. Thats what the umpire confirms and decides upon. Inzi was out because he wilfully used his bat to obstruct the ball. That he used his bat in innocence or malice or whether he was within or outside the crease is neither here nor there and completely besides the point.
The issue with his wrong “run out” against England was covered under Law 38 (Run Out), not Law 37 (Obstructing the Field). Both are separate. If Inzi had obstructed the fielder’s throw willfully, even if he was inside the crease, he would be given out (on appeal), and it will be Out Obstructing the Field, and not run out, like he was given against England.
Re: Point of View
^ Not only Inzi, but all the commentators were also on the wrong track when they tried to explain his out. You are right, ofcourse, that Inzi being in our out of the crease doesn’t really matter when its under Law 37. Here I just posted an explanation with reference to the laws of cricket.
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showpost.php?p=3877046&postcount=8
Re: Video: Inzamam Obstructing the Field
thanks bro. that was really akward.
Re: Point of View
What about the umpires' lack of knowledge about the run-out not applying if the batsman was taking evasive action? 2nd test vs England, @ Faisalabad yaad haiy na? Not one, not two but all three umpires didnt know about it and inzi was given out unfairly. When the umpires, who are supposed to be walking talking cricket encyclopediae, dont know all the rules how then can you expect inzi to know all the rules?
The excuse for such ignorance is we're all human and we all learn from our mistakes.
Sincerely,
Captain Lota