Uttar Pradesh's left-arm spinner Shiva Singh is hogging the limelight for his 360-degree turn just prior to delivery. From ambidextrous bowling to pausing in the middle of the bowling action, bowlers do unique things to grab the eyeballs. However, Shiva's style is so unique that it hasn’t been seen before in any kind of cricket.
Shiva, who was part of the Indian under-19s side which won the World Cup earlier this year, rotated 360 degrees in his run-up just before the delivery. The incident took place on the third day of a CK Nayudu Trophy match between Bengal and Uttar Pradesh in Kalyani.
Weirdo...!! Have a close look..!! pic.twitter.com/jK6ChzyH2T— Bishan Bedi (@BishanBedi) November 7, 2018
The umpire, however, immediately deemed the delivery as a dead ball. As soon as the footage of it went viral on social media, cricket fans and experts were left scratching their heads over the exact rule and whether Shiva Singh's delivery was legal or not.
Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the custodian of the laws of the game, tried to address the situation and came out with the statement concerning the legitimacy of the delivery.
"Firstly, the Laws don't dictate what a bowler's run-up should look like. Under Law 21.1, the bowler must state his/her mode of delivery, which seems to have been left arm round the wicket in this case, but does not state how conventional the bowler's approach should be.
"Law 41.4 states
41.4.1 It is unfair for any fielder deliberately to attempt to distract the striker while he/she is preparing to receive or receiving a delivery.
41.4.2 If either umpire considers that any action by a fielder is such an attempt, he/she shall immediately call and signal Dead ball and inform the other umpire of the reason for the call,"
"Unless the 360 degree twirl was part of the bowler's run-up for every ball, the umpire may need to consider whether he/she feels that the twirl was done in an attempt to distract the batsman in some way. This is particularly so if there was no apparent advantage to be gained from the twirl, unlike, for example, the bowler varying the width of the release point or the length of his/her run-up, which are entirely lawful," the MCC added.
(With inputs from NDTV Sports)