The third umpire failed to check for a front-foot no-ball on a wicket-taking delivery, a standard protocol that was missed. The dismissal stood without the check being made.
During the second Test between India and England in Visakhapatnam, a wicket was taken and referred to the third umpire. Standard protocol requires the third umpire to check for a front-foot no-ball on every wicket-taking delivery, even if not specifically asked.
In this instance, the third umpire confirmed the wicket without checking the front foot. It was a procedural error that raised questions about the consistency and reliability of the third umpire system.
While there was no evidence that the delivery was actually a no-ball, the failure to follow protocol was concerning. The ICC acknowledged the lapse and reiterated the importance of following standard procedures.
The incident was relatively minor but highlighted a broader concern: as cricket becomes more reliant on technology and the third umpire, any procedural lapses undermine confidence in the system. It contributed to the push for automated front-foot no-ball detection technology.
Procedural error by the third umpire. No evidence the delivery was a no-ball, but the failure to check was a breach of protocol.
Gujarat Titans vs Rajasthan Royals
29 May 2026
The Qualifier 2 toss between Gujarat Titans and Rajasthan Royals at Mullanpur had to be conducted twice after match referee Prakash Bhatt failed to hear Riyan Parag's call — a visible frustration for Shubman Gill who appeared to have won the original toss before the do-over.
Lucknow Super Giants vs Kolkata Knight Riders
26 April 2026
Kartik Tyagi bowled two beamers in the final over of LSG's chase but was allowed to continue — umpires called only one dangerous — sparking IPL fury.
Various county and representative sides
1864-06-01
The legalisation of overarm bowling in 1864 created an immediate grey zone: how high could the arm go, and at what point did a fast delivery become an illegal throw? Through the 1860s English cricket struggled with this question as a succession of fast bowlers developed actions that umpires suspected but rarely no-balled, creating a climate of suspicion that would recur in every generation of cricket thereafter.