Angelo Mathews became the first player in international cricket history to be dismissed 'Timed Out' at the 2023 World Cup — triggering a global debate about whether a law intended for persistent time-wasting should be used against a broken helmet strap.
Law 40 (Timed Out) exists to prevent time-wasting — a batsman who delays deliberately beyond 3 minutes to slow the game can be given out. The law was designed for situations where a team strategically delays to eat into fielding time or disrupt a bowling spell.
Angelo Mathews's situation was fundamentally different — his helmet chin strap broke as he prepared to bat. Equipment failure is normally accommodated within cricket's culture of fair play. The Timed Out law contains no exception for genuine equipment failure.
Sri Lanka needed significant runs to make the World Cup semifinals. Mathews came to the wicket at a critical moment. When the helmet strap broke, Mathews pointed it out to the umpire. The delay while a replacement was found took him past the 3-minute limit.
Shakib Al Hasan — a senior figure in world cricket and former ICC Test Player of the Year — had apparently been monitoring the time. His immediate appeal shocked the crowd and his own players visibly.
On 6 November 2023 at the 2023 ICC Cricket World Cup in Delhi, Sri Lanka's Angelo Mathews came to the wicket following a dismissal. As he prepared to face, the chin strap on his helmet broke. Mathews asked for a replacement helmet. Bangladesh captain Shakib Al Hasan immediately appealed for Timed Out under Law 40.1 — which requires a new batsman to be ready to face the first ball within 3 minutes of the previous dismissal. Mathews had exceeded the time limit due to the equipment failure. Umpires Ken Dugald and Richard Illingworth upheld the appeal. Mathews walked off furious, pointing to the broken equipment. It was the first Timed Out dismissal in international cricket history.
Mathews comes to the crease; helmet strap breaks immediately
Mathews requests replacement helmet; delay ensues
Shakib appeals for Timed Out — shock from both dressing rooms and crowd
Umpires deliberate and uphold the appeal — Mathews dismissed for 0 without facing a ball
Mathews points to broken strap; storms off furiously
Global condemnation of the decision's spirit follows; ICC confirms decision was legally correct
November 6, 2023
Mathews helmet strap breaks; Shakib appeals Timed Out
November 6, 2023
Umpires uphold appeal — first international Timed Out dismissal
November 7, 2023
Global reaction: most critics condemn appeal even while acknowledging legality
2024
MCC announces review of Law 40 Timed Out provisions
“My helmet strap broke. I didn't waste time deliberately — I had equipment that failed. This is not what Timed Out was designed for.”
“The law says you must be ready in three minutes. He wasn't ready. I appealed within the laws of the game.”
“Technically within the laws. Not within the spirit of the game. Cricket at its worst, in my view.”
The ICC confirmed the dismissal was within the laws but the episode prompted immediate calls to amend Law 40 to include an exception for genuine equipment failure. The MCC confirmed they would review the law.
Bangladesh won the match. Sri Lanka failed to qualify for the semifinals. Mathews gave an angry post-match press conference. Shakib Al Hasan was widely criticised — even by players who acknowledged his technical right to appeal.
The MCC subsequently announced a review of Timed Out provisions.
The appeal was upheld under the Laws of Cricket, which contain no exception for genuine equipment failure. Shakib defended the decision as within the laws. Cricket's broader community was split — many condemned the appeal as contrary to cricket's spirit; others argued the Laws are the Laws and Mathews's team should have ensured equipment was ready.
The Mathews Timed Out incident immediately became one of cricket's most debated law applications. It revealed how a law written for one specific purpose (preventing deliberate time-wasting) could be applied in a completely different context (genuine equipment failure) with deeply unsatisfying results.
The ICC and MCC began consultations on whether to amend Law 40 to include exceptions for equipment failure. The episode is cited in discussions about the difference between what is 'legal' and what is in the 'spirit of cricket' — a tension as old as the game itself.
ICC vs Cricket World
2005-07-07
The Super Sub rule, introduced in 2005, allowed ODI teams to replace one player mid-match — creating a massive tactical imbalance that rewarded the toss winner and was abandoned within 18 months as one of cricket's most embarrassing regulatory failures.
ICC vs Cricket Community
2016-06-01
The ICC's 2016 proposal to divide Test cricket into two tiers — with promotion and relegation — was opposed so ferociously by India, the BCCI, and virtually every player that it was abandoned before implementation, but the debate it sparked about Test cricket's future continues.
ICC vs Bowlers Worldwide
2020-07-08
The ICC's temporary COVID-era ban on using saliva to shine the cricket ball became permanent in 2022, eliminating a century-old ball-maintenance practice and permanently disadvantaging bowlers — a decision that continues to divide the sport.