South Africa David Bedingham found himself on Wednesday’s rare and controversial moment during the final of the World Championship against Australia and survived a call to handle the ball – now classified as a defending field.
The incident occurred when Australian Beau Webster bowed the length Bedingham prevented from the weak inner edge. The ball diverted from his pillows and fell near his legs. When he floated near the playground, Wicketkeeper Alex Carey threw himself forward and tried to catch.
In an instinctive reaction, Bedingham bent down and picked up the ball from his body before hitting the ground. Carey immediately appealed and convinced the dough interfered with possible release.
AUS vs Sa Live Score, WTC Final 2025 Day 2
Referee Richard Ilingworth and Chris Gaffaney discussed the appeal before he decided Bedingham. Their decision was based on MCC Law 37.3.1, which states that the dough prevents the field if it deliberately prevents the player from playing – including the catch – using a hand or body. Since 2017, the “ball manipulation” has no longer been a separate release and instead is considered under this Act.
While Bedingham clearly made contact with the ball with his hand, the referees decided that there was no intentional intention to defend Carey. As a result, the appeal was rejected.
When he brought a comparison with the release of Michael Vaughan in 2001 against India – one of the few cases where the dough is distributed to handling the ball in the test cricket. However, Vaughan’s case fell under the older version of the law that did not require evidence of intention.
In Bedingham’s case, he emphasized whether he intentionally interfered. Without finding a clear obstacle, it was allowed to continue the South African chicken.
- If the van is no ball, the attacker prevents the fields if the deliberate obstacle or distraction is prevented by the attacker to be caught.
The 20.1 laws that concern when the ball becomes dead are also relevant:
20.1 the ball is dead
- 20.1.1 the ball becomes dead when
- 20.1.1.1 is finally settled in the hands of a goal or pitch.
- 20.1.1.2 The border is evaluated. See Act 19.7 (ran scored from Hranice).
- 20.1.1.3 The dough is rejected. The ball will be considered dead from the moment of the incident that causes release.
- 20.1.1.4 Whether or not is imprisoned between a bat and a dough person or between objects of his clothes or equipment.
- 20.1.1.5 Whether or not, stored in clothing or dough or referee clothes.
- 20.1.1.6 According to one of the laws 24.4 (the player returns without permission) or 28.2 (Fielding the Ball), there is an offense that results in penalty runs. The ball does not count as one of the assessments.
- 20.1.1.7 There is a breach of law 28.3 (protective helmets belonging to the field).
- 20.1.1.8 The match is concluded by some of the law, which was given in the Act 12.9 (end of the match).
- 20.1.2 the ball will be considered dead when it is clear to the final referee of the pitch that the field of field and both doughs in the goal stopped considering a game
The video shots showed that the ball had briefly captured between Bedingham’s thighs before it rolled onto the pads. When Carey closed, Bedingham grabbed the ball and threw it – an instinctive step that raised his eyebrows.
Australian players, including usman Khawaja, were looking for a revision while Carey and the rest of the team exchanged desperate smiles who were aware of the fine nature of the call. After the discussion, the referee Illingworth signaled the dead ball and allowed Bedingham to continue his shifts.
Many people asked if the ball actually came to rest, claiming it was not dead and that Bedingham’s action could guarantee release. The referee’s decision to let the game continue to reflect a gentle balance between the application of the letter of the law and the respect of the spirit of the game.
The incident inevitably brought a comparison with a similar controversial controversy of Ashes 2023 – Jonny Bairstow’s stump on Lord’s – which has been the Australian route, but caused an intense debate.
With Bedingham is not outdoors, South Africa is worth 121 for 5, which follows 91 runs.
Published:
Saurabh Kumar
Published on:
June 12, 2025
