The MCC has clarified Wednesday’s controversial Obstructing the field decision which sparked debate around the world. Given the outrage, the Laws of the Game department felt it was necessary to release a statement on the incident.

South Africa were 3-77 in the 16th over against the West Indies when opener Jiveshan Pillay was given out ‘obstructing the field’.

Also Read: Watch - Jiveshan Pillay's controversial dismissal

Pillay, who was on 47 off 51 balls, inside edged a drive back onto his body. The ball trickled back towards off stump, stopping centimeters away from the pegs. Pillay turned around, picked up the ball and threw it to West Indian gloveman — and captain — Emmanuel Stewart, who promptly appealed.

The MCC said the umpires had no choice but to give Pillay out. “The first thing to say is that the umpires were completely correct in their decision to give Pillay out Obstructing the field,” the statement read. “The Laws of Cricket are extremely clear on this matter. Law 37.4 states:

“Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if, at any time while the ball is in play and, without the consent of a fielder, he/she uses the bat or any part of his/her person to return the ball to any fielder.”

“Pillay did not seek, or receive the consent from, a fielder and did use his hand to return the ball to the wicketkeeper. He was thus rightly given out on appeal.”

Given the ball had stopped and was not about to roll onto the stumps, many have argued in favour of the batsman. ‘Why should Pillay be punished for being helpful?’ was a common sentiment.

The answer, according to the MCC, relates to the condition of the ball.

“The reason behind it is that a fielding team will often take enormous care to maintain the condition of the ball — and they are allowed to do so,” the statement continued.

“Any external influence on the ball — including a sweaty glove — could change its condition unfairly.

“Batsmen are therefore, instructed to leave the ball to the fielding side unless given specific consent to pick it up. It may seem harsh, but a scenario in which batsmen could, without any punishment, interfere with the ball would be far more problematic. Instead, all a batsman needs to remember is not to return the ball to any fielder without consent — as the popular adage goes: batsmen bat, bowlers bowl and let the fielders field.”

Also Read: MCC asked BCCI to support cricket for Olympics

Stewart, the West Indian glovemen and captain who appealed, has been criticised for not withdrawing his appeal. But the MCC had no such criticism.

However, this dismissal didn’t cost much as South Africa registered a victory in that match and cruised their campaign to the knock-out stage.