Bangladesh captain Shakib Al Hasan has no regrets about appealing for timed out against Angelo Mathews in their World Cup 2023 match on Monday, despite being asked by the umpires to withdraw the appeal. He says that he was just playing according to the laws of the game, and that the ICC should change the rules if they have a problem with how they are being applied.
The incident took place in the 25th over of the Sri Lankan innings. Mathews had his helmet strap break and called for a replacement helmet, but by the time it arrived, more than three minutes had elapsed. When Bangladesh appealed, the umpires gave Mathews out, much to the disappointment of the Sri Lankan team.
Mathews has since claimed that he has video evidence to prove that he still had five seconds remaining on the clock when he was at the crease, but Shakib remains unmoved.
“I’m not going to withdraw the appeal,” he said in the post-match press conference. “The law is clear: if the incoming batter is not ready to face the ball within two minutes of the previous dismissal, they are out. I’m not going to apologize for playing according to the rules.”
Shakib also said that the ICC should change the rules if they have a problem with how they are being applied.
“If the ICC thinks that the timed-out rule is unfair, then they should change it,” he said. “But until they do, I’m going to keep playing according to the rules.”
The ICC has yet to comment on the incident, but it is sure to spark a debate about the timed-out rule and the spirit of cricket. Shakib’s decision to appeal for timed out against Mathews is a controversial one. On the one hand, he is right to say that he was just playing according to the laws of the game.
On the other hand, some people may argue that it was against the spirit of cricket to appeal for timed out under the circumstances, given that Mathews’ helmet strap had broken. Ultimately, it is up to the ICC to decide whether or not to change the timed-out rule. However, Shakib’s appeal for timed out against Mathews has certainly highlighted the need for the ICC to clarify the rule and its interpretation.