Many times on the pitch (and after the game) we have come to discuss whether a controversial situation should be allowed or not. There are precious few players with a deep enough understanding of the laws for our arguments to be resolved, but many times it's the players who also act as umpires. Now we can consult a team of expert experienced umpires for the answers to those tricky questions.
"The game was a limited overs match with a maximum five overs allowance for each bowler. The opening bowler bowled the first ball, and then promptly had an asthma attack. Another bowler had to finish the over. This is when the fun started. According to the umpire, each bowler had now ‘bowled’ one over of his five-over allowance. So, two overs had apparently been ‘bowled’, yet only six balls had actually been delivered. Confused? You bet we were!"
The umpire was right. Had the man who finished off the incomplete first over been permitted to go on to bowl a full five over spell he would then, obviously, have bowled a total of five overs and five balls, which would have exceeded his legal allowance under the playing conditions for this match. None of this would have affected the total number of overs actually received by the other side, of course.
"We have a very good leg-break and googly bowler, whose run-up to the wicket, like many spin bowlers, curves in from around the area of mid-off. Why is he prone to being no-balled by umpires, when it is quite obvious that his front foot lands well behind the line of the popping crease?"”
Assuming the umpire wasn’t calling your team-mate for throwing, you have to ask where the bowler’s back foot was landing. In the delivery stride, his back foot must land within and not touching the return crease, which is the inside of the white lines at right angles to, and running back either side from, the popping crease. This can be quite a common problem with bowlers with angled or curved run-ups.
Remember you can submit your own umpiring and scoring questions here.