Skip to content

Ben Stokes obstructing the field decision strange - Sir Ian Botham

'I don't think I would have even thought about appealing for it...'

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ben Stokes and England were unhappy with the 'obstructing the field' dismissal

Sir Ian Botham described Ben Stokes' dismissal for obstructing the field as 'strange', insisting the all-rounder was acting in self-defence.

Stokes was sent on his way by the umpires after handling the ball while seemingly trying to avoid Mitchell Starc's shy at the stumps in England's 64-run defeat to Australia in the second ODI at Lord's.

The all-rounder's dismissal came under Law 37.2, which states: "2. Accidental obstruction. It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt."

One-Day International Cricket

Reflecting on the incident after England's defeat – which leaves Eoin Morgan 2-0 down with three game to play – Botham said: "I don't quite know what Ben Stokes is supposed to do there. He's got a 6ft 8in guy some 10-15 yards away and he's hurling the ball at him.

"I don't think any batsman in that position is thinking about anything else apart from getting out of the way, one way or another.

Also See:

"He's got to be very good if he's looking the wrong way when he's diving back to catch the ball without looking. He was trying to dive back into his ground.

"So how the umpire thinks he was wilfully watching it, I do find that a little strange.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Eoin Morgan says he would have withdrawn the appeal had an Australia player been in the same situation as Ben Stokes

"I'm a little surprised it was given. I don't think there was any intent there if you see it in full speed. The third umpire didn't ask to see it in full speed."

Speaking after the defeat, Morgan told Sky Sports that opposing captain Steven Smith should have withdrawn the Stokes appeal.

"If the guy throws the ball in your direction from five yards then all you can do is flinch, you don't have time to think," he said, adding: "The decision was made and I certainly feel it would have been different if we were fielding."

Reflecting on those comments, Botham added: "I don't think I would have even thought about appealing for it. Should a captain appeal for that?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Australia captain Steve Smith defended his decision not to withdraw the appeal

"Just put yourself in Stokes' place. When a guy with a powerful arm loads it up you are definitely going to be getting out of the way and you're going to put anything up to get in the way [of a painful blow].

"I don't think there's any intent there whatsoever."

Fellow Sky Sports commentator and former West Indies paceman Michael Holding added: "Looking at that incident live you say it is self-defence; Stokes is thinking about protecting himself.

"There is no way I can look at that and say Stokes thinks that ball is going to hit the stumps, so he's tried to stop it. There's absolutely no way.

"Captains should know the laws but I don't think they should take the view: 'Let's try to appeal and see what the umpires say.'"

Watch the third ODI between England and Australia live on Sky Sports 2 from 1.30pm on Tuesday.

Around Sky