Skip to content
Rules5 min

Obstructing the Field Explained: Cricket's Intentional Interference Dismissal

What obstructing the field means in cricket — when a batter intentionally prevents a fielder from catching the ball or making a play, notable incidents including Ben Stokes's controversial dismissal, and how it differs from handled the ball.

Written by GeoCric EditorialUpdated Invalid Date
ShareShareWhatsAppFacebook

Obstructing the field is a dismissal in cricket under Law 37 — a batter is out if they intentionally obstruct or distract a fielder by word or action while the fielder is attempting to make a play on the ball. The key word is 'intentionally' — accidental obstruction (a batter taking a natural step that happens to impede a fielder) does not constitute obstructing the field. The law is one of cricket's least-invoked dismissal methods, with only a handful of obstructing-the-field dismissals in international cricket history.

What Constitutes Obstruction

Obstruction can take several forms: a batter deliberately using their bat or body to deflect a throw from a fielder trying to run them out; a batter deliberately standing in the line of a throw to prevent a run-out; a batter deliberately waving their bat or making noise to distract a fielder attempting a catch. The dismissed batter (or their batting partner) must have acted intentionally — if a batter was legitimately running between wickets and a throw hit them accidentally, the runs count (this is simply a deflection, not obstruction). Note: 'handled the ball' — when a batter used their hand to stop the ball — was merged into 'obstructing the field' in the 2017 Law revisions.

Ben Stokes Dismissal (2015)

One of the most high-profile obstructing the field dismissals in international cricket involved Ben Stokes — dismissed for obstructing the field in a 2015 ODI for England against South Africa. Stokes was batting and, after hitting the ball, deflected it with his hand to prevent a run-out — an intentional action that met the criterion for obstruction. The dismissal was controversial because Stokes argued it was a reflex action to protect himself; the umpires and match referee upheld the dismissal. This incident illustrates the difficulty of 'intent' as a criterion — what constitutes a deliberate action versus an instinctive movement.

The 2017 MCC Laws revision merged 'handled the ball' (Law 33 — when a batter touched the ball with their hand without the fielding side's consent) into 'obstructing the field' (Law 37). This simplification removed a separate dismissal category that had existed since cricket's early Laws, consolidating all deliberate batter interference into one Law. The effect is the same — the batter is out — but the scoring and scorecards now record it as 'obstructed the field' rather than 'handled the ball.'

Frequency of the Dismissal

Obstructing the field is one of the rarest dismissals in cricket — second only to timed out. In the history of Test cricket, fewer than ten batters have been given out obstructing the field. In ODI and T20 cricket, the dismissal is similarly rare. The rarity reflects both that most batters do not deliberately obstruct (the penalty is significant — losing your wicket) and that umpires apply a high threshold of 'intent' before upholding the appeal. The fielding team must appeal for any dismissal in cricket, including obstructing the field — the umpires will not give it out without an appeal.

Frequently asked questions

What is obstructing the field in cricket?

A dismissal under Law 37 — a batter is out if they intentionally obstruct or distract a fielder by word or action while the fielder is attempting to make a play. The key criterion is intent; accidental obstruction is not a dismissal. It is one of cricket's rarest dismissals, with fewer than ten international incidents historically.

What happened with Ben Stokes obstructing the field?

In a 2015 ODI against South Africa, Ben Stokes was dismissed for obstructing the field after deflecting the ball with his hand to prevent a run-out. Stokes argued it was a reflex action; umpires upheld the dismissal. One of the most prominent examples of this rare dismissal in international cricket.

What is the difference between obstructing the field and handled the ball?

'Handled the ball' (when a batter touched the ball with their hand) was merged into 'obstructing the field' in the 2017 MCC Laws revision. They are now the same dismissal — all deliberate batter interference is recorded as 'obstructed the field.'