Handled the Ball: The Rare Dismissal Mode That Was Merged Into Obstructing the Field
The history of the 'handled the ball' dismissal in cricket — what it was, why a batsman touching the ball with their hand was a dismissal, famous instances of the dismissal in international cricket, why the 2017 Laws revision merged it into 'obstructing the field', and what the combined law now covers.
What the Law Was
Until the 2017 revision of the Laws of Cricket, 'handled the ball' was a separate dismissal mode — a batsman who wilfully touched the ball with one or both hands while it was in play (and not at the request of the fielding side) was dismissed handled the ball. The law was separate from obstructing the field (which required deliberate physical obstruction of a fielder's action). The distinction: touching the ball was handled the ball; blocking, shouldering, or physically impeding a fielder was obstruction. Both were extremely rare dismissals — international cricket has recorded fewer than 10 instances of each in over 2000 Tests. The 2017 revision merged both into a single 'obstructing the field' law (Law 37), eliminating 'handled the ball' as a separate category.
Famous Instances
The most famous international 'handled the ball' dismissal occurred in the 1993 India vs South Africa Test — India's Mohammad Azharuddin was given out handled the ball after he deflected a ball heading toward his stumps with his hand, a reflex action the umpires ruled as willful handling. Graham Gooch of England was dismissed handled the ball in a 1993 Test against Australia — he picked up the ball to throw it back to a fielder without considering it was still in play. In both cases, the dismissal was controversial — the question of whether the action was willful (deliberate) or reflex (unconscious self-protection) was debated. The merged 2017 law requires umpires to assess whether the batsman's action obstructed the fielding side, bringing a more consistent standard than the binary 'touched or not touched' of the old law.
The 2017 Merger
The MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club, guardian of the Laws) merged 'handled the ball' into 'obstructing the field' in the 2017 revision for practical and logical reasons: both laws addressed essentially the same behaviour (a batsman taking action that prevents the fielding side from completing a legal play), and the distinction between 'touch' and 'obstruct' was increasingly difficult to apply consistently in modern cricket. The merged law (Law 37.1) covers any willful action by a batsman that obstructs or distracts the fielding team — including, but not limited to, handling the ball. The batsman's intent (was the action willful?) remains the key umpire judgment, as it was in the previous laws.
Frequently asked questions
How is a 'handled the ball' dismissal recorded in statistics?
Before 2017, a handled the ball dismissal was recorded separately in scorecards — 'handled ball' in the dismissal column. In statistical databases, these dismissals count as wickets for the fielding team but do not credit a specific bowler (similar to a run-out — the wicket accrues to the team's total but no individual bowler gets a tally). After the 2017 merger, any dismissal under Law 37 is recorded as 'obstructed the field' regardless of whether the specific action was handling or physical obstruction. Historical statistics maintained the 'handled ball' distinction for archival purposes.
Can a batsman be dismissed handled the ball in T20 cricket?
Yes — the merged Law 37 (obstructing the field, which includes ball-handling scenarios) applies to all formats of cricket, including T20. However, the pace and style of T20 cricket makes a handling-style dismissal even more unlikely than in Test cricket — T20 batsmen focus on attacking the ball and would have very little occasion to touch a live ball. The dismissal remains theoretically possible if a batsman, attempting a big hit, catches a return ball hit off the bat in their hands — a scenario that has not occurred in international T20 cricket as of 2025.
Are there other 'rare' dismissal modes in cricket?
Yes — cricket has several rarely-seen dismissal modes beyond the common ones (bowled, LBW, caught, run-out, stumped). 'Hit the ball twice' (Law 34) dismisses a batsman who deliberately hits the ball a second time after it has landed — theoretically possible if a batsman misses a sweep, the ball bounces toward the stumps, and they hit it away again deliberately. 'Timed out' (Law 40) dismisses an incoming batsman who takes more than 3 minutes to reach the crease after the fall of the previous wicket — a dismissal that occurred in international cricket in 2023 when Bangladesh's Angelo Mathews was timed out against Sri Lanka. 'Hit wicket' (hitting the stumps with bat or body while playing a shot) occurs several times per year at international level — more common than other rares but still relatively infrequent.