Chennai Super Kings batter Dewald Brevis’s dismissal against the Royal Challengers Bengaluru on May 3 raised questions over cricket’s Laws and Playing Conditions. Is there a way to address it?
What is the fuss over the Brevis dismissal?
Chasing 214 against RCB at Chinnaswamy, CSK were in firm control, at 171-2 in the 17th over. Then Lungi Ngidi (3-30) took out the prodigious Ayush Mhatre for a 48-ball 94, and Brevis walked out.
Match 52, Royal Challengers Bengaluru vs Chennai Super Kings
vs
- Ball by ball Over
Ngidi’s next ball was a full toss aimed at the pads. Brevis missed the ball completely, and the ball hit the pad. As it rolled towards point, Brevis and Ravindra Jadeja ran for a leg-bye. The fielder picked up the ball and threw at the non-striker’s end. The ball hit the stumps, and then raced to the boundary.
By then, however, the umpire had raised his finger. Brevis wanted to review, but by the time he chose to, 15 seconds had already elapsed since the umpire had ruled Brevis out, and the decision stayed put.
How did the CSK camp react?
Brevis and Jadeja had an animated discussion with the umpires, Mohit Krishnadas and Nitin Menon, but the decision did not get overturned.
The media asked CSK head coach Stephen Fleming about the dismissal at the post-match press conference. “As soon as you’re given out, I understand the timer starts," he replied. "There was a fair bit eaten up with the play still being completed, and whether they just ran out of time ... In the umpire's view, it did.”
It is worth a mention that after the game, the official broadcasters ran a timer on the entire course of events. Brevis had taken 25.2 seconds to review. It is worth a mention that the giant screen on the ground did not run a countdown timer that Brevis could have referred to.
“The other part about it,” continued Fleming, “because he was given out, we wouldn’t have got the runs. While we would have maintained the wicket, it certainly wouldn't have given us the five runs, which would have been nice.”
What do the IPL Playing Conditions say?
Clause 3.2.2 of Appendix D of the IPL Playing Conditions state that “The total time elapsed between the ball becoming dead and the review request being made shall be no more than 15 seconds. The bowler’s end umpire shall provide the relevant player with a prompt after 10 seconds if the request has not been made at that time and the player shall request the review immediately thereafter. If the on-field umpires believe that a request has not been made within the 15 second time limit, they shall decline the request for a Player Review.”
Additionally, 3.7.1 mentions: “If following a Player Review request, an original decision of Out is changed to Not out, then the ball is still deemed to have become dead when the original decision was made ... The batting side, while benefiting from the reversal of the dismissal, shall not benefit from any runs that may subsequently have accrued from the delivery had the on-field umpire originally made a Not out decision, other than any No ball penalty.”
Since the ball becomes dead the moment the on-field umpire rules a batter out, the officials were correct in their assessment that Brevis had indeed been too late. In a video, former umpire Anil Chaudhary expressed his surprise at Brevis and Jadeja continuing to run after being ruled out – though, of course, they might not have realised the decision immediately.
What needs to be addressed?
There are two problems here, both reasonably valid ones, and the Brevis incident raised both concerns.
One, given that the batter could have been running when the umpire ruled out, they would have to choose between focusing on the run and reviewing the decision. If the first involves running to the end of their partner, the second involves communicating with them. Doing one after the other within a short span of time is not easy.
Two, the runs – off the bat or the pads – do not count if the on-field umpire rules the batter out, as the ball becomes dead at that very instant. Thus, the runs scored by the batter – for no fault of theirs – will not count if the on-field umpire rules out, irrespective of whether the decision gets overturned.
How can these be addressed?
A small change in the Playing Conditions can address both issues.
While the fielding side can appeal, the umpire can delay their decision until the ball becomes dead in any way under Law 20.1 of Cricket. The various conditions include:
- (the ball) is finally settled in the hands of the wicket-keeper or of the bowler, or
- a boundary is scored, or
- a batter is dismissed, or
- whether played or not it becomes trapped between the bat and person of a batter or between items of his/her clothing or equipment, or
- whether played or not it lodges in the clothing or equipment of a batter or the clothing of an umpire, or
- there is an offence resulting in an award of Penalty runs, or
- a contravention of Law 28.3 (Protective helmets belonging to the fielding side), or
- the match is concluded, or
- when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play
The third point, of course, needs to be changed. The Laws cannot change (they apply to all matches – including games without DRS), but the DRS-specific Playing Conditions can be changed to “a batter is dismissed and willingly leaves for the pavilion”.
If the umpire indeed delays the decision after the ball becomes dead, the batter will get the time to review. Additionally, a small change can also grant the batting side whatever runs they had scored before the ball became dead.
The downside? It will probably use some extra time.
Follow Wisden for all IPL 2025 updates, including live scores, team squads & news, team schedule and more. The live streaming details for India, UK and USA can be found here. Check the updated points table, along with the Orange Cap and Purple Cap holders.
