'Bunny Hop' Catches No Longer Legal: Frame-By-Frame Explanation Of New Cricket Rule

Boundary catches involving 'bunny hops', or multiple airborne touches outside the rope, have been deemed illegal by the Marylebone Cricket Club, with the new ruling set to be integrated into ICC's playing conditions this month and the MCC's laws from October next year. Spectacular catches like the ones pulled off by Michael Neser during BBL 2023 and Tom Banton, with Matt Renshaw's help in 2020, will not be considered legal once the updated rule comes into force.
According to an MCC note circulated to member boards by the ICC, while the existing law "led to some spectacular" fielding efforts, it also allowed "some unusual-looking catches that, to the majority of the cricketing public, feel unfair".
Here's a frame-by-frame explanation of the revamped rule:
Frame 1: Fielder catches the ball inside the boundary rope, but the momentum is set to take him/her out of the field.
Frame 2: Fielder throws the ball in the air as he is about to step outside the field.
Frame 3: Fielder catches the ball outside the boundary rope again, but both his feet are in the air. This step is no longer allowed.
Frame 4: Fielder throws the ball in the air before touching the ground again.
Frame 5: Fielder completes the catch inside the field of play. While this would be termed as a valid catch as per the current rules, the MCC proposal has now made it invalid.
Describing Neser's catch for Brisbane Heat to dismiss Jordan Silk, the MCC said the fielder "bunny hopped" before completing the catch inside the boundary. While the act complied with the law at the time, the note added it "felt like the fielder had - quite literally - gone too far".
Both instances triggered widespread debate, prompting the ICC and MCC to review Law 19.5.2, which was last updated in 2010.
As part of its revision, the MCC clarified that any fielder making a second contact with the ball after jumping from beyond the boundary must land inside the field of play, or else a boundary will be awarded.
"MCC has devised a new wording where the 'bunny hop' wholly beyond the boundary is removed, but these catches where the fielder pushes the ball up from inside the boundary, steps outside and then dives back in to catch the ball, are permitted," the note said.
"Our solution has been to limit any fielder who has gone outside the boundary to touching the ball while airborne only once, and then, having done so, to be wholly grounded within the boundary for the rest of the duration of that delivery." The rule will also apply to relay catches. If a fielder parries the ball while airborne outside the boundary and fails to return inside the field before the catch is completed — even by a teammate — it will be ruled a boundary.
"Even if the ball is parried - to another fielder or inside the field of play - if the fielder lands outside the boundary, or subsequently steps outside, then a boundary will be scored.
"For clarity, that means the fielder gets one chance, and one chance only, to touch the ball having jumped from outside the boundary. After that point, the boundary becomes a hard line - and any time they touch the ground in that delivery, whatever else happens, they must be inside." The revised rule will be enforced starting June 17, when the new World Test Championship (WTC) cycle begins with Sri Lanka taking on Bangladesh in Galle. The change in the laws will officially take effect from October 2026.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

First Post

22 minutes ago

• First Post

Explained: Will ICC punish Rishabh Pant for angry confrontation with umpire?

Rishabh Pant faces the danger of being punished by the ICC for his angry confrontation with umpire Paul Reiffel during the Headingley Test. Here's an explainer on under which articles he can be punished. read more Rishabh Pant could face action from ICC after his confrontation with umpire Paul Reiffel. Image: Willow TV Indian wicket-keeper and vice-captain Rishabh Pant faces the threat of disciplinary action from the International Cricket Council (ICC) after he was involved in a heated altercation with umpire Paul Reiffel during Day 3 of the first Test against England at Headingley. Pant was insisting on the change of the ball in the 63rd over of England's innings as he felt the red cherry had lost its shape; however, after using the standard gauge test, Reiffel decided to continue with the same ball. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This did not go down well with Pant, who threw away the ball in anger to express his disappointment. Former India coach Ravi Shastri, who was commenting at the moment, explained the reasons behind Pant's frustration. 'When you start wanting to change the ball every now and then, it's a clear indication that nothing's happening. We want something to happen. And that was frustration from Pant,' Shastri said on air. Former England opener Mark Butcher, however, wasn't happy with Pant's behaviour. 'I'm not sure there was any need for that. (We) know that he's a showman and part of that is probably in order to get a reaction from the crowd, but I'm not sure Paul Reiffel appreciated it very much,' Butcher said. Will ICC take action against Rishabh Pant for confrontation with umpire? ICC match referee Richie Richardson could take action against Pant as the Indian has most likely violated two specific articles of the Code of Conduct. Article 2.8 under the ICC Code of Conduct refers to dissent against an umpiring decision. It can be classified as either a Level 1 or Level 2 offense under clause (a) for showing excessive disappointment and clause (h) for engaging in prolonged discussion about the decision. He can also be penalised under Article 2.9, which prohibits 'throwing the ball at a player, umpire or another person in an inappropriate and dangerous manner.' Any offense under this article can also carry a potential Level 1 and Level 2 sanction. So far, the match referee has not taken any action, but it's quite possible that the sanctions will be announced at the end of the ongoing game.

Hindustan Times

32 minutes ago

• Hindustan Times

Rishabh Pant at risk of ICC sanction for violating Code of Conduct after 'needless' outburst at umpire

India wicketkeeper-batter Rishabh Pant could be at risk of facing sanctions for breaching not one, but two articles of the ICC Code of Conduct following his heated argument with the on-field umpire Paul Reiffel on Day 3 of the ongoing first Test against England in Leeds. The act even received criticism from former cricketers Ravi Shastri and Mark Butcher on air, who deemed it "needless." Rishabh Pant (L) complains about the shape of the ball to Australia's umpire Paul Reiffel (R) on day 3 of the first cricket test match between England and India (AFP) The incident happened after the penultimate ball of the 61st over of England's first innings at Headingley on Sunday, after Mohammed Siraj was hit for a boundary by Harry Brook. Pant seemed visibly unhappy with the condition of the ball as he approached the umpire to get it inspected. Reiffel checked it using the ball gauge and seemed satisfied with the shape of it as he gave it back to Pant. But the India star seemed "frustrated," as he threw the ball away back-handed on the ground and stormed off. The English crowd immediately booed Pant. "When you start wanting to change the ball every now and then, it's a clear indication that nothing's happening. We want something to happen. And that was frustration from Pant," said Shastri in the commentary. Butcher, on the other hand, highlighted the umpire's reaction to Pant's act, saying: "I'm not sure there was any need for that. (We) know that he's a showman and part of that is probably in order to get a reaction from the crowd, but I'm not sure Paul Reiffel appreciated it very much." Will ICC punish Rishabh Pant? Pant is likely to have violated two articles of the Code of Conduct during his heated exchange with the umpire. The India vice-captain could be charged for violating, which pertains to 'showing dissent at an umpire's decision during an international match.' He could be charged with Level 1 or 2 offense under clause '(a) excessive, obvious disappointment with an Umpire's decision, and (h) arguing or entering into a prolonged discussion with the Umpire about his/her decision.' The other article Pant violated was Article 2.9, which pertains to "Throwing a ball (or any other item of cricket equipment such as a water bottle) at or near a Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire, Match Referee or any other third person in an inappropriate and/or dangerous manner during an International Match." India, in fact, had the umpire conduct multiple checks as Shubman Gill and Jasprit Bumrah were seen discussing the matter a few times. India closed day three at 90/2, thus leading by 96 runs in Leeds.

India.com

an hour ago

• India.com

Rishabh Pant To Get Banned? ICC Investigates Heated Ball Change Outburst During IND vs ENG Headingley Test

Tensions boiled over on Day 3 of the 1st Test between England and India at Headingley as India's vice-captain Rishabh Pant found himself in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. Following a denied ball-change request, Pant's animated reaction sparked a wave of controversy that could lead to disciplinary action from the International Cricket Council (ICC). Meet our new vice captain — LSG×Shreyansh (@LSGfam_) June 22, 2025 The flashpoint occurred late in the 61st over of England's innings, just after Harry Brook executed a cheeky ramp shot over the slips for four off Mohammed Siraj. Immediately after the boundary, Pant approached on-field umpire Paul Reiffel, urging a ball change due to what he believed was an altered shape. Reiffel, using the standard ball gauge, deemed the ball fit for play and denied the request. The decision did not sit well with Pant, who tried to plead his case further. Upon Reiffel's refusal, Pant flung the ball back-handed into the turf and stomped away visibly annoyed—eliciting boos from the Headingley crowd. What Does the ICC Code of Conduct Say? Pant's actions could potentially violate two separate articles under the ICC Code of Conduct: Article 2.8: Pertains to 'showing dissent at an umpire's decision.' Clause (a): For obvious and excessive disappointment. Clause (h): For prolonged or aggressive discussion with the umpire. Article 2.9: Prohibits 'throwing a ball at or near an umpire in an inappropriate and/or dangerous manner.' Both articles carry Level 1 or Level 2 sanctions, which could include fines, demerit points, or in extreme cases, a brief suspension. Though Pant did not appear to aim the ball directly at the umpire, the ICC could interpret the back-handed throw and storm-off as an inappropriate display of dissent. Reactions from the Commentary Box The incident didn't go unnoticed in the commentary box. 'When you start wanting to change the ball every now and then, it's a clear indication that nothing's happening. We want something to happen. And that was frustration from Pant,' said former India coach Ravi Shastri, adding context to Pant's visible irritation. Meanwhile, former England batter Mark Butcher weighed in with a more critical tone: 'He's a showman, and maybe this was partly to fire up the crowd. But I don't think Paul Reiffel appreciated it. There was no need for that reaction.' Impact on the Match and Momentum Shift Interestingly, the drama surrounding the ball incident seemed to inject energy into the Indian side. Just an over later, Siraj struck a crucial blow by removing England skipper Ben Stokes, reducing the hosts to 276/5 in reply to India's massive first-innings total of 471. The umpires, perhaps re-evaluating the condition of the ball, conducted multiple ball inspections soon after the confrontation. Shubman Gill and Jasprit Bumrah were seen joining the discussion with match officials, underlining the lingering tension. What Happens Next? Will Pant Be Punished? While the ICC has not yet issued an official statement, any decision will likely be made post-match. Given the nature of Pant's reaction—passionate but not overtly hostile—it's plausible that a Level 1 sanction (a reprimand and/or fine) could be handed out rather than a harsher penalty. Historically, similar reactions have been handled with minor disciplinary measures, especially when intent to harm or directly insult an official is absent. However, the ICC may still act to reinforce standards of player conduct, particularly for team leaders like Pant.