In the final over of the Sunrisers Hyderabad run-chase, Harshal bowled a full toss above waist height that was dispatched by Rashid Khan for a boundary. Even as the no-ball and free hit was signalled there was instant displeasure from the Hyderabad dugout, specifically from skipper Warner.

This was because it was Harshal’s second beamer in the game. In the 18th over, Harshal had sent down another full toss well above waist height against Jason Holder that was also no-balled.

Law 41.7, concerning the delivery of dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries (beamers), was amended in October 2017. The amended law stated that any bowler who bowled more than one beamer in a game, irrespective of speed and height, had to be taken out of the attack.

Earlier, slower deliveries could be bowled up to shoulder level height. According to this, Harshal ought to have been banned after the second full toss in the final over.

However, this law was amended again a year later.

Hello, what have we here?

Of course Harshal bowled two beamers!

Over 17.4
Over 19.3

He should have been taken off. Someone else would have had defend 8 in 4 balls, no? https://t.co/M7w3dNbk5r

— Abhishek Mukherjee (@SachinAzharCT) (@ovshake42) April 14, 2021

In a statement released by the MCC in November 2018, it made the law more subjective.

“Since its introduction, feedback has been received which suggests strongly that the new sanctions were overly severe (especially to younger bowlers). In many cases, Governing Bodies introduced their own playing conditions that rendered the new Law irrelevant.

“In response to this feedback, the Laws sub-committee has reviewed Law 41.7 and – with the support of the Cricket committee, World Cricket committee and MCC Committee – agreed that it should be adjusted, with effect from 1st April 2019, to allow umpires to make a more subjective decision over which deliveries are dangerous.”

By this amendment, Harshal was actually in the clear as he had delivered the first beamer outside leg-stump, as such not being as dangerous to the batsman.

According to the latest amendment, Law 41.7 reads thus:

41.7 Bowling of dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries

41.7.1 Any delivery, which passes or would have passed, without pitching, above waist height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease, is to be deemed to be unfair, whether or not it is likely to inflict physical injury on the striker.

If the bowler bowls such a delivery the umpire shall immediately call and signal No ball.

41.7.2 The bowling of a delivery as defined in 41.7.1 is also dangerous if the bowler’s end umpire considers that there is a risk of injury to the striker. In making that judgement the umpire shall:

– disregard any protective equipment worn by the striker
-be mindful of:
-the speed, height and direction of the delivery
-the skill of the striker-the repeated nature of such deliveries

41.7.3 If the umpire considers a non-pitching delivery, or a series of non-pitching deliveries, to be dangerous under 41.7.2 when the ball is dead, the umpire shall repeat the No ball signal to the scorers and then caution the bowler, indicating that this is a first and final warning.

Harshal wasn’t given a warning after his first delivery as it wasn’t deemed dangerous by the umpires and could continue bowling despite his second beamer in the final over.

Sunrisers Hyderabad are aware of this as Trevor Bayliss, the head coach, clarified in the post-match press conference.

“He [Warner] was a little animated because we weren’t playing very good cricket and we lost. I think the umpires got it right. There was a bit of conjecture over obviously the second high no-ball, but the first one was not directed at the batter’s body, so that wasn’t a warning. So I think the umpires got that one right,” Bayliss said during the virtual post-match press conference.