Why was the African batsman not given out on Harris' ball, what does the law say?

Why was the African batsman not given out on Harris' ball, what does the law say?

In the 26th and most important match of the World Cup, South Africa defeated Pakistan by one wicket after a thrilling match.

South Africa achieved Pakistan's target of 271 runs for the loss of 9 wickets in 47.2 overs.

There was a chance in the match that South Africa needed 8 runs to win while Pakistan needed only one wicket to win.

In such a situation, Haris Rauf sent the ball to South Africa's tail-and-beater Tabrez Shamsi, which hit his pad. Pakistan appealed for LBW, but the on-field umpire gave not out, so the green shirts asked for a review. decided.

In the review, it was seen that Harris' ball was touching the wicket slightly, but it was given not out by the on-field umpire, so he remained not out even after the review due to the umpires' call.

If the on-field umpire had given out on this ball of Haris, then Pakistan would have won the match, while South Africa would have declared it as an out.

 What does the law say?

In fact, if the on-field umpire has given out on the appeal of LBW, then if the batting side takes a review, only if the ball hits the stumps, then he will be out even after the review.

Whereas, if the on-field umpire has given not out on an LBW appeal and a review has been taken by the fielding team, then at least half of the ball must hit the stumps, then the out will be given in Hamti decision.

If even less than half of the ball hits the stumps, it will be an umpire's call and the final decision will be not out, which happened on Harris' ball.

After Pakistan's defeat, former Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh criticized the ICC rules by issuing a statement on social media.

He said that bad umpiring and rules were the reason for Pakistan's defeat, ICC should change this law if the ball hits the stumps, whether the on-field umpire gives out or not out, it should not matter and they should be called out.