Stop clock for Tests, allowance to use saliva, new DRS protocols: All you need to know about new ICC playing conditions

No mandatory ball change for deliberate use of saliva

The Indian Premier League (IPL) 2025 was the first major cricket league after the COVID-19 pandemic to lift the saliva ban. However, the ICC has not gone down that route. While using saliva on the ball is still banned, the ICC has said it is no longer compulsory for the umpires to ask for another ball as soon as saliva is found on the one in use. The change has been made to prevent a situation where teams intentionally apply saliva to a ball in an attempt to force a change. Henceforth, the umpires will only change the ball if its condition has been changed considerably. This has been left entirely to the discretion of the umpires. Also, if the ball begins to do things after the umpires have asserted the application of saliva has not altered its condition, it cannot be changed. The batting team, however, will be accorded five runs.

DRS protocol for secondary review after an out decision

To understand this tweak in the rule, consider this example: If a batter has been out caught by the wicketkeeper, and he asks for a review. UltraEdge shows the ball has actually kissed the pads, sans any connection with the bat. This means that the batter is certainly not out caught behind as he hasn't nicked the delivery. The third umpire now checks for the second mode of dismissal and asks to substantiate via ball-tracking whether the batter is out lbw or not. As per the previous rule, during such a review, once it was decided the batter was not out caught, the default on-field decision for the second mode of dismissal - lbw - would also be not out. That means if ball-tracking led to an "umpire's call" verdict, the batter would remain not out. However, the umpire might have only given not out for the caught behind call and may not have taken the possibility of lbw into account. But after the updated rule, when the ball-tracking graphic for lbw is displayed, the "original decision" label on it will read "out". And if the review yields an umpire's call verdict, then the batter would have to take the long walk back to the pavilion.

The ICC has also made a call to change the process of adjudication in case of a combined review involving both umpire and player referrals by managing them in the order of their occurrence. As of now, during a combined review, the process started with the third umpire taking up the umpire review before looking at the player's review. "If the conclusion from the first incident is that a batter is dismissed, then the ball would be deemed to have become dead at that point, rendering investigation of the second incident unnecessary," rule 3.9 in the revised ICC playing conditions says. So, if there is an appeal for a caught behind as well as a run out, the third umpire would now first look for the caught behind review as that took place earlier. If the batter is out, the ball would be declared dead.

Fairness of catch to be reviewed for no-ball

If there is an instance where on-field officials are unsure regarding whether a catch has been taken cleanly, but even as they are deciding, the TV umpire tells them it was a no-ball, then till now, under the playing conditions, once the no-ball was signalled, the TV umpire would not need to adjudicate on the fairness of the catch. However, as per the updated playing conditions, the third umpire will now take a close look at the legality of the catch, and if it is found to be a fair catch, then the batting team will only get an extra run for the no-ball. However, if the catch was not taken cleanly, then the batting team would get the runs the batters had scored.

Deliberate short run

There is an interesting tweak to this rule. So far, in the instance of one of the batters being caught taking a short run, the batting team would be slapped with a five-run penalty. But in the updated rules, if one of the batters is found to have not made their ground deliberately in order to steal an extra run, then the officials will give the bowling side an opportunity to decide which batter they want on strike. Also, the five-run penalty will continue to be part of the sanction.

"A deliberate short run is an attempt for batters to appear to run more than one run, while at least one batter deliberately does not make good their ground at one end," Rule 18.5.1 of the playing conditions says. "Batters may choose to abort a run, provided the umpire believes that there was no intention by the batter concerned to deceive the umpires or to score the run in which they didn't make their ground."

Full-time injury substitutes in domestic first-class cricket

The ICC has asked boards to try out the allowance of full-time injury substitutes who can come in and perform the role of a player on the team. This replacement will be allowed only if the player who is to be subbed off has suffered an injury which is clearly visible and perceptible by the match officials. The replacement player will have to be like-for-like, as is the case for a concussion sub. This would not be applicable to cricketers sustaining hamstring pulls or niggles.

It is important to note that this rule will be used on a trial basis and is entirely up to the member countries' discretion to implement in their domestic first-class circuit.