Timed Out Dismissal in Cricket: The Rules Explained

In November 2023, during the ICC Cricket World Cup in India, something happened on a cricket field that had never occurred before in the tournament's history. Bangladesh's captain Shakib Al Hasan appealed for a timed out dismissal against Sri Lanka's Angelo Mathews — and the on-field umpire upheld it.

Mathews became the first batter in the history of ODI cricket to be given out timed out. He was dismissed before he faced a single delivery — not by a bowler, not by a fielder, but by a broken helmet strap and the ticking clock.

The incident ignited a furious global debate about the spirit of cricket, the letter of the law, and whether a fielding captain should ever actually use this rule. To understand what happened — and why it mattered — you need to understand Law 40.

---

What is Timed Out in Cricket?

Timed out is a method of dismissal in cricket where an incoming batsman fails to be ready to face the ball within the time limit set by the Laws, and the fielding side appeals.

The dismissal does not require any direct action by the fielding side. There is no ball bowled, no catch taken, no throw aimed at the stumps. The only requirement is that the incoming batsman takes too long to arrive and be ready at the crease, and that the fielding side appeals for the dismissal within the correct timeframe.

It is one of cricket's most unusual dismissals because it is entirely passive from the batting side's perspective — the batsman is given out for something they failed to do (arrive in time) rather than something they actively did.

---

How Long Does a Batsman Have?

Under Law 40 of the Laws of Cricket (as revised by the MCC), the incoming batsman must be ready to face the ball within 3 minutes of a wicket falling. "Ready to face" means the batsman must be at the crease and prepared to take their guard — not still walking across the outfield, not strapping on their helmet, not sorting out equipment.

The 3-minute clock starts from the moment the previous wicket falls — not from the moment the fielding side is ready, or from the moment the umpire signals the dismissal.

However, the ICC and individual governing bodies can — and do — adjust this time limit in their playing conditions for specific tournaments and series. In ICC tournament conditions, the time limit has often been set at 2 minutes rather than 3. This was the case in the 2023 World Cup, making the time limit tighter than the base law specifies.

---

What Happens if They Are Late?

If the incoming batsman is not ready to face within the specified time, the fielding side has the option to appeal for a timed out dismissal. If they appeal and the umpire determines that time has elapsed without the batsman being ready, the batsman is given out timed out.

The dismissal is unusual in that it is given against a batsman who has not yet faced a delivery. In the scorebook, the dismissed batsman's score reads as zero (did not bat on that occasion). The wicket is recorded as "timed out" and counts as a genuine dismissal — it affects the bowling team's wickets count and the batting side's wicket count in the innings.

Crucially, the dismissal is a batsman-out decision. It does not result in a re-bowl or any penalty runs. It is simply: the batsman is out before they face a ball.

---

Must the Fielding Team Appeal?

Yes — like all dismissals in cricket, a timed out decision requires an appeal from the fielding side. The umpire will not proactively give a batsman out for being late without the fielding side making the appeal.

This is one of the most debated aspects of the law. Because the fielding team must actively choose to appeal, timed out is a dismissal that can only happen if the fielding captain decides to pursue it. A captain who chooses not to appeal — perhaps out of a sense of sportsmanship, or because the delay was clearly due to a genuine equipment failure — allows the batsman to continue without any penalty.

The fielding captain has complete discretion. The law gives them the option to appeal; it does not compel them to do so. This is why timed out has almost never been used in professional cricket before 2023 — most captains, even when technically entitled to appeal, chose not to in the spirit of the game.

---

The Angelo Mathews Incident (2023 World Cup)

The most significant timed out dismissal in cricket history occurred on 6 November 2023 during the ICC Men's Cricket World Cup group stage match between Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in Delhi.

Sri Lanka had lost a wicket and Angelo Mathews, one of their most experienced batsmen, walked out to the crease. As he prepared to face the first ball, he discovered his helmet chin strap had snapped. He called for a replacement helmet from the Sri Lanka dressing room.

Bangladesh captain Shakib Al Hasan immediately appealed for timed out, arguing that the time limit had elapsed while Mathews was dealing with the equipment issue.

The on-field umpires checked their timing and upheld the appeal. Angelo Mathews was given out timed out — the first instance in ODI World Cup history.

The reaction was immediate and intense. Mathews was visibly furious on the field, pointing to the broken helmet strap as evidence that the delay was beyond his control. Sri Lanka's captain and management protested. Television pundits and former players around the world split sharply between those who said Shakib was entirely within his rights under the Laws, and those who condemned the appeal as against the spirit of cricket.

Key facts of the incident:

• The time limit under 2023 World Cup conditions was 2 minutes
• Mathews had arrived at the crease within the time limit but was dealing with equipment when time expired
• The ICC's playing conditions did not provide an exception for equipment malfunctions
• The appeal was upheld by the on-field umpires
• Sri Lanka lost the match; the dismissal did not determine the result, but it was deeply controversial

---

Controversy Around Timed Out

The Mathews incident crystallised a debate that had simmered in cricket for years: should a rule that is technically on the books ever be used in a way that violates the spirit of the game?

Critics of Shakib's decision argued that:

• Mathews could not have anticipated his helmet strap breaking
• Equipment failure beyond a batsman's control should not lead to dismissal
• The spirit of cricket — fair play and mutual respect — was violated
• Shakib's decision would damage cricket's reputation and the relationship between the two nations

Defenders of Shakib's decision argued that:

• The Laws of Cricket are clear and apply to everyone equally
• Shakib was entitled to appeal under the Laws without any requirement to be lenient
• The responsibility to be ready lies with the batting team, including having properly functioning equipment
• Setting a precedent of ignoring rules when they are inconvenient weakens all cricket laws

The ICC did not take any action against Bangladesh or Shakib. The dismissal stood in the record books.

Since the incident, there have been renewed calls for the MCC and ICC to revisit Law 40 and consider whether an explicit exception for involuntary equipment failure should be incorporated. As of 2026, the law has not been formally amended.

---

Is Timed Out Used Strategically?

Prior to 2023, timed out was regarded as a law that existed but would never actually be used, because the social and reputational costs of appealing were considered to outweigh any tactical benefit. Shakib's decision in 2023 changed that perception.

Could a captain use timed out strategically? The scenario would require:

1. The fielding team to be actively monitoring the time from the moment a wicket falls
2. The incoming batsman to be cutting it close to the time limit
3. The fielding captain to make a calculated decision that the wicket is worth the controversy

In a high-pressure match where a team desperately needs wickets, and the incoming batsman is known to be a significant threat, a captain might theoretically watch the clock very carefully and appeal if the batsman is even marginally late. The Angelo Mathews case has shown that umpires will uphold the appeal if the evidence (timing) is clear.

Whether this crosses into genuinely unsporting territory — or whether it is simply a legitimate use of the Laws — remains a point of debate. What the 2023 incident has undeniably done is make captains and team managers more aware of the time limit, and more likely to ensure batsmen are equipped and ready at the fall of a wicket.

---

Law 40 Explained

Law 40 of the MCC Laws of Cricket covers the timed out dismissal. The key provisions:

• The incoming batsman must be ready to face a delivery (or for the other batsman to face) within 3 minutes of a wicket falling (or a shorter time if specified in playing conditions)
• The fielding side must appeal for the dismissal
• The umpire must determine whether time has elapsed based on the available evidence
• No provision in the base law for equipment failure exceptions — this is a matter for ICC playing conditions, which may or may not add such provisions

The law is brief because its concept is simple. The complexity lies in its application — specifically, in determining whether a delay was beyond the incoming batsman's reasonable control, and whether the spirit of cricket should temper a technically valid appeal.

---

Quick Reference Table

Rule	Detail
Governing law	Law 40 (MCC Laws of Cricket)
Standard time limit	3 minutes from fall of wicket
ICC tournament time limit	Often 2 minutes (specified in playing conditions)
Clock starts from	Moment the previous wicket falls
Does fielding team need to appeal?	Yes — umpire cannot give this out without appeal
Score of timed out batsman	Zero (did not face a delivery)
Most famous instance	Angelo Mathews (Sri Lanka vs Bangladesh, 2023 World Cup)
Exception for equipment failure?	Not in the base law — depends on ICC playing conditions
Has this been used in Test cricket?	Extremely rarely — essentially no confirmed modern Test instance
Spirit of cricket consideration	Major point of debate; captains have discretion not to appeal

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Has a timed out dismissal ever happened in Test cricket? Timed out dismissals in Test cricket are almost non-existent. The Angelo Mathews case in the 2023 World Cup was in ODI cricket. In the long history of Test cricket, there is no widely documented confirmed timed out dismissal in a Test match. The combination of rarity of the scenario and captains' historical reluctance to appeal means the law has almost never been applied at Test level.

What if there is a genuine reason for the delay — like a medical issue or equipment failure? The base Law 40 does not provide an automatic exception for unavoidable delays. However, ICC playing conditions for specific tournaments can and sometimes do include provisions for reasonable delays beyond the batting side's control. Whether a broken helmet strap qualifies as such was the central dispute in the Angelo Mathews case, and the 2023 World Cup conditions did not include such an exception.

Does the incoming batsman have to be at the crease, or just ready at the pavilion gate? The batsman must be at the crease and ready to face — not at the gate or still crossing the boundary. Arriving at the boundary rope one minute in and then taking another two minutes to reach the crease and prepare would not satisfy the requirement.

Can the batting team call for a drinks break or injury timeout to buy the incoming batsman more time? No. The time limit runs from the fall of the wicket and continues regardless of other match events in that window. However, if an official break (umpire-called drink, interruption for rain, or similar) is called during the incoming batsman's window, this would pause the timing — though this scenario is itself extremely unusual.

If a timed out appeal is rejected by the on-field umpire, can it be reviewed via DRS? Yes. DRS can be used to review a rejected timed out appeal in the same way it can be used for other dismissal appeals. The third umpire would review the timing evidence — primarily the official timing records and camera footage from the moment the wicket fell.

---

Conclusion

Timed out sits at the intersection of cricket law and cricket culture. The law is unambiguous: arrive and be ready in time, or risk being given out. Cricket culture, until 2023, said: never actually use this rule. Angelo Mathews's dismissal in the 2023 World Cup broke that cultural norm and forced the sport to confront a question it had long avoided.

The resulting debate — legitimate law versus spirit of cricket — is unlikely to be fully resolved. What is certain is that Law 40 now has a real, recent, high-profile example attached to it, and captains around the world are more aware of it than they were before that November afternoon in Delhi.

For more explanations of cricket's most debated rules, explore our cricket rules guide. You might also find our articles on obstructing the field and hit the ball twice useful for understanding the full range of unusual cricket dismissals.

---

Sources:

• MCC Laws of Cricket — Law 40: Timed Out
• ICC 2023 Men's Cricket World Cup Playing Conditions
• ESPNcricinfo — Angelo Mathews timed out, November 2023