AUS vs ENG: Had Matthew Wade been adjudged out for obstructing the field on England's appeal? Here's what MCC Law says

Australian batter Matthew Wade survived a controversial dismissal during the first T20I against England and it proved to be a talking point among the cricketing world. After top-edging a delivery straight into the air in the 17th over, Wade was unsighted and he took a few steps down the batting track for a possible single. Mark Wood was the bowler in action, and Wade threw an arm out while returning to the crease which restricted Wood from going for the catch.  

Wood looked perplexed while turning towards the umpires and he did look like appealing in a soft manner. However, later it was revealed that the umpires had enquired England skipper Jos Buttler if they had wanted to appeal for obstructing the field. Buttler refrained from it and he spoke on the incident after the match ended.  

"I wasn't sure what happened. They asked if I wanted to appeal, and I thought, 'We're here for a long time in Australia. I would be a risky one to go for so early in the trip," Buttler told in the post match conference.  

However, there was a sense of confusion among the fans wondering that would have happened if England had appealed for a possible obstructing the field.  

Here's the MCC law regarding Obstructing the field

According to the MCC Law 37.3, “If the delivery is not a No ball, the striker is out Obstructing the field if wilful obstruction or distraction by either batter prevents the striker being out Caught.” 

Going by the MCC rules, Wade would have been declared out had England appealed with a lot more conviction. The left-hander was dismissed for a 15-ball 21 in the end and Australia ended up losing the game by eight runs in end. Although at this instance Wade’s survival did not influence the game, the debate would have got much intense had he won the game for the hosts.