Freddie and the Loopholes

<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">So, Freddie recently reached 87mph.
<p align="justify">Unfortunately this wasn't the speed of a ball coming out of his hand, but his car in a 50mph zone. Happily, a lawyer nicknamed "Mr Loophole" got him off on what I believe is compulsorily described as a "technicality".
<p align="justify">Freddie also wore brown shoes with a pale grey suit, which was the real offence for which he ought to have been charged.
<p align="justify">This got me thinking about whether Mr Loophole could help cricketers on as well as off the field. So, [b]let's take a look at the Laws of Cricket![/b]
<p align="justify">I haven't scrutinised laws this closely since Kasprovic's dismissal in the Edgbaston Ashes test. The Laws are a tightly-drafted piece of work, I'll be the first to admit. There are, though, a few Laws which have not been fully exploited.
<p align="justify">[b]Law 2.7:[/b] The runner shall wear external protective equipment equivalent to that worn by the batsman for whom he runs and shall carry a bat.
<p align="justify">[b]Loophole:[/b] it doesn't specify what kind of bat. The bat blade must be made of wood, and a maximum size is specified, but nothing seems to prohibit a less sprightly runner from carrying a wooden table tennis bat or a mini autograph bat or, if worried about having to bend down to ground it, a normal-sized balsa wood bat. Do it, Rob Key.
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">[b]

Law 25 :[/b] A penalty of one run shall be awarded instantly on the call of Wide ball.
<p align="justify">[b]Loophole:[/b] There's no mention in the Laws of the penalty of Career-Damaging which was imposed on Steve Harmison for a wide. Steve, appeal! This may be the best argument you've got!
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">[b]

Law 40 :[/b] "If by his actions and positioning it is apparent to the umpires that he will not be able to discharge his duties as a wicket-keeper, he shall forfeit ... the right to be recognised as a wicket-keeper".
<p align="justify">[b]Loophole:[/b] Chris Read should have demanded the proper enforcement of this Law against his rivals for the slot, years ago (Although I must say I do like Tiny Tim).
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">[b]

Law 42:[/b] Prohibition on dangerous and unfair bowling.
<p align="justify">[b]Loophole:[/b] If this is seriously intended to address dangerous and unfair bowling such as might trouble the opposition, it presumably means that Dale Steyn is, BY LAW, required to be omitted from the starting XI for the whole of this summer's series against England. Ali Cook, you know he'll have you for breakfast so get Mr Loophole onto this immediately. Also, I'd like my eyeliner back at some point.
<p align="justify">
The Spirit of Cricket is, for these purposes, being conveniently ignored because all's fair in love and law.
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">
<p align="justify">

(Don't forget to post your questions for Miriam. )
...
www.cricketwithballs.com "Now with extra juicy Podcast"