Jump to content

Surly Cricket Thread


APMP

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It sounded like rain was expected. That being the case why wouldn’t you bring Bumrah back earlier to get in as many overs as possible?  I’m just following on the scorecard for now so maybe this was the right move?

They screwed up trying to finish Chahal's spell. Taylor butchered him for 18 runs off that over before Kumar got CdG (and nearly Taylor!) the next over.

D/L par score after 46 overs is 237. That's a tough ask on this pitch. 148 if it becomes a 20-over chase.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forecast is looking bad, they're calling for more rain throughout the day and D/L score will almost certainly factor in to the outcome.

From CricInfo:

Possibilities:

- Play resumes before roughly 3pm GMT: No reduction, NZ continues their innings.

- Play resumes after roughly 3pm GMT: Reduction in overs, India will face a DLS target.

- Play resumes after 3pm, but there is further interruption today and play cannot be finished: India will have a DLS target posted (because we start losing overs at about 3pm), they will face the same target tomorrow whereever they left off. So say they have to chase 200 in 35 overs, and are 100-3 after 20 when there's more rain. They'd pick up on that 100-3 after 20 tomorrow, chasing the same 200 in 35.

- No further play is possible today: We will continue the match as in (1) above, with no reduction.

- No further play is possible today or tomorrow: India advance to the final, as they were the better team in the Group Stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From here on, overs are going to start getting taken off. No way to avoid D/L now.

There's a reserve day, but it can only be used if today is exhausted. Really hope it just rains all day now so India can get a full 50 overs to chase tomorrow, instead of a rain-shortened 20 overs or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to the graphic you posted about what happens in washouts, it would be so fitting if AUS vs ENG get washed out and AUS advance without playing a single ball.  It would serve the ECB right for shitty tournament organization the first half of the tournament and blatant changes to the pitches once England was on the brink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Roy just went beast-mode. Three consecutive sixes off of Steve Smith.

This is over. We'll have a first-time World Cup champion on Sunday.

I'll be at the Kiwi Bar on Soi 8 in Bangkok for that one with my Kiwi buddy.  I fear the Black Caps are going to get shit stomped, but it will be a blast none the less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Man of the series is Kiwi captain Kane Williamson. Like Federer, he literally got as close as possible to winning the title without actually securing it 😞

 

Give the Roger Federer thing a rest, will you? It's not like you haven't already created a thread to worship the ground he walks on and we're all subject to reading your references to him in other threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Because the batsmen hadn't crossed when the throw made contact with Stokes' bat, only five runs should have been awarded instead of six. Huge umpiring mistake.
 
The law is unfortunately ambiguous. I can see an interpretation where it's five, but can also see one where it's six.

19.8 Overthrow or wilful act of fielder

If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be

          any runs for penalties awarded to either side

and     the allowance for the boundary

and     the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had

          already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.


So we have a boundary that has happened as a result of Guptil's overthrow/act. Under the law, it would clearly be 4 runs allowance for the boundary. There would also clearly be the first run that was completed before Guptill's throw. So that is five.

The ambiguous part is the second run attempted by the batsmen. The preamble of the law above says "if the boundary results," so a lot of lawyers (including me) would assume that the law is drafted for application at the time the ball went over the rope. Under that logic, the second run attempted by the batsmen is a completed run, not an in-progress run. This is because at the time the ball crossed the boundary, Stokes was safely in his crease and the batsmen stopped running). There's no in-progress run in this interpretation.

However, if the second run attempted by the batsmen should be interpreted as an in-progress run, then then the batsmen clearly had not crossed at the time of the throw. In this scenario NZ got hosed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I haven’t followed The Ashes at all, but saw on the icc website that Australia put a freaking beat down on the Poms in the first test. That’s a shame.

I think first of September is supposed to be the start of the Caribbean Premier League.  That should be entertaining, but probably not a high level of cricket.

Edited by Fudge Nuggets
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...