New answers tagged cricket
Ricky Ponting and Herschelle Gibbs shared the "man of the match" award in "438 game": Players of the match - HH Gibbs (South Africa) and RT Ponting (Australia)
While it is not allowed by the rules, it is indeed possible, and has happened: In a 1951 in a test versus England, Alex Moir of New Zealand bowled 2 successive overs, the last before tea and the first after the interval! This was an oversight on behalf of the umpires (and captains, batsmen and bowler as well).
Because it is in the rules.... LAW 36 (LEG BEFORE WICKET) The striker is out LBW in the circumstances set out below. and (b) the ball, if it is not intercepted full pitch, pitches in line between wicket and wicket or on the off side of the striker’s wicket, It is irrelevant as to whether the bowler delivers over or around the wicket. It has to do ...
No. The reasons for a no ball are listed in Law 24 (and the subsidiary bits mentioned in Law 24.9) and do not include "fielder not in the field of play". In theory, Law 2, Section 6 says that: If a player comes on to the field of play [without permission of the umpires] and comes into contact with the ball while it is in play, (a) the ball shall ...
You are absolutely right. I had my doubts thats why I googled and this page came up. This is not live commentary. This is fooling the spectators
Essentially, no. So long as the bat conforms to Law 6, The bat, Appendix E, The Bat and any playing conditions under which the match is being played, "anything goes" (although the Laws are restrictive in what is allowed). In general, bats are set up to be as good as they can be at hitting the ball, so there would be no advantage to be gained from "tampering" ...
The events of Moneyball are now 14 years old; the main story focuses around the 2002 season. The world has moved on enormously in those 14 years and every sport uses "advanced statistics"/data science/whatever you want to call it to a greater or lesser extent. It's just not news any more - in fact, it would be more news if a professional team didn't have ...
I see two questions here: What caps would he be given if he's both the highest wicket taker and the leading run scorer? According to the rules, both the caps would be awarded to the player, after the respective innings in which he earned them. What cap would/should he wear if he's awarded both? There isn't any rule which binds the player to the ...
Law 22.5(a) can provide the missing piece in your puzzle. Umpire miscounting (a) If the umpire miscounts the number of valid balls, the over as counted by the umpire shall stand. The last over becomes a 7-ball over due to the umpire miscounting.1 The 10th dismissal could be either (a) Hitting the Ball Twice or (b) Obstructing the Field. ...
I have a complete solution, but the key part is that the title of this question has a wrong assumption. Core Puzzle: Team A scored 250 runs for 9 wickets in 50 overs. Team B was 250 for 0 in 49 overs. Eventually Team A won the match by virtue of losing fewer wickets. Hence Team B lost 10 wickets in 1 over. The main part of this question was no two ...
The simple answer is - it depends. For a lot of matches, the commentators will be in the ground, but for others they won't be, for a lot of reasons but usually for financial ones - it can make financial sense to have commentators operate off a TV feed rather than send them thousands of miles for what might be a single match. My experience of cricket ...
As an umpire, it would be a distraction not a help. We stand with our eyes generally over middle stump, although this can change if leg stump is particularly important say for a left arm over bowler to a right hander. The extra lines would act as a distraction and would not help with the decision making process.
This is allowed by the playing conditions for the specific matches. For example, see the 2016 World T20 regulations: 8.2 [...] The use of LED wickets is permitted.
Top 50 recent answers are included