744 Forum

Apron => Pit => Topic started by: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 06:47

Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 06:47
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/8082343.stm

I have no clue what they did or what the comments and figures mean, but still.

 :twisted:

QuoteBroad, as he had with most of the balls in the over, picked up in his follow-through, but turned and missed with the attempted run-out, and the Dutch grabbed an extra run with the overthrow.

Had the bowler chosen to keep the ball, and allow the single, the game would have been decided by a one-over eliminator.

Can somebody translate this to English please?
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Shiv Mathur on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 07:20
Holland needed 2 runs to win, with just 1 ball (delivery) left to play.
Had they got 1 run, the scores would have been tied.

Broad was the bowler. The batsman played the ball back near Broad, and the batsmen took off for a run. Broad fielded the ball and threw it at the stumps.

1) Had the ball hit the stumps, the batsman would have been dismissed (run-out) and the run would not have been counted, leaving England the winners.

2) Had the fielder (Broad) not shied at the stumps, Holland would have got 1 run, leaving the scores tied, and the match would have gone into a 'tie-breaker' (which the report calls a 'one-over eliminator').

3) As it happened, he DID throw at the stumps, missed, and the ball ran much further away, giving the batsmen the opportunity to run back for a second run (called an 'overthrow' run), and thus actually win the match !

Have I made confusion worse confounded?   :roll:

Shiv
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 09:51
Still decoding.
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Richard McDonald Woods on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 15:25
Shiv,
It's easy when you are borne with a bat in your hand, isn't it? ;)
Cheers, Richard
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Shiv Mathur on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 15:43
Quote from: mcdonarShiv,
It's easy when you are borne with a bat in your hand, isn't it? ;)
Cheers, Richard

Haha !  I'll have to ask Tendulkar or Lara about that.
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Will on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 19:43
Can't a game (not a match, but a game) last for days at a time?  What a difficult sport.

Will
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: martin on Sat, 6 Jun 2009 19:48
Quote from: Shiv MathurHaha !  I'll have to ask Tendulkar or Lara about that.

Confirmed.

 :mrgreen:
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers on Sun, 7 Jun 2009 05:58
It must be about tactics then. We tend to have our kids play with discarded avionics.   :mrgreen:

(http://www.hoppie.nl/pic/carolina.jpg)
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: John Golin on Sun, 7 Jun 2009 08:22
Quote from: Will CronenwettCan't a game (not a match, but a game) last for days at a time?  What a difficult sport.

Will

Depends - there are test matches (5 days), One day games, and 20/20 games.

One day games consist of a maximum of 50 overs being bowled by each side - each 'over' is set of 6 deliveries from one end of the wicket.  So each side has 6 x 50, or 300 balls, to try and get the most runs / get the other team out.

20 / 20 is a fast and dirty version of One Day - instead of 50 overs you only get 20 overs, or 120 balls.

There are some other subtle differences but that is basically it.

Either way, it appears England sucks.

:D
Title: Commonwealth Versus Flatlanders
Post by: Richard McDonald Woods on Sun, 7 Jun 2009 09:11
John,

You forgot to mention the most important part of cricket - the county matches.

These last up to 3 days and can sometimes attract crowds of up to 100. Great entertainment for some, because you can read your newspaper between balls, or just go to sleep by putting the newspaper over your face!

Cheers, Richard