Why is an overthrow that goes for 4 attributed to the batsman as 5?

[TheJediBrah]

also we wouldn't have any of this catch the ball, throw it back in and catch it again nonsense

Instead you'd have the fielders fighting with members of the crowd leaning over to catch the ball haha

 

[GIMH]

Isn't it only 5 if the batsmen have crossed once? I remember that stokes's overthrow 6 in the WC final should have been 5 because he hadn't completed the second run at some important point.

Yeah the reason some say it shouldn’t have been 6 is because they hadn’t crossed at the point the ball was thrown

 

[Molehill]

Isn't it only 5 if the batsmen have crossed once? I remember that stokes's overthrow 6 in the WC final should have been 5 because he hadn't completed the second run at some important point.

Yeah, I think we all learnt something that day (umpires included). It had to be when the ball leaves the fielder's hand and at that point we all now know that the batsmen hadn't crossed. It's just that the normal situation is a fielder throwing from cover and the batsmen have long since crossed so the run is given.

 

[Daemon]

Yeah the reason it shouldn’t have been 6 is because they hadn’t crossed at the point the ball was thrown

Fixed

 

[GIMH]

Fixed

Yeah I mean I read it that way too. I did read a couple of pieces that suggested otherwise but I’ve little interest in finding them. PS you’re a ****.

 

[Daemon]

Yeah I mean I read it that way too. I did read a couple of pieces that suggested otherwise but I’ve little interest in finding them. PS you’re a ****.

Happy new year!

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah the reason some say it shouldn’t have been 6 is because they hadn’t crossed at the point the ball was thrown

"some say"

lol

 

[GIMH]

"some say"

lol

Bore off you tedious turd