Basic questions

[vcs]

I saw these puzzlers in a women's big bash t20 yesterday. Could someone have made a mistake, or are there different rules, or do I just not get it?

On about the third ball of an over during the first innings, the batter was out on a catch. After the new batter came in, the game resumed with the partner batting. The new batter didn't get her turn to swing until after a single on the second bowl after she came onto the field. Was that handled right? Later on in the same game, after another catch, the replacement batter immediately had her turn to swing. Nobody had any objections to either event. Is it possible that the rules are different at different points in a women's big bash game?

If the batsmen cross over while the ball is in the air, the new batsman will not be facing the next delivery.

At a later point in that same game, a batter had a dot ball that was the end an over, and after the bowling changeover, she was still the batter. I didn't understand that either.

No idea, sounds bizarre.

Last, who is the batter after a run out? The striker was run out at the batting end trying to stretch a single into a double. I would have thought that the game would resume with the replacement batter now being the striker in as much as the non-striker was not out on her side of the pitch, but instead the non-striker became the batter. What is the rule on that?

Did the run out happen on the last ball of the over?

 

[rodk]

If the batsmen cross over while the ball is in the air, the new batsman will not be facing the next delivery.

Idk. That wasn't shown or replayed on either occasion. By "crossing over" do you mean actually getting to the ends of the pitch or just getting past each other on the trip?

No idea, sounds bizarre.

Agreed. Any chance there are team options on that issue, as there are with such things as declarations, batting first, determining when power plays occur?

Did the run out happen on the last ball of the over?

No. It happened during the last over but it was not the last ball of the last over.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Shebwas out on a fielder's choice

 

[rodk]

I'm trying to understand. Please forgive if these questions sound stupid.

1. Can batting partners steal a run? Maybe the bowler has his back to them while prepping for his next delivery and zones out? Or maybe the ball on its way back from outfielder to wicket keeper to bowler gets dropped or thrown away?

2. I heard there are times when partners won't try for a single run if what they really need is for the current striker to keep batting and stroke boundaries as part of a comeback. Imagine the partners' names are Tendulkar (striking) and and Maidengiver (waiting). Can't this create a stalemate if the fielding team declines to pick up the ball until partners cross? Will an umpire declare a play dead if nothing is happening other than the sides staring at each other?

3. Can teams keep scoring runs until the ball is brought back into the infield, or is there a limit of six? Maybe outfielders have been injured in a collision, leaving it up to an infielder hundreds of feet away to get the ball and get it back in.

TY.

 

[trundler]

You can if the fielder over throws i.e if it goes past the keeper or bowler/they fail to collect it. Not before a ball is bowled under any circumstances.

And no. That would be a silly thing to do.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I'm trying to understand. Please forgive if these questions sound stupid.

1. Can batting partners steal a run? Maybe the bowler has his back to them while going back for his next delivery and zones out? Or maybe the ball on its way back from outfield to wicket keeper to bowler gets dropped or thrown away?

The ball usually is dead as he's walking back to his mark.
In the second instance, yes. They can steal a run or two or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 or 10, and so on.

2. I heard there are times when partners won't try for a single run if what they really need is for the current striker to keep batting and stroke boundaries as part of a comeback. Can't this create a stalemate if the fielding team declines to pick up the ball until partners run? Will an umpire declare a play dead if nothing is happening?

The only party getting hurt here is the fielding team. Over rate will be terrible. Captain will get fined. No such thing as a stalemate in cricket.

Umpire usually declare a play dead if something like this occurs:

TY.

 

[rodk]

You can if the fielder over throws i.e if it goes past the keeper or bowler/they fail to collect it. Not before a ball is bowled under any circumstances.

Is everything frozen once the bowler has it in the bowlers hands?

How about the change after an over, when, in theory there is no bowler until he presents himself as such? With everyone shifting around, is that an automatic time out?

Is a quick bowl legal? Perhaps a bowler who normally takes a 10 step run up surprises the batsman before he is really ready by turning and taking a 3 step run up, assuming it is a legal delivery otherwise?

silly thing to do

Is "silly" the same as illegal, cheating and/or unethical?

 

[mr_mister]

Weird gimmick for a multi

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

What did I missed?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Rodk is asking alot of questions.

What percentage falls under the 'basic' category?

 

[rodk]

Rodk is asking alot of questions.

What percentage falls under the 'basic' category?

I'm putting into "basic" all the stuff that tv announcers don't say because they take it for granted that viewers already know what they would be saying. That is the bane of all sports on tv: noobs can't penetrate the discussion and can't read minds.

 

[rodk]

Is "following on" a requirement or is it an option of either or both sides? If optional, is it used as a weapon in a close test to force the opponent to bat fourth, when production at bat is toughest?

 

[trundler]

It's optional and the decision lies with the team which batted first. Actually the team that bats first might have to bat fourth but ideally they would only have to chase a small target if need be. The purpose is to make the opposition crumble under pressure and not bat again at all.

 

[rodk]

It's optional and the decision lies with the team which batted first. Actually the team that bats first might have to bat fourth but ideally they would only have to chase a small target if need be. The purpose is to make the opposition crumble under pressure and not bat again at all.

TY. But I'm figuring that there will be occasions when you should have been careful what you wished for because it could come true -- especially if the third innings are unexpectedly huge because the first batting teams bowlers are exhausted from having to play for several days in a row without a break.

 

[Dendarii]

Is "following on" a requirement or is it an option of either or both sides? If optional, is it used as a weapon in a close test to force the opponent to bat fourth, when production at bat is toughest?

If a team is following on then it's not a close test. The follow on only becomes an option if the team batting first has a lead of more than 200 runs after dismissing the other team.

 

[rodk]

I noticed that some ovals have more than one pitch. Do the teams use the same pitch every day during a test, or do they alternate them? If they alternate them, is there a rule as to how that happens, or is that done by agreements before or during the event?

 

[rodk]

The situation is that the last bowl of an over resulted in a taken wicket and new batsman is going to get the next ball. Does the bowling team have to identify its bowler before the batting team identifies its batsman so the batting team can get its preferred matchup? or does the bowling team make its pick after the new batsman takes his place?

 

[rodk]

If a team is following on then it's not a close test. The follow on only becomes an option if the team batting first has a lead of more than 200 runs after dismissing the other team.

TY. That clarifies a lot. I was thinking the team batting second could force a follow on even if it was only a couple of runs behind and really put its opponent at a big disadvantage.

 

[trundler]

The situation is that the last bowl of an over resulted in a taken wicket and new batsman is going to get the next ball. Does the bowling team have to identify its bowler before the batting team identifies its batsman so the batting team can get its preferred matchup? or does the bowling team make its pick after the new batsman takes his place?

There really isn't a connection between the 2. The batting team sends in the next batsman based on the batting position and match situation.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I have a basic question:

What happens when a guy gets run out for 99 on his debut match by his brother leaving him stranded?