• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Australian Domestic Season 2008/09

mikeW

mikeW

International Vice-Captain
thierry henry said:
Agreed. Rather than being wided, it should have been given out bowled imo
Click to expand...
aw 25 (Wide ball)

1. Judging a Wide
(a) If the bowler bowls a ball, not being a No ball, the umpire shall adjudge it a Wide if, according to the definition in (b) below, in his opinion the ball passes wide of the striker where he is standing and would also have passed wide of him standing in a normal guard position.
(b) The ball will be considered as passing wide of the striker unless it is sufficiently within his reach for him to be able to hit it with his bat by means of a normal cricket stroke.
 
thierry henry

thierry henry

International Coach
mikeW said:
aw 25 (Wide ball)

1. Judging a Wide
(a) If the bowler bowls a ball, not being a No ball, the umpire shall adjudge it a Wide if, according to the definition in (b) below, in his opinion the ball passes wide of the striker where he is standing and would also have passed wide of him standing in a normal guard position.
(b) The ball will be considered as passing wide of the striker unless it is sufficiently within his reach for him to be able to hit it with his bat by means of a normal cricket stroke.
Click to expand...
Good point. Umpires should've used this interpretation for that ball in the last over despite no umpire ever having used it before in 20/20 history.
 
FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
mikeW said:
aw 25 (Wide ball)

1. Judging a Wide
(a) If the bowler bowls a ball, not being a No ball, the umpire shall adjudge it a Wide if, according to the definition in (b) below, in his opinion the ball passes wide of the striker where he is standing and would also have passed wide of him standing in a normal guard position.
(b) The ball will be considered as passing wide of the striker unless it is sufficiently within his reach for him to be able to hit it with his bat by means of a normal cricket stroke.
Click to expand...
Limited overs cricket has a different wide interpretation. Anything outside the leg-stump is a wide unless it gets hit. But you knew that.
 
Josh

Josh

International Regular
Whoever misfielded that ball at extra cover on the second last ball cost us the match. No other moment matters.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Gutted that an exceedingly harsh wide call against Harwood in the last over essentially cost us the match. Missed leg-stump by a coat of varnish and yet is a wide?
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Just want a bit of consistency - balls that finish there are rarely called wides - to call a ball like that a wide in the final over of a tight match, just surprising, and unfortunately in the end it cost the Vics dearly...
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
The wide was stiff, but the misfield was a disaster. The run out was out (fat **** Smith would have been gone) and 2 off 1 would have been difficult.

How good was Harwood's yorker that got Thorneley? Base of middle peg... so good.
 
Camo999

Camo999

State 12th Man
Disappointing to lose such a tight match.

Still reckon it's pretty poor that McCullum played. Surely a rule change is in order. Otherwise we could see half a dozen gun international players come in on each side just for the final... just in case their IPL team doesn't make it to Champ league. Makes a mockery of the entire competition in the first place. What's to stop McCullum playing for say Tas or WA next year if they make the final?

By the way, how come Damian Wright didn't play? Injured?
 
KiWiNiNjA

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
Camo999 said:
Still reckon it's pretty poor that McCullum played. Surely a rule change is in order. Otherwise we could see half a dozen gun international players come in on each side just for the final... just in case their IPL team doesn't make it to Champ league. Makes a mockery of the entire competition in the first place. What's to stop McCullum playing for say Tas or WA next year if they make the final?
Click to expand...
Twenty20 makes a mockery of cricket, so I don't see the problem. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top