weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Haha yes my bad. Rashid would have definitely hit a six, as he said to Morgan that Allah was supporting England yesterday.
-
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.
Should deflected overthrows off stokes bat have only been 5 runs not 6?
- Thread starter Cookie99
- Start date
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
No one is calling for a change in that part of the current rule, just saying the umpires got it wrong. The actual change would involve not awarding overthrows if the ball strikes the batsman. In the situation that prevailed logically England would have had two runs and the game carries on.
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Can that result in some fielders targeting the batsmen with their throws?
Neil Young
State Vice-Captain
The benefit of doing that being what?
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
injuring the batsman
(not saying even 1% of fielders may take the approach; but some dick can)
cnerd123
likes this
Already covered under Law 42.3.1
Pretty sure ICC Code of Conduct would cover this as well
Would Rashid definitely have been on strike in the case of a 5 being awarded instead of a 6? If so, that would even seem a bit bizarre to me, and I would have been salty about it, as the point when the ball hits Stokes he has completed two runs and is on strike for the next ball.
We all know Rashid would have just plonked the ball into some unusual area of the ground for 4 anyway.
We all know Rashid would have just plonked the ball into some unusual area of the ground for 4 anyway.
Victor Ian
International Coach
Cricket is about more than skill and rules. Luck is a rather large factor at times. Even if the ball travelled faster and hit the stumps to run Stokes out, it was England's day. They were going to win this no matter what transpired. I thought the first ball of that innings was telling. Out LBW. But the umpire erred on the side of caution rather than put his finger up. England's day. They won it with their bowling. A much underrated unit.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's a bit disturbing you think that would be a possibility
Did you think people want to do that and the only reason people don't is because they're worried the ball will go for overthrows?
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Never know with nasty people like Starc playing the game.
That Pollard incidents is one of the rare times I’ve seen a cricketer actively try and injure someone. Should’ve copped a ban for it actually.
Athlai
Not Terrible
Deflected overthrows probably shouldn't exist at all. Assuming it comes into contact with the stumps/umpire/batsman. Makes sense for misfielding but once it hits something or someone (that isn't a fielder) it should probably be a dead ball (though if batsman have crossed then they should be able to complete the run unless run out).
Brett Lee beamers.
Martin Crowe was a vocal campiagner for dead ball after hitting the stumps, thought it encouraged shying at the stumps which was exciting for the spectators.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
lol do people still think this
Nah, they just think that his hand got very slippery after he had been hit for a few fours. But only once or twice in a spell, so never enough to get him banned from bowling. Clever, eh?
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Of course he should have been off strike, he should have been in ****ing gaol.
