vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Did you think otherwise?Stefano said:
Ice hockey's the third biggest sport here after Equestrian and Curling. Narrowly ahead of hopscotch.
-
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.
Test Cricket - Information
- Thread starter Stefano
- Start date
Ice hockey's the third biggest sport here after Equestrian and Curling. Narrowly ahead of hopscotch.
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
*wonders why Norway can beat Australia at curling but not at cricket, then*vic_orthdox said:Did you think otherwise?
tooextracool
International Coach
he said "other than the odd test". you were pointing out the odd test.a massive zebra said:
and you still havent managed to tell me which test he was dropped for.
tooextracool
International Coach
rubbish if he was in pain he wouldnt have bowled 120 overs in 2 innings. thats just insane. at edgbaston in particular he bowled as well as he always has, england just played him well.Richard said:
and its not the first time that hes had a 30+ average against england either.
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
TEC, did you not read this?Top_Cat said:
tooextracool
International Coach
really how many threads dont end up going off topic after a few pages?Neil Pickup said:
and i believe the starter of this thread got the answer he needed at the beginning of the thread.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I think he might still have some questions and might find it easier to pose them in this thread than to start another thread and then watch it drift off as well.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
You forgot about "Name That Fish".vic_orthdox said:Did you think otherwise?
Stefano
School Boy/Girl Captain
Please don't close this topic, because I still have some other questions.
1) Why does the bowler have to give his cap and sometimes even his jacket to the referee?
2) How many players can wear a hat rather than the traditional cap?
3) No ball. I know what it is. However, I have some doubt about it. When there is a no ball, the bowler has to bowl an extra ball in that over. But what happens if the batsman hits the ball (a 4-run boundaries, for example)? Does the batting team receive 5 runs? Does the bowler has to bowl an extra ball even if the batsman has hit a no ball?
4) Wide. I know what it is. However, for what I have seen (which is nothing) in ODIs, Wides are called more often than it Test Matches. Is that possible?
5) Some situations:
a) The batsman hits the ball with his bat. The ball hits the stumps and breaks the wicket. Is he out?
b) The batsman hits the ball. The ball hits the other stumps (where there is the other batsman). Who is out?
c) The batsman is hit by the ball bowled. The batsman DOESN'T hit the ball with his bat. Then, the ball hits the stumps and breaks the wicket. Is he out?
d) The batsman is hit by the ball bowled. The batsman DOESN'T hit the ball with his bat. Then, a fielder catches the ball. Is the batsman out?
1) Why does the bowler have to give his cap and sometimes even his jacket to the referee?
2) How many players can wear a hat rather than the traditional cap?
3) No ball. I know what it is. However, I have some doubt about it. When there is a no ball, the bowler has to bowl an extra ball in that over. But what happens if the batsman hits the ball (a 4-run boundaries, for example)? Does the batting team receive 5 runs? Does the bowler has to bowl an extra ball even if the batsman has hit a no ball?
4) Wide. I know what it is. However, for what I have seen (which is nothing) in ODIs, Wides are called more often than it Test Matches. Is that possible?
5) Some situations:
a) The batsman hits the ball with his bat. The ball hits the stumps and breaks the wicket. Is he out?
b) The batsman hits the ball. The ball hits the other stumps (where there is the other batsman). Who is out?
c) The batsman is hit by the ball bowled. The batsman DOESN'T hit the ball with his bat. Then, the ball hits the stumps and breaks the wicket. Is he out?
d) The batsman is hit by the ball bowled. The batsman DOESN'T hit the ball with his bat. Then, a fielder catches the ball. Is the batsman out?
Adamc
Cricketer Of The Year
1) The bowler doesn't have to, but most bowlers do because (in my experience anyway) it is distracting to bowl in a cap. The cap might also fly off when the bowler is running in, so the best thing to do is to give it to the umpire. Some spin bowlers (who don't have much of a run-up) sometimes bowl with a cap on (e.g. Chris Gayle of the West Indies).Stefano said:
2) This varies from team to team. Australia for example usually requires its players to wear the baggy green cap during the first session of a Test match. Other than that it is usually a matter of preference.
3) A no-ball which is hit for four is worth five runs (though only four are credited to the batsman). An extra ball must still be bowled regardless of whether runs are hit off the no-ball.
4) That is quite right: wides occur far more often in one-day matches. The limits for wides are much more stringent in ODIs and are usually marked by small white lines on either side of the batsman. The reason for this is that one-day matches have limited overs, so this is a disincentive for bowlers to bowl deliveries which are difficult for the batsman to reach. In Test matches it doesn't matter (as much) if the deliveries are difficult for the batsman to reach, as the number of overs is not limited.
(Sorry, not a very helpful explanation, hopefully someone else will explain it better
)5a) Yes. This appears on the scorecard the same as being out 'bowled'.
5b) Usually neither batsman is out in this situation. The exception is if batsman A (the striker) hits the ball straight, the bowler touches it, then it goes on to hit the stumps. If (and only if) batsman B (the non-striker) is out of his crease, he is run out.
5c) Yes. This is regarded as 'bowled' as well.
5d) No. If it hits the batsman's glove, however, he will be out, as the glove is regarded as being part of the bat. He can still of course be given out LBW (if the delivery satisfies the conditions needed for an LBW).
Hope this helps.
Last edited:
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
On both occasions he was injured - groin in the Second and Third Tests of 2000\01, shoulder in 2002. Otherwise he's always tied England in knots - and most others, too.tooextracool said:
I fail to believe someone as usually informed as you can fail to remember that Murali in 2002 was nothing close to fit to play.
C_C
International Captain
Hi Stefano.
AdamC has answered pretty much all your points excellently. I just wanted to expand a wee bit on the some of the stuff.
When a bowler bowls a noball, 1 run is automatically credited to the batting side under the extras column( extras are runs that have not come off the bat...for example the ball hits the pads wide off the stumps-so its not lbw- and richochiates off and the batsmen scamper a run...then its a leg bye. If the bowler bowls a monster ball that neither the batsman nor the wicketkeeper can get and the batsmen scamper runs while the fielding side retrieves the ball its a bye...wides and noballs are also in the extras category).
The bowler automatically has to bowl an extra ball and whatever the batsman scores off the ball goes into his personal account( and therefore into the team's account).
You can only be runout in cricket off of a noball- it is similar to being run out in baseball, where the baseman tags out or gets the ball and touches the baseplate before the runner can slide in.
For example, lets say the scorecard looks something like this:
Neil : c. Adam b. Honestbharani: 50
C&C : bowled Top_Cat : 340
Stefano NOT OUT : 45
Richard NOT OUT : 2
.
.
.
.
Extras : 30
Total : 467/2
Now lets say T_C bowls a noball and you whack it for a four. So your personal score moves to 49 and 1 run is added to the extras column. Therefore, the team got 5 runs from that ball.
Also upon the question of wides.....yes, in ODI cricket, wide rules are a lot more stringent than in tests but it is not dictated by the lines on the stumps ( it used to be a long long time ago but the tradition has carried over).
The definition of a wide is a delivery that is out of the reach of a batsman when the batsman takes guard on the stumps.
As such, someone who is 5'5 has a lot less reach than someone who is 6'5...the same ball that isnt wide for the latter person is wide for the former one...and essentially it is a judgement call.
In the legside the wide rule is typically more stringent than in the off side, as it is easier to lunge in the offside than legside. In ODI crickets, typically a ball that is bowled on the legside that a batsman misses is almost always called a wide.
Mind you,the wide call is affected by the batsman's position to a large degree
Ofcourse, if i bowl it ten feet outside the offstump its always a wide-irrelevant to where you are standing.. But say i bowl just a foot outside offstump and while the ball is in the air, you take two giant steps towards legside(because you misread the ball) and then proceed to miss the ball because it is outside your reach, its not my fault and it isnt a wide.
This modification exists because otherwise cricket will be a farce. Batsmen will just keep moving away from the ball and get it called as a wide and the team can score infitine runs and play for infinite time in the ODIs.
Mind you, wide calls are also afffected by where you take guard(ie, where you stand while you are batting).
You cant expect to stand 5 feet outside the legstump and expect a perfect offstump delivery to be called wide because you couldnt reach it.
Though little leeway exits. As long as you take guard somewhere on the stumps, you can get a wide call ( unless like i said previously, the bowler bowls one that is ridiculously wide even if you were standing at proper position).
Usually batsmen prefer an offstump guard ( ie, the center of their bat is in line with the offstump) but some take middle stump guards or even leg stump guards(rarely).
AdamC has answered pretty much all your points excellently. I just wanted to expand a wee bit on the some of the stuff.
When a bowler bowls a noball, 1 run is automatically credited to the batting side under the extras column( extras are runs that have not come off the bat...for example the ball hits the pads wide off the stumps-so its not lbw- and richochiates off and the batsmen scamper a run...then its a leg bye. If the bowler bowls a monster ball that neither the batsman nor the wicketkeeper can get and the batsmen scamper runs while the fielding side retrieves the ball its a bye...wides and noballs are also in the extras category).
The bowler automatically has to bowl an extra ball and whatever the batsman scores off the ball goes into his personal account( and therefore into the team's account).
You can only be runout in cricket off of a noball- it is similar to being run out in baseball, where the baseman tags out or gets the ball and touches the baseplate before the runner can slide in.
For example, lets say the scorecard looks something like this:
Neil : c. Adam b. Honestbharani: 50
C&C : bowled Top_Cat : 340
Stefano NOT OUT : 45
Richard NOT OUT : 2
.
.
.
.
Extras : 30
Total : 467/2
Now lets say T_C bowls a noball and you whack it for a four. So your personal score moves to 49 and 1 run is added to the extras column. Therefore, the team got 5 runs from that ball.
Also upon the question of wides.....yes, in ODI cricket, wide rules are a lot more stringent than in tests but it is not dictated by the lines on the stumps ( it used to be a long long time ago but the tradition has carried over).
The definition of a wide is a delivery that is out of the reach of a batsman when the batsman takes guard on the stumps.
As such, someone who is 5'5 has a lot less reach than someone who is 6'5...the same ball that isnt wide for the latter person is wide for the former one...and essentially it is a judgement call.
In the legside the wide rule is typically more stringent than in the off side, as it is easier to lunge in the offside than legside. In ODI crickets, typically a ball that is bowled on the legside that a batsman misses is almost always called a wide.
Mind you,the wide call is affected by the batsman's position to a large degree
Ofcourse, if i bowl it ten feet outside the offstump its always a wide-irrelevant to where you are standing.. But say i bowl just a foot outside offstump and while the ball is in the air, you take two giant steps towards legside(because you misread the ball) and then proceed to miss the ball because it is outside your reach, its not my fault and it isnt a wide.
This modification exists because otherwise cricket will be a farce. Batsmen will just keep moving away from the ball and get it called as a wide and the team can score infitine runs and play for infinite time in the ODIs.
Mind you, wide calls are also afffected by where you take guard(ie, where you stand while you are batting).
You cant expect to stand 5 feet outside the legstump and expect a perfect offstump delivery to be called wide because you couldnt reach it.
Though little leeway exits. As long as you take guard somewhere on the stumps, you can get a wide call ( unless like i said previously, the bowler bowls one that is ridiculously wide even if you were standing at proper position).
Usually batsmen prefer an offstump guard ( ie, the center of their bat is in line with the offstump) but some take middle stump guards or even leg stump guards(rarely).
Last edited:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
yay, I got Neil out. 
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
I had a rubbish game.honestbharani said:yay, I got Neil out.
