Who's heard of Roy Gilchrist?

[SJS]

I am sure I read somewhere he once bowled a ball that went for 6 byes

That story been used over the years for many bowlers to indicate how fast they were. I am not very sure if this actually happened with Gilchrist.

 

[Swervy]

That story been used over the years for many bowlers to indicate how fast they were. I am not very sure if this actually happened with Gilchrist.

yeah...from cricinfos obit

'Gilchrist was a small man, with short legs and long arms, but generated tremendous pace. It is said that his first ball in Test cricket (against England at Edgbaston in 1957) bounced over the head of both batsman and 'keeper, and rebounded 30 yards onto the field from the sightscreen. Although this should be looked upon more as legend than fact (only 3 byes appear in the scorecard of that innings), there is little doubt that he was one of the fastest and most hostile bowlers of his generation.'

 

[luckyeddie]

I am sure I read somewhere he once bowled a ball that went for 6 byes

There's no such thing.

 

[Swervy]

There's no such thing.

?????

what do you mean..there is no provision in the laws of the game for this to happen...or that it just didnt happen to Roy G

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

?????

what do you mean..there is no provision in the laws of the game for this to happen...or that it just didnt happen to Roy G

Possibly that it couldn't happen. Making a ball bounce, then on that bounce travel 50+ meters would require quite a bit of pace. Or a rigged ball.

 

[luckyeddie]

?????

what do you mean..there is no provision in the laws of the game for this to happen...or that it just didnt happen to Roy G

No provision in the laws of the game for 6 byes, 6 leg-byes or 6 wides.

The relevant bit...

(b) Unless agreed differently under (a) above, the allowances for boundaries shall be 6 runs if the ball having been struck by the bat pitches beyond the boundary, but otherwise 4 runs. These allowances shall still apply even though the ball has previously touched a fielder. See also (c) below.



(a), (b) and (c) don't relate to this situation, incidentally

 

[Swervy]

No provision in the laws of the game for 6 byes, 6 leg-byes or 6 wides.

The relevant bit...

(b) Unless agreed differently under (a) above, the allowances for boundaries shall be 6 runs if the ball having been struck by the bat pitches beyond the boundary, but otherwise 4 runs. These allowances shall still apply even though the ball has previously touched a fielder. See also (c) below.



(a), (b) and (c) don't relate to this situation, incidentally

nice one...didnt know that!!!!!!

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

No provision in the laws of the game for 6 byes, 6 leg-byes or 6 wides.

The relevant bit...

(b) Unless agreed differently under (a) above, the allowances for boundaries shall be 6 runs if the ball having been struck by the bat pitches beyond the boundary, but otherwise 4 runs. These allowances shall still apply even though the ball has previously touched a fielder. See also (c) below.



(a), (b) and (c) don't relate to this situation, incidentally

Huh. Learn something new every day.

 

[SJS]

No provision in the laws of the game for 6 byes, 6 leg-byes or 6 wides.

The relevant bit...

(b) Unless agreed differently under (a) above, the allowances for boundaries shall be 6 runs if the ball having been struck by the bat pitches beyond the boundary, but otherwise 4 runs. These allowances shall still apply even though the ball has previously touched a fielder. See also (c) below.



(a), (b) and (c) don't relate to this situation, incidentally

But this refers only to the ball HIT by the bat. The "otherwise 4 runs" refering to when the ball does not "pitch beyond the boundary".

 

[luckyeddie]

But this refers only to the ball HIT by the bat. The "otherwise 4 runs" refering to when the ball does not "pitch beyond the boundary".

I asked David Constant 20 years ago - the explanation he gave basically is the same as the interpretation I just made.

In PL/1:

SELECT;
WHEN(STRUCK_BY_BATSMAN & PITCHED_OVER_ROPES)
RUNS = 6;
OTHER
RUNS = 4;
END; /* SELECT */

Seems clear to me

Otherwise means 'all other alternatives' - or they would have said 'else'.

Simple Boolean logic.

 

[SJS]

I asked David Constant 20 years ago - the explanation he gave basically is the same as the interpretation I just made.

In PL/1:

SELECT;
WHEN(STRUCK_BY_BATSMAN & PITCHED_OVER_ROPES)
RUNS = 6;
OTHER
RUNS = 4;
END; /* SELECT */

Seems clear to me

Otherwise means 'all other alternatives' - or they would have said 'else'.

Simple Boolean logic.

Thats very intersting indeed.

 

[luckyeddie]

Thats very intersting indeed.

Don't get much of a chance to write programs any more.

Seriously, if they'd have meant that it was a general case that the ball carried over the boundary on the full would be six runs, whether byes, runs to the batsman, wides, no-balls or anything else, they wouldn't have needed to mention anything about the ball having struck the bat at all.

I think.

 

[SJS]

Don't get much of a chance to write programs any more.

Seriously, if they'd have meant that it was a general case that the ball carried over the boundary on the full would be six runs, whether byes, runs to the batsman, wides, no-balls or anything else, they wouldn't have needed to mention anything about the ball having struck the bat at all.

I think.

People do tend to state the obvious, at times more than one, when writing the law. So I wouldnt be surprised.

 

[sqwerty]

Don't get much of a chance to write programs any more.

Seriously, if they'd have meant that it was a general case that the ball carried over the boundary on the full would be six runs, whether byes, runs to the batsman, wides, no-balls or anything else, they wouldn't have needed to mention anything about the ball having struck the bat at all.

I think.

I played in a game once where the ball flicked the top of the batsman's pad and went over the boundary on the full. Sharp bowler but damn small boundaries. He was sharp but not that sharp.

We gave it 6 byes but found out later we were wrong.

I must say...that was the smallest straight boundary I've ever played on - was a temporary square while the ground was being developed.

 

[SJS]

Don't get much of a chance to write programs any more.

Seriously, if they'd have meant that it was a general case that the ball carried over the boundary on the full would be six runs, whether byes, runs to the batsman, wides, no-balls or anything else, they wouldn't have needed to mention anything about the ball having struck the bat at all.

I think.

Here is some confirmation.

Six
A six scored by hitting the ball over the boundary is signalled by the umpire raising both hands above his head, often in a celebratory manner. See BBC Sport. It must be emphasised that for a six to be scored the ball must come off the bat, so it is impossible to have six byes for a ball crossing the boundary (without there being overthrows).
Wikipedia

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Your wife is a sympathetic woman, and more than you deserve. It is a pity that brutes are allowed to roam in society just because they are good at games.

Or words to that effect. This was after Gilchrist's wife vouched for him(?!) at his trial.

 

[superkingdave]

played down the road from me for 20 years or so

 

[luckyeddie]

played down the road from me for 20 years or so

Yes, he was devastating in League cricket. This old bloke who used to come into my Dad's pub many years ago used to tell plenty of stories about when he was umpiring up there (bloke called Haycroft - ex-Army Colonel).

He didn't like him one bit.

 

[Richard]

I mean I would expect everyone to know about Gilchrist as well as Leary Constantine and the 3 Ws etc (as we're talking about WI).

I can't believe anyone would be anywhere near so familiar with him as the three Ws, nor Lord Constantine.

 

[steds]

What did he do?

Played cricket