Page 92 of 115 FirstFirst ... 428289909192939495102 ... LastLast
Results 911 to 920 of 1147
  1. #911
    Drew drew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    16,207


    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Triggaaar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes, when the ball was thrown they had not yet completed two runs - but they don't have to have completed them at that point. The ball was still in play and they can keep running until it's not in play (although etiquette would say they stop running if they accidentally hit it again, and they did stop).

    That is two separate points. 1) The runs completed by the batsmen when the ball goes dead (in this case, two). Plus 2) Any run in progress if they had crossed when the ball was thrown (in this case, zero). 2 + 0 = 2.

    You're trying to apply the clause for incomplete runs to the runs that were already complete. That clause comes after the comma, and does not apply to completed runs.
    You are making things up as you go along. The rule is quite clear. They had not crossed when the ball was thrown so that run shouldn't have counted. There was only one complete run when the ball was thrown in. Everyone else on this thread realizes this except you! Where does this particular rule mention they can keep on running?

    Read the specific rule again and work your way through it.

    19.8 Overthrow or wilful act of fielder

    If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be

    any runs for penalties awarded to either side

    and the allowance for the boundary

    and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had

    already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.


    Alternatively, you could just be

    • North Stand Chat

      advertising
      Join Date: Jul 2003
      Posts: Lots

        


    • #912
      Resident pedant Triggaaar's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Location
      Goldstone
      Posts
      42,068


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by drew View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      They had not crossed when the ball was thrown
      For completed runs (runs that have finished when the ball hits the ropes) they don't have to cross before the ball is thrown. The rule doesn't say that. Only runs that are in progress.
      There was only one complete run when the ball was thrown in.
      Sure, but it doesn't say anything about runs that are completed before the ball is thrown.

      Everyone else on this thread realizes this except you!
      Well that doesn't seem to be the case, as a couple of people have said they agree with me.

      Where does this particular rule mention they can keep on running?
      Seriously? Batsmen keep running when there are overthrows. That's what happens in cricket. The law doesn't need to say they're allowed to keep running.

      Read the specific rule again and work your way through it.
      I understand what it says. I don't think you do.
      the runs scored shall be

      any runs for penalties awarded to either side

      and the allowance for the boundary

      and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had

      already crossed at the instant of the throw or act.
      I agree that it is clear. It is clear that the instant of the throw applies to runs that are in progress. It does not apply to completed runs.

      Tell me why they put a comma in the rule?
      Thank you Chris, you're a legend.
    • #913
      Members Bold Seagull's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      Hove
      Posts
      20,859


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by Triggaaar View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      For completed runs (runs that have finished when the ball hits the ropes) they don't have to cross before the ball is thrown. The rule doesn't say that. Only runs that are in progress.
      Sure, but it doesn't say anything about runs that are completed before the ball is thrown.

      Well that doesn't seem to be the case, as a couple of people have said they agree with me.

      Seriously? Batsmen keep running when there are overthrows. That's what happens in cricket. The law doesn't need to say they're allowed to keep running.

      I understand what it says. I don't think you do.
      I agree that it is clear. It is clear that the instant of the throw applies to runs that are in progress. It does not apply to completed runs.

      Tell me why they put a comma in the rule?
      The assumption appears to be that the umpires on the field didn't know the rule properly and made a mistake, not that they knew the rule and interrupted it the same as you have and applied it consistently as they have in other matches. No one else seems to have made a proper statement on it other than an Aussie, and they can hardly be trusted now can they!
    • #914
      Mama said knock you out. LlcoolJ's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2009
      Location
      Sheffield
      Posts
      10,286


      3 Not allowed!
      #teamtrig

      It's all semantics anyway. There were numerous instances where New Zealand could have got a couple more runs and vice versa (some of the wide decisions v Archer were a joke).

      It came down to holding the nerve, and for me both teams did. Amazingly.

      But we won. Everyone knew that it was on that last ball and that's what was played for. We won.

      Suck it up Australia (as they seem to be the ones complaining most, quell surprise). We're going to STUFF you in the Ashes anyway boys!
      "I never mentioned horses!"
    • #915
      Drew drew's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2006
      Location
      Burgess Hill
      Posts
      16,207


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by Triggaaar View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      For completed runs (runs that have finished when the ball hits the ropes) they don't have to cross before the ball is thrown. The rule doesn't say that. Only runs that are in progress.
      Sure, but it doesn't say anything about runs that are completed before the ball is thrown.

      Well that doesn't seem to be the case, as a couple of people have said they agree with me.

      Seriously? Batsmen keep running when there are overthrows. That's what happens in cricket. The law doesn't need to say they're allowed to keep running.

      I understand what it says. I don't think you do.
      I agree that it is clear. It is clear that the instant of the throw applies to runs that are in progress. It does not apply to completed runs.

      Tell me why they put a comma in the rule?
      They might still keep running because they might not know whether the overthrow will reach the boundary and therefore count as 4. However, are you sure the umpire still only counts the runs completed (and the one in progress if crossed) at the time the ball was thrown?

      eg. Ball heads out to the boundary and the batsmen run three runs but not yet crossed for the fourth before it is thrown in by a fielder. A miss field allows the ball to trundle towards the opposite boundary whilst the batsmen complete that fourth run and then run another two. After they cross for the second, the ball is thrown in before it gets to the boundary and they stop. So, 6 runs in total.

      Similar scenario but this time when the ball is thrown in the second time, it is miss fielded again and goes out to the boundary. At the time of the second throw, they have completed a total of five and have crossed for the sixth but as it heads towards the boundary they run another 2. Under the rules, they will only get 6 runs as the final two were run after the throw which led to the boundary.
    • #916
      Members
      Join Date
      Jul 2009
      Location
      York
      Posts
      756


      1 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by Triggaaar View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      Yes. Batsmen hit the ball and start running for 1 run (which they're never going to get with a direct hit). Fielding team sees the chance of a run-out and launch the ball at the stumps. The throw is taken before the batsmen have crossed. It misses, whizzing past the stumps, the batsmen finish their run, then go for a second, and then a third. While they're running the third, the ball (which is being chased) beats the fielder and hits the boundary rope. The batsmen get 4 runs for the boundary, 2 runs for runs completed, and they don't get the 3rd run as it was still in progress, and obviously it had been thrown before they started the run, let along crossed.

      Has anyone got some youtube clips of an example like mine here, where the umpires have said 'oh no, you only get the 4 for the boundary, and zero for the running'?
      Not sure where the confusion is here. If they haven't crossed before throw is taken that results in a boundary it is 4 runs. If they have completed 1 run and went for second but had not crossed at instant of throw, is 5 runs. If they had crossed at instant of throw is 6 runs. Doesn't matter if they complete another run or two.
    • #917
      Resident pedant Triggaaar's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Location
      Goldstone
      Posts
      42,068


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by Bold Seagull View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      The assumption appears to be that the umpires on the field didn't know the rule properly and made a mistake, not that they knew the rule and interrupted it the same as you have and applied it consistently as they have in other matches.
      Well until they're asked, we don't know.

      No one else seems to have made a proper statement on it other than an Aussie, and they can hardly be trusted now can they!
      It's possible that the ICC would want the rule to be interpreted as the Aussie has. But if they do, they should perhaps get someone who understands English to write it. You don't put a comma in the rule to set off parts of the sentence that are essential to the meaning.
      Thank you Chris, you're a legend.
    • #918
      Resident pedant Triggaaar's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Location
      Goldstone
      Posts
      42,068


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by jabba View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      Not sure where the confusion is here. If they haven't crossed before throw is taken that results in a boundary it is 4 runs.
      The confusion is that some of you think completed runs are still limited by when the ball is thrown, despite the fact that the rule doesn't say that.
      Thank you Chris, you're a legend.
    • #919
      Resident pedant Triggaaar's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Location
      Goldstone
      Posts
      42,068


      1 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by drew View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      However, are you sure the umpire still only counts the runs completed (and the one in progress if crossed) at the time the ball was thrown?
      The only thing I'm really confident about is how the rule should be interpreted from an English language point of view.

      I don't know how umpires usually interpret the rule. We do know that Taufel thinks it should be 1 run, and that the umpires on the field (let's not pretend they've never witnessed an overthrow before) thought it should be 2. We also know that no commentator (including many ex-captains) thought it was wrong at the time.

      eg. Ball heads out to the boundary and the batsmen run three runs but not yet crossed for the fourth before it is thrown in by a fielder. A miss field allows the ball to trundle towards the opposite boundary whilst the batsmen complete that fourth run and then run another two. After they cross for the second, the ball is thrown in before it gets to the boundary and they stop. So, 6 runs in total.
      I think you mean 7.

      Surely some fans can find plenty of examples to show how many runs umpires give?
      Thank you Chris, you're a legend.
    • #920
      Resident pedant Triggaaar's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 2005
      Location
      Goldstone
      Posts
      42,068


      0 Not allowed!
      Quote Originally Posted by LlcoolJ View Post
      This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
      #teamtrig
      Don't tell 'em your name Pike!
      Thank you Chris, you're a legend.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •