View Full Version : Cricket
We won! What a marvellous performance from both our players and the Kiwis.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Talking Heads
14-07-19, 10:56 PM
We won!
By the narrowest of margins possible the team captained by an Irishman with two South Africans, one Barbadian and ironically, a New Zealander fluked a win.
If the residency qualifications hadn't been recently cut the Barbadian wouldn't have been eligible.
By the narrowest of margins possible the team captained by an Irishman with two South Africans, one Barbadian and ironically, a New Zealander fluked a win.
If the residency qualifications hadn't been recently cut the Barbadian wouldn't have been eligible.
Sore loser!
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190715/5c166032204f98fa4086cdb27f966713.jpg
God save the Queen.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Talking Heads
15-07-19, 06:05 AM
Sore loser!
Nope, last time my country played England&Wales at cricket, we won.
Nope, last time my country played England&Wales at cricket, we won.
Very sore loser!
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190715/6e65b824ca00eea01d74f52dd95680ff.jpg
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Geodude
15-07-19, 06:37 AM
A cricket thread with no Lph is just not.. cricket ;) Where are you hiding Clare (Lph) hope all is okay with you?
A cricket thread with no Lph is just not.. cricket ;) Where are you hiding Clare (Lph) hope all is okay with you?
What is Lph?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Geodude
15-07-19, 06:43 AM
What is Lph?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Only an org national treasure [-X :)
Only an org national treasure [-X :)
.Org national treasure? I still don’t understand.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Geodude
15-07-19, 06:56 AM
.Org national treasure? I still don’t understand.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
An org member (http://forums.sv650.org/member.php?u=7905) who knows her cricket :D
Last time I heard, LPH actually worked at Lords for the MCC.
Last time I heard, LPH actually worked at Lords for the MCC.
So LPH is a person?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sir Trev
15-07-19, 06:38 PM
So LPH is a person?
Yes, she is.
SV650rules
15-07-19, 08:50 PM
Weird thing about the draw in main innings is that England got 4 fluke runs when the batsmen were running between stumps and NZ fielder threw the ball which hit one of their bats and bounced off an managed to reach boundary for 4 runs - I thought you could only score off a ball that was bowled by a bowler - every day is a school day !
chris8886
15-07-19, 09:23 PM
I was working there too yesterday and she was definitely working also. What an incredible end to the game it was. I managed to see the super over from the top of the Compton stand, it was incredible to see absolutely everyone go crazy at the result! :D
Weird thing about the draw in main innings is that England got 4 fluke runs when the batsmen were running between stumps and NZ fielder threw the ball which hit one of their bats and bounced off an managed to reach boundary for 4 runs - I thought you could only score off a ball that was bowled by a bowler - every day is a school day !
... surely you must have seen over-throws previously? They happen in many, if not most matches (in fact I think I remember there was one run during NZ’s innings), usually just the odd one or two runs where the fielding side don’t bother to back up a throw to the bowler’s end. The unusual thing was that the overthrow happened to bounce off Ben Stokes’ bat as he was stretching for the crease - at that point the batsman just counts as part of the field (as long as he doesn’t deliberately get in the way of the fielding side’s business of course).
It is just a law of the game, I’ve never seen the ball hit a bat from a long throw like that, but it is not uncommon for it to hit the batsman - after all he is heading for the same place the fielding side is throwing to. I suppose that makes it a rare occurrence, but not weird.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Apparantly, according to the laws of the game, that should have been 5 runs not 6 meaning that NZ should have won the match. The rule depends on whether the batsmen have crossed at the moment in time that the fielder threw the ball. If they haven't crossed when the ball is thrown, as in this instance, then only 1 run is added to the 4 overthrows, not 2 runs as was awarded by the on field umpire.
Apparantly, according to the laws of the game, that should have been 5 runs not 6 meaning that NZ should have won the match. The rule depends on whether the batsmen have crossed at the moment in time that the fielder threw the ball. If they haven't crossed when the ball is thrown, as in this instance, then only 1 run is added to the 4 overthrows, not 2 runs as was awarded by the on field umpire.
Are you an expert on the laws of cricket?
... I’m pulling your leg, of course you are not. As with all laws, people interpret them, and the two very experienced umpires in the middle (plus probably the third umpire and maybe even the match referee) had a long, hard think about it and disagreed with your opinion (which you read in the paper but are presenting as a fact).
I do find this bizarre. England play cricket extremely well, fight their way through to the final of the World Cup against the world’s best, then win it in an absolutely classic match against very worthy opponents in the Kiwis. Most of the county is delighted and support them, but then there are people (unfortunately like you and a couple of others above) that try to detract from a marvellous achievement.
Well, I remain a proud Englishman and support the nation.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190716/e377003c3890d91f3e9396738371c9f5.jpg
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I'm not trying to detract from the result. however,
OVERTHROW OR WILFUL ACT OF FIELDER - LAW 19.8
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.'
My emphasis.
The batsmen in the case had not crossed when the ball was thrown, This is a pretty obscure law though, so the umpires can be forgiven.
Talking Heads
16-07-19, 08:43 AM
Well, I remain a proud Englishman and support the nation.
Two nations, England and Wales.
I'm not trying to detract from the result. however,
OVERTHROW OR WILFUL ACT OF FIELDER - LAW 19.8
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.'
My emphasis.
The batsmen in the case had not crossed when the ball was thrown, This is a pretty obscure law though, so the umpires can be forgiven.
Well, was the ‘act’ the fielder’s throw, it was it the instant the ball hit Ben Stokes’ bat? Either way, I think you are detracting from our marvellous victory.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Talking Heads
16-07-19, 08:46 AM
I'm not trying to detract from the result. however,
OVERTHROW OR WILFUL ACT OF FIELDER - LAW 19.8
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.'
My emphasis.
The batsmen in the case had not crossed when the ball was thrown, This is a pretty obscure law though, so the umpires can be forgiven.
No no no no no no no.
You should know better than to publish the facts.
Musn't let the rules of the game prevent England being awarded the world cup.
Two nations, England and Wales.
You are confusing the England and Wales Cricket Board, the administrative body that runs the game here, and the national team, which is called England.
You are also detracting from our marvellous victory, and ... (you can probably guess what might have followed).
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190716/a8f0d6d1976a64084b99ff73c9a368d9.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Talking Heads
16-07-19, 08:48 AM
Well, was the ‘act’ the fielder’s throw, it was it the instant the ball hit Ben Stokes’ bat? Either way, I think you are detracting from out marvellous draw.
Fixed that for you.
No no no no no no no.
You should know better than to publish the facts.
Musn't let the rules of the game prevent England being awarded the world cup.
Very, very sore loser!
:-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fixed that for you.
Very, very, very sore loser!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SV650rules
16-07-19, 01:22 PM
Where is LPH when she is needed, could have asked the gurus at Lords for a judgment ( LOL as if they would disagree with result and give NZ the trophy ).
Chatting about cricket with 4 or 5 chaps with almost no knowledge of the game, and particularly a Scot with a chip on his shoulder, has been amusing - as it always is.
Best stick to soccer and bingo chaps, whatever you detractors say the record will show England as cricket ODI world champions.
Perhaps Scotland will win the second tier competition and qualify for the 2023 World Cup- or perhaps it’s team will lose to Nepal next month (sorry, I could not help that one, but you have to admit it is funny).
Best wishes,
Alan
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190716/38e78d32d92737c312b57d90fe4ccb12.jpg
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Very, very sore loser!
:-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually, I am English through and through so I am a winner not a loser. If you support Northants CC (as you should goven where you say you live) that makes you a loser.
Actually, I have respect for the laws of the game as I used to play it, albeit at quite a low standard. Never played football at any level apart from park kickabouts; a game for oiks.
Actually, I am English through and through so I am a winner not a loser. If you support Northants CC (as you should goven where you say you live) that makes you a loser.
Actually, I have respect for the laws of the game as I used to play it, albeit at quite a low standard. Never played football at any level apart from park kickabouts; a game for oiks.
You know very well that you took that quote out of context Heorot; you are very aware it did not pertain to you (but to another contributor that claimed his country had beaten England at cricket recently, as if that would be relevant).
Why did you do that Heorot - did you want to fabricate some pretence by which to call me a loser?
I’m from Hampshire (and proudly a Hampshire Hog), we are having a pretty fair season (4th in division one at the moment). I do sometimes watch Northants with my neighbours at the excellent twenty20 bash evenings - if they were my county I’d be very proud - and certainly would not call my neighbours losers.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Littlepeahead
29-07-19, 09:49 PM
I was there, sat pitch side as we won. Amazing experience.
Been so busy I've hardly been on here lately.
However, I did sit on the photographers platform for the presentation on the day and do the lap of honour with the trophy and some Irish bloke a few days later.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190729/bab47c5eb0b433411039a20e04fd2049.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190729/29aafa7280de339800f6123a46e63d2c.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190729/2ab955a92427f2158e1ede96ecb8dd81.jpg
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Geodude
30-07-19, 07:11 AM
Yay Lph, now its a cricket thread :D
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.