T20 World Cup - Other Matches
-
You have to say that for drama that was quite something. 90,000+ there creating an atmosphere that was jumping through the TV screen. Amazing stuff.
That 6 by Kohli down the ground was sweet as. The pressure that was on India at that point completely turned on Pakistan.
To think a sweet ball like the one that clean bowled Kohli would be the eventual turning point (I think the only 3 run in India’s whole innings).
-
-
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
Can anyone shed any light on the thinking behind the rule that allows you to run after being out on a free hit?
It just seems so absurd.
The free hit / can’t go out trumps everything. It’s the same as if say the batsman gets caught in the field, they can run basically until the ball becomes “dead” ie when it’s returned to the keeper or bowler.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
Can anyone shed any light on the thinking behind the rule that allows you to run after being out on a free hit?
It just seems so absurd.
The free hit / can’t go out trumps everything. It’s the same as if say the batsman gets caught in the field, they can run basically until the ball becomes “dead” ie when it’s returned to the keeper or bowler.
Seems beyond stupid to me. If you get out on a free hit, whether it's bowled, caught or any other way, you should be not out - but you shouldn't get additional runs.
-
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
Can anyone shed any light on the thinking behind the rule that allows you to run after being out on a free hit?
It just seems so absurd.
The free hit / can’t go out trumps everything. It’s the same as if say the batsman gets caught in the field, they can run basically until the ball becomes “dead” ie when it’s returned to the keeper or bowler.
Seems beyond stupid to me. If you get out on a free hit, whether it's bowled, caught or any other way, you should be not out - but you shouldn't get additional runs.
I agree that is what the law should say. Seems relatively simple. Running after being bowled (or caught) is just silly.
Hope they change it.
-
Yeah it’s a funny one.
Just another quirk that not every one is aware of, but I noticed the Pakistan keeper was fully across it. When the Indian batsmen ran the 3rd run after the ball hit the stumps there was a run out* chance and because the bails had been dislodged in the delivery, when the ball was thrown to the keeper he caught it and then pulled the stump out of the ground. The batsman made the ground but it was close.
*you can still be run out on a free hit ball, just like a no ball.
-
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
Can anyone shed any light on the thinking behind the rule that allows you to run after being out on a free hit?
It just seems so absurd.
Ball goes dead when a batsman is dismissed. Because you can’t be dismissed bowled from a “free hit” then ball isn’t dead.
That was a hell of a rough no ball call though (compared to similar that are never called unless taking the head off)
-
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
Yeah it’s a funny one.
Just another quirk that not every one is aware of, but I noticed the Pakistan keeper was fully across it. When the Indian batsmen ran the 3rd run after the ball hit the stumps there was a run out* chance and because the bails had been dislodged in the delivery, when the ball was thrown to the keeper he caught it and then pulled the stump out of the ground. The batsman made the ground but it was close.
*you can still be run out on a free hit ball, just like a no ball.
If we're still discussing this, then this is the key point.
If you get bowled or caught off a no ball you can still run can't you?
So why can't you off a free hit where this has been introduced because it's unpossible to pick up a no-ball call and smack it like you should be able to.
Have no issue with the rule as it stands.
And there'll be no rule change as India benefitted. If it was reversed then bet on it.
-
@Crucial said in T20 World Cup:
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
Can anyone shed any light on the thinking behind the rule that allows you to run after being out on a free hit?
It just seems so absurd.
Ball goes dead when a batsman is dismissed. Because you can’t be dismissed bowled from a “free hit” then ball isn’t dead.
That was a hell of a rough no ball call though (compared to similar that are never called unless taking the head off)
Nah, that's stupid. It should be a dead ball if you're bowled or caught or stumped or whatever, on a free hit.
-
@booboo said in T20 World Cup:
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
Yeah it’s a funny one.
Just another quirk that not every one is aware of, but I noticed the Pakistan keeper was fully across it. When the Indian batsmen ran the 3rd run after the ball hit the stumps there was a run out* chance and because the bails had been dislodged in the delivery, when the ball was thrown to the keeper he caught it and then pulled the stump out of the ground. The batsman made the ground but it was close.
*you can still be run out on a free hit ball, just like a no ball.
If we're still discussing this, then this is the key point.
If you get bowled or caught off a no ball you can still run can't you?
So why can't you off a free hit where this has been introduced because it's unpossible to pick up a no-ball call and smack it like you should be able to.
Have no issue with the rule as it stands.
And there'll be no rule change as India benefitted. If it was reversed then bet on it.
If you get caught off a no ball, you don't get the runs you ran (I hope!).
Free hit should mean just that - one free crack to do some damage. You either capitalise or you don't. You fuck up, you get to play on, but if you would have been otherwise out, then it's a dead ball and you move on.
Getting "out" on your free hit and then surviving (fine) but also scoring runs (wtf?) Is just odd.
-
@voodoo I don’t mind it because there are established methods of getting out on a no ball.
What I saw last night in that ball was akin to an attempted run out when the fielder throws the ball hits the stumps but the batsman makes the crease but the ball ricochet’s off the stumps and goes to the outfield and the batsmen run more runs.
First principle, you can’t be bowled out on free hit ball, so don’t bowl something like that ball because you can’t set a field for it 😀
-
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
@booboo said in T20 World Cup:
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
Yeah it’s a funny one.
Just another quirk that not every one is aware of, but I noticed the Pakistan keeper was fully across it. When the Indian batsmen ran the 3rd run after the ball hit the stumps there was a run out* chance and because the bails had been dislodged in the delivery, when the ball was thrown to the keeper he caught it and then pulled the stump out of the ground. The batsman made the ground but it was close.
*you can still be run out on a free hit ball, just like a no ball.
If we're still discussing this, then this is the key point.
If you get bowled or caught off a no ball you can still run can't you?
So why can't you off a free hit where this has been introduced because it's unpossible to pick up a no-ball call and smack it like you should be able to.
Have no issue with the rule as it stands.
And there'll be no rule change as India benefitted. If it was reversed then bet on it.
If you get caught off a no ball, you don't get the runs you ran (I hope!).
Free hit should mean just that - one free crack to do some damage. You either capitalise or you don't. You fuck up, you get to play on, but if you would have been otherwise out, then it's a dead ball and you move on.
Getting "out" on your free hit and then surviving (fine) but also scoring runs (wtf?) Is just odd.
Really?
-
@booboo said in T20 World Cup:
@voodoo said in T20 World Cup:
@booboo said in T20 World Cup:
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
Yeah it’s a funny one.
Just another quirk that not every one is aware of, but I noticed the Pakistan keeper was fully across it. When the Indian batsmen ran the 3rd run after the ball hit the stumps there was a run out* chance and because the bails had been dislodged in the delivery, when the ball was thrown to the keeper he caught it and then pulled the stump out of the ground. The batsman made the ground but it was close.
*you can still be run out on a free hit ball, just like a no ball.
If we're still discussing this, then this is the key point.
If you get bowled or caught off a no ball you can still run can't you?
So why can't you off a free hit where this has been introduced because it's unpossible to pick up a no-ball call and smack it like you should be able to.
Have no issue with the rule as it stands.
And there'll be no rule change as India benefitted. If it was reversed then bet on it.
If you get caught off a no ball, you don't get the runs you ran (I hope!).
Free hit should mean just that - one free crack to do some damage. You either capitalise or you don't. You fuck up, you get to play on, but if you would have been otherwise out, then it's a dead ball and you move on.
Getting "out" on your free hit and then surviving (fine) but also scoring runs (wtf?) Is just odd.
Really?
Pretty sure that's wrong. It'd be exactly the same as if the ball has bounced I would have thought.
-
Laws of cricket (https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/no-ball) state:
21.16 Runs resulting from a No ball – how scored
The one run penalty shall be scored as a No ball extra and shall be debited against the bowler. If other Penalty runs have been awarded to either side these shall be scored as stated in Law 41.18 (Penalty runs). Any runs completed by the batters or any boundary allowance shall be credited to the striker if the ball has been struck by the bat; otherwise they shall also be scored as Byes or Leg byes as appropriate.
21.17 No ball not to count
A No ball shall not count as one of the over. See Law 17.3 (Validity of balls).
21.18 Out from a No ball
When No ball has been called, neither batters shall be out under any of the Laws except 34 (Hit the ball twice), 37 (Obstructing the field) or 38 (Run out).
@Bones decided to look it up before telling @voodoo my truth that of course the runs count.
Laws aren't explicit but read as if you play on as if nothing happened, and of course you get the runs. Which is what I've always understood/accepted/knew.
As the Free Hit is the extension of the No Ball, same rules apply. Run till you're run out.
-
@booboo said in T20 World Cup:
Laws of cricket (https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/no-ball) state:
21.16 Runs resulting from a No ball – how scored
The one run penalty shall be scored as a No ball extra and shall be debited against the bowler. If other Penalty runs have been awarded to either side these shall be scored as stated in Law 41.18 (Penalty runs). Any runs completed by the batters or any boundary allowance shall be credited to the striker if the ball has been struck by the bat; otherwise they shall also be scored as Byes or Leg byes as appropriate.
21.17 No ball not to count
A No ball shall not count as one of the over. See Law 17.3 (Validity of balls).
21.18 Out from a No ball
When No ball has been called, neither batters shall be out under any of the Laws except 34 (Hit the ball twice), 37 (Obstructing the field) or 38 (Run out).
@Bones decided to look it up before telling @voodoo my truth that of course the runs count.
Laws aren't explicit but read as if you play on as if nothing happened, and of course you get the runs. Which is what I've always understood/accepted/knew.
As the Free Hit is the extension of the No Ball, same rules apply. Run till you're run out.
I didn't know this. So if the bowler oversteps, the batman hits it and gets caught, the batsman is not out, gets the runs complete anyway , and there is an extra ball? So if you're fielding, and you take that catch, you actually have to send through throw in to effect a run out to stop the flow?
That makes sense....
-
@ACT-Crusader said in T20 World Cup:
@voodoo I don’t mind it because there are established methods of getting out on a no ball.
What I saw last night in that ball was akin to an attempted run out when the fielder throws the ball hits the stumps but the batsman makes the crease but the ball ricochet’s off the stumps and goes to the outfield and the batsmen run more runs.
First principle, you can’t be bowled out on free hit ball, so don’t bowl something like that ball because you can’t set a field for it 😀
Nah, there is a fundamental difference there. In your example the batsman wasn't out because he was safe in his crease. In the alternative, he was out, and only given a lifeline because of the free hit principle.
I cant get my head around being out on a free hit, and not only keeping your wicket (fine) but also capitalising with runs on some random event after you were "out "
