SA Footy

RB wrote:Nup, wide ball in test cricket.

How so? Is Test cricket played under a different set of Laws? 21.10 seems black and white to me.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

RB wrote:Nup, wide ball in test cricket.

How so? Is Test cricket played under a different set of Laws? 21.10 seems black and white to me.

100% AGREE

I've been banging on about this for years and i just can't get an answer from anyone why ?

Seriously, it's an utter F******G Joke

Either re write the Law or umpire by the Laws, it's Not F*****G Hard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But then again the ICC is the most incompetent F******G joke of an organisation in the history of Sport and the Clowns on it wouldn't have the faintest idea of what the F***K is going on.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

RB wrote:Nup, wide ball in test cricket.

How so? Is Test cricket played under a different set of Laws? 21.10 seems black and white to me.

They deem it a no-ball so the batsman cannot be stumped.

It should be deemed a wide as it shouldn't count as a ball faced for the batsman, no balls still do.

Law 21.10 clearly states that it should be a no-ball whether it makes sense or not.

To me a wide is a ball that is practically too far away from the body to be hit without using unreasonable measures.

jackpot jim wrote:
100% AGREE

I've been banging on about this for years and i just can't get an answer from anyone why ?

Seriously, it's an utter F******G Joke

Either re write the Law or umpire by the Laws, it's Not F*****G Hard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But then again the ICC is the most incompetent F******G joke of an organisation in the history of Sport and the Clowns on it wouldn't have the faintest idea of what the F***K is going on.

I get your point, I just don't think I could find myself as emotionally attached to it as you have though

Lightning McQueen wrote:

jackpot jim wrote:
100% AGREE

I've been banging on about this for years and i just can't get an answer from anyone why ?

Seriously, it's an utter F******G Joke

Either re write the Law or umpire by the Laws, it's Not F*****G Hard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But then again the ICC is the most incompetent F******G joke of an organisation in the history of Sport and the Clowns on it wouldn't have the faintest idea of what the F***K is going on.

I get your point, I just don't think I could find myself as emotionally attached to it as you have though

I'm with JJ. C'mon LM, we need you to fire up on this one.
Come in off the long run, send down a searing bouncer above the batsman's head and then have a crack at the umpire when he calls wide.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:I'm with JJ. C'mon LM, we need you to fire up on this one.
Come in off the long run, send down a searing bouncer above the batsman's head and then have a crack at the umpire when he calls wide.

Should be penalised double for not hitting the lid or having the fizzing sound go millimetres from the the nose

Lightning McQueen wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

RB wrote:Nup, wide ball in test cricket.

How so? Is Test cricket played under a different set of Laws? 21.10 seems black and white to me.

They deem it a no-ball so the batsman cannot be stumped.

It should be deemed a wide as it shouldn't count as a ball faced for the batsman, no balls still do.

Law 21.10 clearly states that it should be a no-ball whether it makes sense or not.

To me a wide is a ball that is practically too far away from the body to be hit without using unreasonable measures.

I think it maybe a no ball for us plebs so that you cant be dismissed from playing a shot at it as many would try, bit like any ball that pitches in the long grass next to the pitch that is called no ball these days so it cant dismiss you, either bowled or caught etc.
Test cricket has many different playing conditions to the rest of us. The use of a runner is one that springs to mind, its only not allowed in Test cricket. These different playing conditions are a nightmare for us plebs and I agree with JJ. My knee popped out in a semi final just after the no runner rule came in, nearly caused a punch up and 20 minutes was spent on the phone trying to prove that I could have a runner.
I imagine the concussion sub is another rule that doesn't apply to our cricket.
Also the over limitations for bowlers up to the age of 19 doesn't apply in higher cricket, see Pat Cummins Test debut

England win the forth test by 191 runs and take the series 3-1
South Africa second innings 274
van der Dussen 98
Wood 4/54
Broad 2/26, takes him to 485 test wickets.
With England set to play Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in two tests in March, then host the West Indies in three tests in June and Pakistan in three tests in July and August it should see Broad reach and go past the 500 test match wicket mark.

And push up the rankings for the Test Championship,

I have found the answer to my wide/ no ball issue.
Under the ICC Test Match playing conditions, rule 22.1.1.2 over rides rule 21.10 in the Laws of Cricket, which means a short pitched ball that passes above the head of a batsman is a wide in Test cricket (22.1.1.2), but a No Ball (21.10) in all other levels of cricket.
Learn something new every day.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:I have found the answer to my wide/ no ball issue.
Under the ICC Test Match playing conditions, rule 22.1.1.2 over rides rule 21.10 in the Laws of Cricket, which means a short pitched ball that passes above the head of a batsman is a wide in Test cricket (22.1.1.2), but a No Ball (21.10) in all other levels of cricket.
Learn something new every day.

Good work SMG

Utterly ridiculous to have a separate law for this instance as well as others at Test level as just about all recreational cricketers have never read a the rule book and just believe everything they see on telly applies to their level of the game which then creates confusion.

So you say Test cricket ONLY this variation applies to ? Am i mistaken that they call above head height balls in ODIs and T20s Wides as well ?
I just cant recall ever seeing a No Ball called for above head height of the batsman

Our U19’s in deep strife at 4/17 chasing India’s 233.
McGurk out for a very rare Titanium duck

jackpot jim wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:I have found the answer to my wide/ no ball issue.
Under the ICC Test Match playing conditions, rule 22.1.1.2 over rides rule 21.10 in the Laws of Cricket, which means a short pitched ball that passes above the head of a batsman is a wide in Test cricket (22.1.1.2), but a No Ball (21.10) in all other levels of cricket.
Learn something new every day.

Good work SMG

Utterly ridiculous to have a separate law for this instance as well as others at Test level as just about all recreational cricketers have never read a the rule book and just believe everything they see on telly applies to their level of the game which then creates confusion.

So you say Test cricket ONLY this variation applies to ? Am i mistaken that they call above head height balls in ODIs and T20s Wides as well ?
I just cant recall ever seeing a No Ball called for above head height of the batsman

The ICC have three sets of Playing Conditions covering International cricket matches. One for Test matches, one for ODIs and one for T20. In each case 22.1.1.2 applies, which calls a ball that bounces above the batsman's head a wide.

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

jackpot jim wrote:

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:I have found the answer to my wide/ no ball issue.
Under the ICC Test Match playing conditions, rule 22.1.1.2 over rides rule 21.10 in the Laws of Cricket, which means a short pitched ball that passes above the head of a batsman is a wide in Test cricket (22.1.1.2), but a No Ball (21.10) in all other levels of cricket.
Learn something new every day.

Good work SMG

Utterly ridiculous to have a separate law for this instance as well as others at Test level as just about all recreational cricketers have never read a the rule book and just believe everything they see on telly applies to their level of the game which then creates confusion.

So you say Test cricket ONLY this variation applies to ? Am i mistaken that they call above head height balls in ODIs and T20s Wides as well ?
I just cant recall ever seeing a No Ball called for above head height of the batsman

The ICC have three sets of Playing Conditions covering International cricket matches. One for Test matches, one for ODIs and one for T20. In each case 22.1.1.2 applies, which calls a ball that bounces above the batsman's head a wide.

Therefore it's the responsibility of each individual competition to specify which playing conditions apply......

Babar Azam another ton, he's a quality unit. Abu Javed 2/50, he's a good bowler, a right handed Chaminda Vaas. Nibbles it round enough just doesn't have the support.

Pakistan smash Bangladesh by an innings and 44 runs in the first test in Rawalpindi.
Bangladesh first innings 233
Afridi 4/53

Pakistan first innings 445
Azam 143
Masood 100

Bangladesh second innings 168
Naseem Shah 4/26 (Including a hatrick and is the youngest player to take a hatrick in test cricket)
Yasir Shah 4/58

New Zealand v India, first test of the series at the Basin Reserve. NZ won the toss and are bowling first in Ross Taylor's 100th test match.
India 1/33

The Dark Knight wrote:New Zealand v India, first test of the series at the Basin Reserve. NZ won the toss and are bowling first in Ross Taylor's 100th test match.
India 1/33

Go the Shaggers.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

The Dark Knight wrote:New Zealand v India, first test of the series at the Basin Reserve. NZ won the toss and are bowling first in Ross Taylor's 100th test match.
India 1/33

Go the Shaggers.

3/79, Virat gone for 2.

Virat a bit out of form for probably the first time in his career