ATCA

Local cricket is the go here. Any talk about local comps, grade cricket, etc.

Re: ATCA

Postby Lightning McQueen » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:02 pm

The_Informer wrote:I believe one of there batters hit a six off the last ball to tie it all up! Think they needed 22 off the last over

What a cracking match, 292 runs at 2.16 for the first 135 overs, 128 runs at 9.14 for the final 14 overs, 1 more run!!!!!

At the end of the GG are the deserved winners, they would've been awarded more points for the game and it wasn't tied or drawn, you can only win or lose outright unless the team batting fourth is dismissed for an equal amount of combined runs.
HOGG SHIELD DIVISION V WINNER 2018.
User avatar
Lightning McQueen
Coach
 
Posts: 51284
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:43 am
Location: Radiator Springs
Has liked: 4339 times
Been liked: 7902 times

Re: ATCA

Postby threestars » Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:56 pm

Last over for OICC went 6 4 2 1 2 6
threestars
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 11:52 am
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:40 am

Interesting to see that all GF matches are now loaded in, except A3 which simply says Trinity vs TBC.

Surely the turf cant seriously accept a case from Old Iggies, there is no way that game is a tie.

If it were a regular season match, and the outright tie carries an extra 2.5pts per team, on what grounds does GG deserve the extra points? They only took 5 wickets. It can't possibly be a tie.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Lightning McQueen » Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:43 am

Trader wrote:Interesting to see that all GF matches are now loaded in, except A3 which simply says Trinity vs TBC.

Surely the turf cant seriously accept a case from Old Iggies, there is no way that game is a tie.

If it were a regular season match, and the outright tie carries an extra 2.5pts per team, on what grounds does GG deserve the extra points? They only took 5 wickets. It can't possibly be a tie.

I guess they have to hear their case before locking it in, would look silly if they had to change it.

There may be more than meets the eye on it that we don't know.
HOGG SHIELD DIVISION V WINNER 2018.
User avatar
Lightning McQueen
Coach
 
Posts: 51284
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:43 am
Location: Radiator Springs
Has liked: 4339 times
Been liked: 7902 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Sonofbrowny25 » Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:45 am

Lightning McQueen wrote:
Trader wrote:Interesting to see that all GF matches are now loaded in, except A3 which simply says Trinity vs TBC.

Surely the turf cant seriously accept a case from Old Iggies, there is no way that game is a tie.

If it were a regular season match, and the outright tie carries an extra 2.5pts per team, on what grounds does GG deserve the extra points? They only took 5 wickets. It can't possibly be a tie.

I guess they have to hear their case before locking it in, would look silly if they had to change it.

There may be more than meets the eye on it that we don't know.


not great prep for either team aswell.
Sonofbrowny25
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Tony Clifton » Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:46 am

If teams are equal on runs after the first innings but the team chasing is not bowled out, is that recorded as a tie or a draw in ATCA?
This is Tony Clifton! A name to respect! A name to fear!
User avatar
Tony Clifton
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:00 pm
Has liked: 1462 times
Been liked: 244 times
Grassroots Team: Adelaide University

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Tue Mar 20, 2018 11:13 am

Tony Clifton wrote:If teams are equal on runs after the first innings but the team chasing is not bowled out, is that recorded as a tie or a draw in ATCA?


Tie, provided they faced their full allotment of overs.
First innings has compulsory declarations, and therefore results are achieved provided the full allotment of overs are played. On first innings, it is only a draw if the a result hasn't been achieved and the match didn't play the full number of overs.

In short, first innings results are like 1-day games, 2nd innings results are like test matches.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Sonofbrowny25 » Tue Mar 20, 2018 11:24 am

Trader wrote:
Tony Clifton wrote:If teams are equal on runs after the first innings but the team chasing is not bowled out, is that recorded as a tie or a draw in ATCA?


Tie, provided they faced their full allotment of overs.
First innings has compulsory declarations, and therefore results are achieved provided the full allotment of overs are played. On first innings, it is only a draw if the a result hasn't been achieved and the match didn't play the full number of overs.

In short, first innings results are like 1-day games, 2nd innings results are like test matches.


when will they know who went through?
Sonofbrowny25
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Tue Mar 20, 2018 12:04 pm

Sonofbrowny25 wrote:
Trader wrote:
Tony Clifton wrote:If teams are equal on runs after the first innings but the team chasing is not bowled out, is that recorded as a tie or a draw in ATCA?


Tie, provided they faced their full allotment of overs.
First innings has compulsory declarations, and therefore results are achieved provided the full allotment of overs are played. On first innings, it is only a draw if the a result hasn't been achieved and the match didn't play the full number of overs.

In short, first innings results are like 1-day games, 2nd innings results are like test matches.


when will they know who went through?


I understand Iggies have made a formal submission to the ATCA who have referred it to their legal team for review.

The debate is surrounding if Iggies innings is deemed to be completed or not.

B6. TIED MATCHES
In the event of an equality in the aggregate number of runs in which each side has two completed innings, the match shall be regarded as an outright tie.


Then:
B11. SEMI-FINAL MATCHES - ALL GRADES
(c) In the event that no decision can be obtained within the time allowed for the match or a tie has occurred, the team finishing higher on the premiership table at the end of the minor round, shall be deemed the winner.


To determine if the innings was completed, you need to go to the laws of cricket, which state as follows:

13.3 Completed innings
A side’s innings is to be considered as completed if any of the following applies:
13.3.5 in the case of an agreement under 13.1.2,
the prescribed number of overs has been bowled


13.1.2 is where is gets a little more interesting.

13.1.2 It may be agreed to limit any innings to a number of overs or to a period of time. If such an agreement is made then
13.1.2.1 in a one-innings match a similar agreement shall apply to both innings.
13.1.2.2 in a two-innings match similar agreements shall apply
to the first innings of each side
or to the second innings of each side
or to both innings of each side.


Iggies are clearly arguing that their innings was limited to 14 overs, 14 overs were played, and therefore the innings was completed.

However, the bit in red above is where it gets interesting for mine.
Given GG second innings was not the same length as the Iggies 2nd innings, I'm not sure it now applies as a completed innings.

For mine the spirit of the bylaws are clear. The outright result is only a tie if the team batting last is bowled out with scores level.

It will all come down to the word completed, and if a 14 over innings with 5 wickets to fall is completed or not!

A fun one for Heyzer and Gade to adjudicate!
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Tony Clifton » Tue Mar 20, 2018 1:47 pm

Maybe Golden Grove and Old Iggies will progress and the semi final winner will miss out. Unlucky!
This is Tony Clifton! A name to respect! A name to fear!
User avatar
Tony Clifton
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:00 pm
Has liked: 1462 times
Been liked: 244 times
Grassroots Team: Adelaide University

Re: ATCA

Postby Dogwatcher » Tue Mar 20, 2018 1:55 pm

Pigs arse.
You're my only friend, and you don't even like me.
Dogwatcher
Coach
 
 
Posts: 29318
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:29 am
Location: The Bronx
Has liked: 1425 times
Been liked: 1152 times
Grassroots Team: Elizabeth

Re: ATCA

Postby Sonofbrowny25 » Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:07 pm

Tony Clifton wrote:Maybe Golden Grove and Old Iggies will progress and the semi final winner will miss out. Unlucky!


maybe saturday morning before driving to trinity they play a super over.
Sonofbrowny25
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:22 pm

Sonofbrowny25 wrote:
Tony Clifton wrote:Maybe Golden Grove and Old Iggies will progress and the semi final winner will miss out. Unlucky!


maybe saturday morning before driving to trinity they play a super over.


Or make them both drive to trinity for a super over!
Really see who can be bothered playing in the GF!
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Sonofbrowny25 » Wed Mar 21, 2018 11:32 am

any updates with the Iggies vs grove outcome?
Sonofbrowny25
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Senor Moto Gadili » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:11 pm

I see the Old Scotch v Woody Rechabites GF is being played on the main oval at Scotch College. They have played all home games on the No. 2 oval this year. That'll be a pleasant surprise for the Woody Rechabites
Senor Moto Gadili
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:52 pm
Has liked: 206 times
Been liked: 532 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:16 pm

Sonofbrowny25 wrote:any updates with the Iggies vs grove outcome?


Still listed as TBC on mycricket.

Will make for an interesting dinner tonight if the turf can't announce who is playing!!!

For mine it is very simple, and I can not believe it has taken this long to sort out.

1) This result has never been a tie in 150 years of cricket. It is always a draw, and there are plenty of examples to show that. (1996 Zimbabwe vs England, 2011 India vs West Indies). To try and claim it is a tie now is disingenuous from Old Ignatians.

2) Even if you ignore the laws of cricket which show the game to be a draw, and look at the bylaws which for whatever reason have decided to try and define a tie (not needed given the laws of cricket already cover it), even then, it is still ambiguous at best. For the game to be called a tie under the bylaws, you need to categorically show that Iggies innings was completed after 14 overs. Based on the snipit from the laws of cricket posted above, you can not say that was the case, for two reasons:
a) Golden Grove's innings was not limited to 14 overs (that is, a similar agreement on the number of overs of BOTH sides second innings did not apply).
b) Even Old Iggies innings wasn't restricted to 14 overs. 14 was a minimum, not a maximum number of overs to be bowled. IE: Had the 14th over been completed before the scheduled close of play (assuming 5:30 but given weather might be different), then Golden Grove would have been required to bowl a 15th. As such, Old Iggies innings was not necessarily completed after 14 overs.

3) If you throw both the laws of cricket out, and the bylaws, and look at this situation logically, once again you can not come up with a tie as the correct result.
Assume this was a minor round game. For a tie to be awarded, Golden Grove would pick up half the outright points, that is, an extra 2.5pts, when they only took 5 second innings wickets. There is no way they deserve these points, and if it were to be granted a tie and they received these points, no doubt the remaining teams would challenge that ruling.

Given the laws of cricket are clear it is a draw, the bylaws are ambiguous at best, and the intent of the bylaws are that this game is not a tie, I can not see how anyone can rule in good faith that Old Iggies are the side to go through.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Reilly » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:24 pm

Trader wrote:
Sonofbrowny25 wrote:any updates with the Iggies vs grove outcome?


Still listed as TBC on mycricket.

Will make for an interesting dinner tonight if the turf can't announce who is playing!!!

For mine it is very simple, and I can not believe it has taken this long to sort out.

1) This result has never been a tie in 150 years of cricket. It is always a draw, and there are plenty of examples to show that. (1996 Zimbabwe vs England, 2011 India vs West Indies). To try and claim it is a tie now is disingenuous from Old Ignatians.

2) Even if you ignore the laws of cricket which show the game to be a draw, and look at the bylaws which for whatever reason have decided to try and define a tie (not needed given the laws of cricket already cover it), even then, it is still ambiguous at best. For the game to be called a tie under the bylaws, you need to categorically show that Iggies innings was completed after 14 overs. Based on the snipit from the laws of cricket posted above, you can not say that was the case, for two reasons:
a) Golden Grove's innings was not limited to 14 overs (that is, a similar agreement on the number of overs of BOTH sides second innings did not apply).
b) Even Old Iggies innings wasn't restricted to 14 overs. 14 was a minimum, not a maximum number of overs to be bowled. IE: Had the 14th over been completed before the scheduled close of play (assuming 5:30 but given weather might be different), then Golden Grove would have been required to bowl a 15th. As such, Old Iggies innings was not necessarily completed after 14 overs.

3) If you throw both the laws of cricket out, and the bylaws, and look at this situation logically, once again you can not come up with a tie as the correct result.
Assume this was a minor round game. For a tie to be awarded, Golden Grove would pick up half the outright points, that is, an extra 2.5pts, when they only took 5 second innings wickets. There is no way they deserve these points, and if it were to be granted a tie and they received these points, no doubt the remaining teams would challenge that ruling.

Given the laws of cricket are clear it is a draw, the bylaws are ambiguous at best, and the intent of the bylaws are that this game is not a tie, I can not see how anyone can rule in good faith that Old Iggies are the side to go through.

Looking at GG's FB page we won't know the outcome till tomorrow!
Reilly
Member
 
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:46 pm
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 4 times
Grassroots Team: Flinders Park

Re: ATCA

Postby Sonofbrowny25 » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:55 pm

Reilly wrote:
Trader wrote:
Sonofbrowny25 wrote:any updates with the Iggies vs grove outcome?


Still listed as TBC on mycricket.

Will make for an interesting dinner tonight if the turf can't announce who is playing!!!

For mine it is very simple, and I can not believe it has taken this long to sort out.

1) This result has never been a tie in 150 years of cricket. It is always a draw, and there are plenty of examples to show that. (1996 Zimbabwe vs England, 2011 India vs West Indies). To try and claim it is a tie now is disingenuous from Old Ignatians.

2) Even if you ignore the laws of cricket which show the game to be a draw, and look at the bylaws which for whatever reason have decided to try and define a tie (not needed given the laws of cricket already cover it), even then, it is still ambiguous at best. For the game to be called a tie under the bylaws, you need to categorically show that Iggies innings was completed after 14 overs. Based on the snipit from the laws of cricket posted above, you can not say that was the case, for two reasons:
a) Golden Grove's innings was not limited to 14 overs (that is, a similar agreement on the number of overs of BOTH sides second innings did not apply).
b) Even Old Iggies innings wasn't restricted to 14 overs. 14 was a minimum, not a maximum number of overs to be bowled. IE: Had the 14th over been completed before the scheduled close of play (assuming 5:30 but given weather might be different), then Golden Grove would have been required to bowl a 15th. As such, Old Iggies innings was not necessarily completed after 14 overs.

3) If you throw both the laws of cricket out, and the bylaws, and look at this situation logically, once again you can not come up with a tie as the correct result.
Assume this was a minor round game. For a tie to be awarded, Golden Grove would pick up half the outright points, that is, an extra 2.5pts, when they only took 5 second innings wickets. There is no way they deserve these points, and if it were to be granted a tie and they received these points, no doubt the remaining teams would challenge that ruling.

Given the laws of cricket are clear it is a draw, the bylaws are ambiguous at best, and the intent of the bylaws are that this game is not a tie, I can not see how anyone can rule in good faith that Old Iggies are the side to go through.

Looking at GG's FB page we won't know the outcome till tomorrow!



tonight should be interesting then!
Sonofbrowny25
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Senor Moto Gadili » Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:56 pm

Trader wrote:
Sonofbrowny25 wrote:any updates with the Iggies vs grove outcome?


Still listed as TBC on mycricket.

Will make for an interesting dinner tonight if the turf can't announce who is playing!!!

For mine it is very simple, and I can not believe it has taken this long to sort out.

1) This result has never been a tie in 150 years of cricket. It is always a draw, and there are plenty of examples to show that. (1996 Zimbabwe vs England, 2011 India vs West Indies). To try and claim it is a tie now is disingenuous from Old Ignatians.

2) Even if you ignore the laws of cricket which show the game to be a draw, and look at the bylaws which for whatever reason have decided to try and define a tie (not needed given the laws of cricket already cover it), even then, it is still ambiguous at best. For the game to be called a tie under the bylaws, you need to categorically show that Iggies innings was completed after 14 overs. Based on the snipit from the laws of cricket posted above, you can not say that was the case, for two reasons:
a) Golden Grove's innings was not limited to 14 overs (that is, a similar agreement on the number of overs of BOTH sides second innings did not apply).
b) Even Old Iggies innings wasn't restricted to 14 overs. 14 was a minimum, not a maximum number of overs to be bowled. IE: Had the 14th over been completed before the scheduled close of play (assuming 5:30 but given weather might be different), then Golden Grove would have been required to bowl a 15th. As such, Old Iggies innings was not necessarily completed after 14 overs.

3) If you throw both the laws of cricket out, and the bylaws, and look at this situation logically, once again you can not come up with a tie as the correct result.
Assume this was a minor round game. For a tie to be awarded, Golden Grove would pick up half the outright points, that is, an extra 2.5pts, when they only took 5 second innings wickets. There is no way they deserve these points, and if it were to be granted a tie and they received these points, no doubt the remaining teams would challenge that ruling.

Given the laws of cricket are clear it is a draw, the bylaws are ambiguous at best, and the intent of the bylaws are that this game is not a tie, I can not see how anyone can rule in good faith that Old Iggies are the side to go through.

I tend to agree, but there is some ambiguity which Old Ignations are entitled to contest. Worth waiting an extra day to get the right outcome.

1 to 5mm on Sunday, so you want to be a higher ranked team
Senor Moto Gadili
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:52 pm
Has liked: 206 times
Been liked: 532 times

Re: ATCA

Postby Trader » Wed Mar 21, 2018 2:06 pm

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:
trader wrote:Given the laws of cricket are clear it is a draw, the bylaws are ambiguous at best, and the intent of the bylaws are that this game is not a tie, I can not see how anyone can rule in good faith that Old Iggies are the side to go through.

I tend to agree, but there is some ambiguity which Old Ignations are entitled to contest. Worth waiting an extra day to get the right outcome.

1 to 5mm on Sunday, so you want to be a higher ranked team


1 day was Sunday to Monday. We are now talking about Thursday!
The turf are very lucky it is in the 2vs3 game and not 1v4 where curators still wouldn't know if they need to prepare a deck or not!

As you say, higher ranked team will win the GF on washout anyway, so basically its an argument over who gets promoted.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Other Sports  Regional Cricket Comps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |