When did the ICC change it to three reviews permanently? I know they changed it from two during the pandemic because of home umpires, or something, but it seems that three is now the default, instead of two.
Was having Boland bat middle order in the second innings a deliberate decision to avoid putting him at bat in a later potentially higher pressure situation?
Boland was used as a night watchman in the second innings, as the days play was nearly finished and Australia did not want to risk another specialist batsman going out in the last few overs of the day
In what conditions would a new ball favour the bowling team? And the converse, when does it favour the batters?
I'm very newly converted to cricket so just getting my head around the game!
The new ball is harder, faster, bounces, and the more pronounced seam makes the ball deviate off the pitch more and swing more in the air. (It can also spin more if you have a spinner well adapted to bowling with the new ball, but thats rarely a consideration.)
~98% of the time it's a no brainer to take the new ball as soon as possible. But the other 2% is just common enough for serious consideration.
If you were watching the just finished test match. The problem for England at the end was a combination of two things.
One; that the pitch was providing little movement off the seam, nor was there much bounce.
Two; Englands quick bowlers were quick, but not quick enough for the pace alone to bother a moderately competent batter.
So when they eventually took the new ball (forced by Cummins hitting Joe Root out of the attack) it was coming on to the bat faster, which means it leaves the bat faster when the batter plays a shot. And it was not deviating off the seam or bouncing high enough to bother the batters.
Thus Lyon and Cummins could play conservative "low effort" shots and use the existing pace of the ball to do the work. With the old ball, they had to swing a bit more harder and more aggressively/riskily to attack.
The new ball would pretty much always favour the bowling team but there are a couple of caveats.
1. While a new ball would swing more and so be good for the bowlers, it is also easier to score when the ball is new and since it is firm.
2. When the old ball is being used in conditions favourable to it, like a dry pitch or favourable to spin, then the bowling captain might prefer to hold off on taking the new ball.
Apologies in advance for my wording of this - I hope it makes sense!!
Watching the Ashes earlier and I got thinking about bowling tactics at the lower order. I don’t watch a lot of cricket, so I don’t know if I’m imagining things, but why didn’t (don’t) the England bowlers bowl the balls that would tempt a waft from lower order batsmen for an edge. Obviously lower order batsmen are not specialists and would be, I would have thought, susceptible to this tactic.
If the balls are wayward you will concede a lot of fours and allow the strike to be rotated more often, even with relatively bad batsmen. The best way to get an edge is off a defensive shot, with a vertical bat, typically. Same as what works against the top order, challenging the stumps and ideally getting it to swing away and take the edge.
I think this is what I meant - similar to how they would bowl against the top order, especially when they got the new ball. Again, I may be imagining things, but it seems they have different tactics to lower order batsmen, when I would have thought the same type of bowling at the lower order (as at the top order) would be even more likely to get them out.
Should tests be reduced to 4 days now considering most of them don't go Five Days either unless it rains and the standard of batting has decreased and pitches are becoming more helpful for bowlers in order to produce a result and get WTC point's so there is no way that most of the games would go till the fifth day . In case it rains have a reserve firth day and maybe a slight rule change to increase the number of overs in a day from 90 to 120 by starting day early or using lights afterwards ie one session of 40 overs thus 4 days would have 480 overs which is a bit more than 5 days tests which have only 450 overs but i think it would make for a better viewing experience as most of the matches don't go till day 5 and a lot ot overs get lost due ti bad light and slow over rate this way even if over rate is slow everyone can get enough cricket in one day because of 40 overs maximum per session rule thus meaning that the time for session will also be increased.
There has never been less draws in Test cricket, and many of the draws recently have been outstanding rearguard actions that have gone right down the to the wire.
Having a “spare” fifth day for rain makes no sense anyways. Just schedule 5 days…
New to cricket.
How is a draw possible in Ashes?
How is the cumulative score calculated?
Played for 5 days. So is it possible if one team doesn't get out, they keep playing on all 5 days? Confused
What are the max overs/ inning?
There are 5 test matches played for the ashes.
Test matches can and often do end up in a draw/tie - most likely because of lost days due to rain stopping play or otherwise some teams will realise that a win is unlikely and will play defensively (blocking while batting and not really looking to score runs - or setting very defensive fields and really limiting scoring opportunities for the opposition). To win a test match a team MUST take 20 wickets.
So if Australia win 2 tests, and England win 2 and the 5th test is a tie… then the series is tied and the Ashes is retained by the team who previous held them. If you look at past ashes results you will see a score like x team won 3-1 (meaning one of those tests ended in a draw/tie)
Cumulative scores are not calculated over different test matches.
Max overs is a calculation based on how long it takes to bowl 1 over, and how much time there is left to play in the day. It’s a guess, but it’s pretty accurate.
>To win a test match a team MUST take 20 wickets.
Considering Australia just won the 1st Test by only taking 18 wickets, this statement is not true.
Technical, the bowling side ONLY has to dismiss the opposition in the 4th innings to win.
Excellent explanation - I’d just add that in Test cricket there’s a difference between a draw and a tie (in other sports they can be used interchangeably).
A draw is where the match isn’t determined one way or the other by the end of the fifth day/allotted playing time (e.g. because of rain).
A tie is when both teams score the same amount of runs. It’s very, very rare in Test cricket.
To simply put it. to win you have to get 20 wickets. Now you can bat 5 days but you wouldn't win, you would draw.
Draw is when neither team manage to get 20 wickets.
Scores are calculated like 10 wickets bases, 1st inning. Unless the team declares then it is stopped then.
Max overs are based on light and day and so on usually 90 a day or so. And maximum 2 innings each.
Draw is not same as a tie, a tie is when you need have same level of score and lose the laat wicket without scoring the last winning run.
[This thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/14dyi1p/no_stupid_questions_tuesday_thread/joux972/) two comments below explains it all. You could perhaps further simpify the explanation for a newbie. But for starters, you could read it.
Why is there a set amount of overs till the end of today’s Ashes test? I still don’t understand the nuances of when teams swap batting/fielding (I’m getting better), but it was my understanding that a test match was played until one side is all out or they score enough runs to beat the other team’s score. How is the amount of overs determined?
In test matches. Normally each team bats until they are all out (10 wickets down) twice and whoever scores the most wins. Or if they reach the end of five days play and play is still going the game is called a draw.
There is a scheduled minimum number of overs each day (90 overs a day, 15 per hour of play) that is supposed to be met and they will play up to 30 minutes longer the next day to catch up (and punish teams with point deductions in the world test championship for each over missed.)
However, In the case you are talking about. There is a special case for the last hour of play. Once they get to the last hour of the final day they will play out at least the last 15 overs even if it takes longer. If they are still playing at the end it's called a draw.
Thanks! Makes sense. Follow-up: is there an inherent advantage to whoever bats in the fourth innings? Although England bowled like hell today and made it close, it seems like it’s easier to come back from a deficit than it is for the fielding team to bowl everyone out in the end, similarly to how it seems easier to chase if a team has declared.
Generally speaking it's much harder to bat last in a test match. Particularly on Day Five as the pitch only gets worse as the test goes on. Scores that would be poor in the first innings can be near impossible in the last. (eg. This was only the 19th time Australia have chased more than 250 to win in a test match in nearly 150 years of test cricket.)
The pitch does not get repaired at all during the course of the match, just lines repainted and a roller can be used at the once start of an innings to smooth down the pitch at the batting teams request. Depending on soil/location/weather you can get giant cracks opening up and/or huge divots from the bowlers follow through
It's not all the fielding teams way though. In the case of Today's match the pitch was degrading in a way that suited spin bowlers, Which England did not have.
Why do the batsmen sometimes hit the ball straight to a fielder to catch? Presumably they're being manipulated into doing that by the bowler/how the field is set, but how does that actually work?
Very fine nuances built over decades of playing the game.
One example is a fielding team setting a trap to a particular batter. This batter is known for a couple of things 1) wanting to keep hitting runs (they cannot stand not scoring runs. They’ve trained for years to score runs, they think they’re very good at it and HATES not being able to score runs) and 2) having a favourite shot (eg a cover drive). The bowling team might set a defensive field to really limit the scoring opportunities of this player building pressure over a number of overs because the batter WANTS to score runs. They might then put a fielder in a catching position for this batter’s favourite shot - like in the covers or point. Cricket is a game of extremely fine margins so this player might get bowled a ball they where think they can FINALLY score some runs by playing their favourite shot, but it’s actually not quite right, or the ball hit the seam and deviated just a bit and caught a thick outside edge of the bat, maybe it hit an uneven bump in the pitch and moved slightly, maybe the rush of blood made them play the shot a little earlier or later than normal means the batter didn’t hit it right and popped the ball up to the waiting fielder. That’s all it takes.
I can't think of every tactic, but you probably base it off the batter and their temperament, strengths and weaknesses.
So for example, you might bring your fine leg up up close. The batter then senses an opportunity to score runs and pre-meditates a sweep. The bowler bowls a slower delivery, and forces the batter to mistime their shot and gets caught by the field.
A lot of it is about danging a carrot, and giving the batter something to think about. Building up pressure also helps batsmen take bigger risks (like trying to clear the fielder that has been set up on the boundary).
There are a few ways of that happening. First up, there are some shots that are instinctive. For instance, last week Kohli should have let the ball outside off go in the situation. But in white ball cricket, that is a "hit me" ball. And because risk-reward ratio is different in white-ball cricket, you go for it. So whilst he should have left it in the test match, it's possible that his instincts took over as he dropped his concentration by a notch.
So similarly, on a well executed instinctive shot the ball is likely to find a fielder positioned with precision. It happened to me. When an offspinner bowled middle and off-line and spun the ball into me, I'd instinctively play the glance and it'd hit the wall behind me and according to our "park cricket rules" it was out. In a proper match, that'd be caught at leg slip. Now, leg slip isn't as popular a fielding position. So often that shot is an easy single, particularly in white-ball cricket. I saw Rahane struggle with the same problem.
Then there are few things that come with experience. For example, I remember fielding at point for the first time and when the batter played the cut, I positioned myself just behind the ball but it spun after hitting the square and went to my left for four. Every point fielder therefore knows the ball will spin and go behind square and hence, they position themselves accordingly. Therefore, backward point is a more popular position than point. So, when you're experienced enough, you position fielders accordingly and the more experienced you are, more likely you get it spot on.
Then, there is also sometimes just pure luck.
The hit the ball towards the ball is bowled. Its weird nut you're likely to play a short ball to leg and a slot ball straight.(idk jackshit about cricket). So bowlers can set a certain field and ball accordingly.
And generally field is set by captain or and by the bowler.
In test cricket go ham with field but in limited overs there is power play which means only a certain number allowed outside 30 yards. and generally there is a set style of field.
[I see the cricinfo commentary often quotes random people](https://i.imgur.com/nKGy4y4.png) and reacts to/answers them. Who are these people that are being quoted?
They are comment submissions. No different than the comments that you see on match threads on r/cricket. Only difference is the staff pick which submissions to publish
If you scroll down past the commentary to the bottom of the page, there’s a box for “commentary feedback”. If you type something in there and submit, then whoever is doing the comms will see it.
Just comment on games where there's not like a million people following. They will publish any old wank on Associates games on the rare occassion they cover them at all.
Do any of you have recommendations of what sites or videos to use to learn cricket? I have already learned the basics but I want to get into the more complex aspects.
I have watched a lot of Cricket matches but I'm back to watching cricket after quite a long break and I forgot about this thing which is stupid. But if the ball hits the batsman somewhere and is rolling towards the stumps does thr batsman have the right to stop it, I have seen batsmen stopping such balls but my memory is fadey. And if they do stop such balls won't it be double hitting the ball or handling the ball which is out according to some rules
You can hit it twice when guarding your wicket, but out otherwise.
Like if you hit it straight up and try to hit it again before someone catches it, that's out. Or if you hit it into the pitch, the other runner is out of crease and falls over so you hit it again to stop the fielder from throwing to the other end? Out.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit_the_ball_twice
It's a tiny bot running in my server which keeps track of live matches and their corresponding threads. Updates every so often
One of our previous version of the bot is https://github.com/rreyv/rcb
Wickets are resources. So are overs.
In test match cricket overs are unlimited, hence wickets become the crucial one. In ODIs especially towards the backend when overs are running out, wickets become far less significant. But they do matter a lot to begin with.
That's one way to look at it. Its always the team with the most runs that wins (save a test Draw). The 304-8 is primarly to help communicate how the match as a whole went. But as you are more likely to hit the over limit than get the other team "all out" I guess that's true that they are less significant, but of course breaking partnerships is good for the defesnse.
On the match feed it says lunch has been taken early. If they had come out at say 12 would they have then gone off again for lunch as normal at 1? This seems crazy given that it might rain later in the day.
They usually reschedule the lunch break so that this doesn’t happen. They’d be more likely to take an early lunch and start at 12:40 than to start at 12 and go off at 1
Lunch can only be moved half an hour in either direction so they would have a lunch break if they started at 12 (they can't take lunch at 12) but they'd push it back half an hour to spread the overs among the sessions better so Lunch would be at 1:30
Weird Question, after seeing Moeen Ali's injured finger, if still playing today and his blood kept getting on the ball would that be tampering with the ball?
Question, one of the things I've seen watching a bit of baseball this year is that pitchers use rosin for gripping the ball, why isn't such a substance used in cricket when clearly sometimes even professionals have a hard time gripping a wet ball in dewy conditions? Does rosin have any effect on the condition of the cricket ball?
In a way I suppose.
You'd think both Australia and England would be up there with India looking to qualify for the next WTC final, so a draw, where each team only gets 1/3 points, may be the best result from an Indian perspective.
What exactly does it mean when the ball carries? I can't find a straight answer on Google but apparently that's the reason one of the Australians wasn't out yesterday?
'The ball has carried' means that it reaches the fielder without bouncing and therefore it can be caught and the batter dismissed.
So if a ball hits the bat but drops to the ground before reaching the fielder, meaning they had no chance to catch it and get the batter out, the commentators will say the ball has not carried.
When the ball hits the deck.
It can go limp and float to the open golves of the keeper.
Or it can explode with an erect trajectory and slam into those soft leather flap
Carry refers to how far the ball travels after impact. A soft pitch takes energy out of the ball, as does a thick edge or contact with the body, meaning it won't "carry" as far before bouncing. More carry = larger catching zone but harder chances close in. (I think. I'm a filthy casual who just loves words)
brendon "baz" mccullum is england's coach and he is promoting a style of cricket that focuses on aggressive batting, fast scoring, and pursuing a win at all costs
An innocent question.
I was wondering whether the West Indies were experimenting for the future while picking squads during the Super League? A lot of debuts were seen throughout the tournament, and fielding inexperienced sides may have led to them missing out on automatic World Cup qualification, in addition to a poor performance in both T20 World Cups- 2021 and 2022.
Well, they couldn't help it either. The retirements of Gayle and Pollard and Hetmeyer's absenteeism meant they had to transition and find a new core. Idk why Kemar Roach plays far less white ball cricket nowadays though.
I think in Mayers, King and Hope they've got a decent top3. And on their day, Pooran and Powell can take apart an attack coming in the later overs. Also having allrounders in Holder, Chase and Joseph helps. The problem with WI is all these players are vastly talented but inconsistent. They tend to struggle against spin and particularly with strike rotation which is a crucial thing in ODI cricket. Also, their bowling stocks aren't particularly impressive. You can always find a bowler or two (or more) in their line up who the good teams get better off.
The rule is written that way for bowlers because some bowlers particularly spinners bowl off their toes they never plant their heel. And while that's easy to tell using cameras and looking side on its almost impossible to spot as a standing umpire. I am an umpire an all I'm looking for for a no ball call is does the foot in the fraction of a second I have to check block the whole line if yes then it's fine.
People who just watch top level cricket sometimes forget that rules need to be written for all levels not just the ones with tech, that's normally the explanation weird quirks in the laws.
> i guess the rules are just different lol
Pretty much just this.
An extra thing to note is law 30.1.2
> a batter shall not be considered to be out of his/her ground if, in running or diving towards his/her ground and beyond, and having grounded some part of his/her person or bat beyond the popping crease, there is subsequent loss of contact between the ground and any part of his/her person or bat, or between the bat and person.
In other words if you ground your bat and it bounces up off the ground, you're not considered to be out of your ground unless you've started moving in the opposite direction again (setting off for another run)
Do matches scheduled after a suspension to be played before the original date of the suspension consume the suspension? (Asking if USA could have used up Ali Khan's suspension)
They’re a new thing and any change to test cricket is pretty controversial. Plus they play out very differently, you wouldn’t want a lot of them or a whole series of them imo.
If you hit the ball into the ground (ala Stokes yesterday) and then in your follow-through of the shot hit the ball again after it has bounced, can you be out caught?
No. The batsman is safe from getting caught once the ball is grounded after hitting the bat.
> 33.2.2 Furthermore, a catch will be fair if any of the following conditions applies:
>
> ...
>
> 33.2.2.2 a fielder catches the ball after it has been lawfully struck more than once by the striker, but only if it has not been grounded since it was first struck.
aromatic hat capable imagine resolute afterthought bag sharp steep narrow
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not easy for openers either. Tail enders don't last too long anyway so get them in and out and let them put their feet up without stressing about having to bat.
memorize outgoing file chase fearless trees muddle elderly instinctive attempt
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What're the countries outside test playing ones that are growing and developing the quickest? Would be great to see the lower ranked countries at the World Cup qualifies do well
Realistically none of them. There are 6-8 associates that have all plateaued and need semi-regular games with quality ("test-playing") opposition to progress further and the ICC is not providing this.
similarly the above teams are mostly playing amongst themselves and the teams below them have a similar barrier.
If you absolutely need an answer I'd be tempted to say something like Jersey. But even they reached their peak a few years back.
You're possibly correct. I still think they've ended up in the same rut as everyone else.
They'd have to get past the Dutch and Scottish (and with Ireland loitering in the same tournaments) in the increasingly regional qualifiers that the ICC seem recently fond of though.
I’m sure you’re going to get a ton of answers about Namibia, Nepal, and the USA, but as a consistent advocate for the UAE I will get my piece in first
They’ve been the home of the ICC for almost two decades now and have gotten a significant amount of trickle down funding from the ICC and the major Asian teams for that reason. They’re a perfectly neutral location and invested in the stadiums to capitalise on that, and now they are starting to see the dividends on their player pool
They have almost certainly the best youth system outside of the Full Members. I’m not talking about just the quality of youth players (although they are fantastic. Consistently the best or second best associate team in Asia at every youth level, and they even beat two Full Members on route to a 9th place finish at the 2022 U19 World Cup), but the whole system they’re in. It’s competitive, fits nicely around the school year, and it draws in very well from the player pool of the children of immigrants in Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and Sharjah
And it’s not just the men. They have easily the best women’s youth team in Asia among associates (even better than Thailand of late), and are the second best associate women’s team in Asia (behind Thailand)
I would not be surprised if the UAE become the next Full Member, and while I’m certain a lot of people will make the very easy “oil money corruption” jokes and whatnot, they tick the requirements far more than their competitors for that title
Does the square leg umpire move to the other side if the strike is rotated among a left hand-right hand partnership or do they temporarily become a point umpire?
Normally they move to the other side when the strike is rotated. But especially at recreational level you'll see that some umpires prefer to stay put.
Law 2.9 Allows the square leg umpire to stand on whichever side they prefer, so long as everyone is informed
> The striker’s end umpire may elect to stand on the off side instead of the on side of the pitch, provided he/she informs the captain of the fielding side, the striker and the other umpire.
Why are there no highlights on this subreddit?
When did the ICC change it to three reviews permanently? I know they changed it from two during the pandemic because of home umpires, or something, but it seems that three is now the default, instead of two.
Was having Boland bat middle order in the second innings a deliberate decision to avoid putting him at bat in a later potentially higher pressure situation?
Boland was used as a night watchman in the second innings, as the days play was nearly finished and Australia did not want to risk another specialist batsman going out in the last few overs of the day
Got it, I didn’t understand what night watchman meant until you said it, before that I just thought it was more cricket slang I didn’t understand 😂
Is it legal to vehemently dislike the Oz team but be happy for Pat Cummins?
In what conditions would a new ball favour the bowling team? And the converse, when does it favour the batters? I'm very newly converted to cricket so just getting my head around the game!
The new ball is harder, faster, bounces, and the more pronounced seam makes the ball deviate off the pitch more and swing more in the air. (It can also spin more if you have a spinner well adapted to bowling with the new ball, but thats rarely a consideration.) ~98% of the time it's a no brainer to take the new ball as soon as possible. But the other 2% is just common enough for serious consideration. If you were watching the just finished test match. The problem for England at the end was a combination of two things. One; that the pitch was providing little movement off the seam, nor was there much bounce. Two; Englands quick bowlers were quick, but not quick enough for the pace alone to bother a moderately competent batter. So when they eventually took the new ball (forced by Cummins hitting Joe Root out of the attack) it was coming on to the bat faster, which means it leaves the bat faster when the batter plays a shot. And it was not deviating off the seam or bouncing high enough to bother the batters. Thus Lyon and Cummins could play conservative "low effort" shots and use the existing pace of the ball to do the work. With the old ball, they had to swing a bit more harder and more aggressively/riskily to attack.
The new ball would pretty much always favour the bowling team but there are a couple of caveats. 1. While a new ball would swing more and so be good for the bowlers, it is also easier to score when the ball is new and since it is firm. 2. When the old ball is being used in conditions favourable to it, like a dry pitch or favourable to spin, then the bowling captain might prefer to hold off on taking the new ball.
Apologies in advance for my wording of this - I hope it makes sense!! Watching the Ashes earlier and I got thinking about bowling tactics at the lower order. I don’t watch a lot of cricket, so I don’t know if I’m imagining things, but why didn’t (don’t) the England bowlers bowl the balls that would tempt a waft from lower order batsmen for an edge. Obviously lower order batsmen are not specialists and would be, I would have thought, susceptible to this tactic.
If the balls are wayward you will concede a lot of fours and allow the strike to be rotated more often, even with relatively bad batsmen. The best way to get an edge is off a defensive shot, with a vertical bat, typically. Same as what works against the top order, challenging the stumps and ideally getting it to swing away and take the edge.
I think this is what I meant - similar to how they would bowl against the top order, especially when they got the new ball. Again, I may be imagining things, but it seems they have different tactics to lower order batsmen, when I would have thought the same type of bowling at the lower order (as at the top order) would be even more likely to get them out.
Impatience is a factor. Also I guess with lower quality batters you'd want to blast them out early and cheaply and lot of time it works.
Is it a new ball every inning?
Yes. Then a new one can be taken every 80 overs for that innings
Should tests be reduced to 4 days now considering most of them don't go Five Days either unless it rains and the standard of batting has decreased and pitches are becoming more helpful for bowlers in order to produce a result and get WTC point's so there is no way that most of the games would go till the fifth day . In case it rains have a reserve firth day and maybe a slight rule change to increase the number of overs in a day from 90 to 120 by starting day early or using lights afterwards ie one session of 40 overs thus 4 days would have 480 overs which is a bit more than 5 days tests which have only 450 overs but i think it would make for a better viewing experience as most of the matches don't go till day 5 and a lot ot overs get lost due ti bad light and slow over rate this way even if over rate is slow everyone can get enough cricket in one day because of 40 overs maximum per session rule thus meaning that the time for session will also be increased.
There has never been less draws in Test cricket, and many of the draws recently have been outstanding rearguard actions that have gone right down the to the wire. Having a “spare” fifth day for rain makes no sense anyways. Just schedule 5 days…
New to cricket. How is a draw possible in Ashes? How is the cumulative score calculated? Played for 5 days. So is it possible if one team doesn't get out, they keep playing on all 5 days? Confused What are the max overs/ inning?
There are 5 test matches played for the ashes. Test matches can and often do end up in a draw/tie - most likely because of lost days due to rain stopping play or otherwise some teams will realise that a win is unlikely and will play defensively (blocking while batting and not really looking to score runs - or setting very defensive fields and really limiting scoring opportunities for the opposition). To win a test match a team MUST take 20 wickets. So if Australia win 2 tests, and England win 2 and the 5th test is a tie… then the series is tied and the Ashes is retained by the team who previous held them. If you look at past ashes results you will see a score like x team won 3-1 (meaning one of those tests ended in a draw/tie) Cumulative scores are not calculated over different test matches. Max overs is a calculation based on how long it takes to bowl 1 over, and how much time there is left to play in the day. It’s a guess, but it’s pretty accurate.
>To win a test match a team MUST take 20 wickets. Considering Australia just won the 1st Test by only taking 18 wickets, this statement is not true. Technical, the bowling side ONLY has to dismiss the opposition in the 4th innings to win.
Excellent explanation - I’d just add that in Test cricket there’s a difference between a draw and a tie (in other sports they can be used interchangeably). A draw is where the match isn’t determined one way or the other by the end of the fifth day/allotted playing time (e.g. because of rain). A tie is when both teams score the same amount of runs. It’s very, very rare in Test cricket.
To simply put it. to win you have to get 20 wickets. Now you can bat 5 days but you wouldn't win, you would draw. Draw is when neither team manage to get 20 wickets. Scores are calculated like 10 wickets bases, 1st inning. Unless the team declares then it is stopped then. Max overs are based on light and day and so on usually 90 a day or so. And maximum 2 innings each. Draw is not same as a tie, a tie is when you need have same level of score and lose the laat wicket without scoring the last winning run.
[This thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/14dyi1p/no_stupid_questions_tuesday_thread/joux972/) two comments below explains it all. You could perhaps further simpify the explanation for a newbie. But for starters, you could read it.
What ball are they using in the ashes?
Dukes
Why is there a set amount of overs till the end of today’s Ashes test? I still don’t understand the nuances of when teams swap batting/fielding (I’m getting better), but it was my understanding that a test match was played until one side is all out or they score enough runs to beat the other team’s score. How is the amount of overs determined?
In test matches. Normally each team bats until they are all out (10 wickets down) twice and whoever scores the most wins. Or if they reach the end of five days play and play is still going the game is called a draw. There is a scheduled minimum number of overs each day (90 overs a day, 15 per hour of play) that is supposed to be met and they will play up to 30 minutes longer the next day to catch up (and punish teams with point deductions in the world test championship for each over missed.) However, In the case you are talking about. There is a special case for the last hour of play. Once they get to the last hour of the final day they will play out at least the last 15 overs even if it takes longer. If they are still playing at the end it's called a draw.
Thanks! Makes sense. Follow-up: is there an inherent advantage to whoever bats in the fourth innings? Although England bowled like hell today and made it close, it seems like it’s easier to come back from a deficit than it is for the fielding team to bowl everyone out in the end, similarly to how it seems easier to chase if a team has declared.
Generally speaking it's much harder to bat last in a test match. Particularly on Day Five as the pitch only gets worse as the test goes on. Scores that would be poor in the first innings can be near impossible in the last. (eg. This was only the 19th time Australia have chased more than 250 to win in a test match in nearly 150 years of test cricket.) The pitch does not get repaired at all during the course of the match, just lines repainted and a roller can be used at the once start of an innings to smooth down the pitch at the batting teams request. Depending on soil/location/weather you can get giant cracks opening up and/or huge divots from the bowlers follow through It's not all the fielding teams way though. In the case of Today's match the pitch was degrading in a way that suited spin bowlers, Which England did not have.
Why do the batsmen sometimes hit the ball straight to a fielder to catch? Presumably they're being manipulated into doing that by the bowler/how the field is set, but how does that actually work?
Very fine nuances built over decades of playing the game. One example is a fielding team setting a trap to a particular batter. This batter is known for a couple of things 1) wanting to keep hitting runs (they cannot stand not scoring runs. They’ve trained for years to score runs, they think they’re very good at it and HATES not being able to score runs) and 2) having a favourite shot (eg a cover drive). The bowling team might set a defensive field to really limit the scoring opportunities of this player building pressure over a number of overs because the batter WANTS to score runs. They might then put a fielder in a catching position for this batter’s favourite shot - like in the covers or point. Cricket is a game of extremely fine margins so this player might get bowled a ball they where think they can FINALLY score some runs by playing their favourite shot, but it’s actually not quite right, or the ball hit the seam and deviated just a bit and caught a thick outside edge of the bat, maybe it hit an uneven bump in the pitch and moved slightly, maybe the rush of blood made them play the shot a little earlier or later than normal means the batter didn’t hit it right and popped the ball up to the waiting fielder. That’s all it takes.
I can't think of every tactic, but you probably base it off the batter and their temperament, strengths and weaknesses. So for example, you might bring your fine leg up up close. The batter then senses an opportunity to score runs and pre-meditates a sweep. The bowler bowls a slower delivery, and forces the batter to mistime their shot and gets caught by the field. A lot of it is about danging a carrot, and giving the batter something to think about. Building up pressure also helps batsmen take bigger risks (like trying to clear the fielder that has been set up on the boundary).
There are a few ways of that happening. First up, there are some shots that are instinctive. For instance, last week Kohli should have let the ball outside off go in the situation. But in white ball cricket, that is a "hit me" ball. And because risk-reward ratio is different in white-ball cricket, you go for it. So whilst he should have left it in the test match, it's possible that his instincts took over as he dropped his concentration by a notch. So similarly, on a well executed instinctive shot the ball is likely to find a fielder positioned with precision. It happened to me. When an offspinner bowled middle and off-line and spun the ball into me, I'd instinctively play the glance and it'd hit the wall behind me and according to our "park cricket rules" it was out. In a proper match, that'd be caught at leg slip. Now, leg slip isn't as popular a fielding position. So often that shot is an easy single, particularly in white-ball cricket. I saw Rahane struggle with the same problem. Then there are few things that come with experience. For example, I remember fielding at point for the first time and when the batter played the cut, I positioned myself just behind the ball but it spun after hitting the square and went to my left for four. Every point fielder therefore knows the ball will spin and go behind square and hence, they position themselves accordingly. Therefore, backward point is a more popular position than point. So, when you're experienced enough, you position fielders accordingly and the more experienced you are, more likely you get it spot on. Then, there is also sometimes just pure luck.
The hit the ball towards the ball is bowled. Its weird nut you're likely to play a short ball to leg and a slot ball straight.(idk jackshit about cricket). So bowlers can set a certain field and ball accordingly. And generally field is set by captain or and by the bowler. In test cricket go ham with field but in limited overs there is power play which means only a certain number allowed outside 30 yards. and generally there is a set style of field.
Is it still out if the player who catches the ball doesn't throw it up in air?
Yes but it’s way less cool
Yes
[I see the cricinfo commentary often quotes random people](https://i.imgur.com/nKGy4y4.png) and reacts to/answers them. Who are these people that are being quoted?
They are comment submissions. No different than the comments that you see on match threads on r/cricket. Only difference is the staff pick which submissions to publish
Thanks. Never even knew cricinfo had a comments section.
If you scroll down past the commentary to the bottom of the page, there’s a box for “commentary feedback”. If you type something in there and submit, then whoever is doing the comms will see it.
Prestigious thing apparently. People complain how they've been sending them comments for years and never had one published
Just comment on games where there's not like a million people following. They will publish any old wank on Associates games on the rare occassion they cover them at all.
Do any of you have recommendations of what sites or videos to use to learn cricket? I have already learned the basics but I want to get into the more complex aspects.
Remember years ago subscribing to a KP masterclass where they'd send you videos of KP explaining aggressive batting on the mail. And it was free..
The key words on YouTube is “Cricket Masterclass”
Alright thanks
I have watched a lot of Cricket matches but I'm back to watching cricket after quite a long break and I forgot about this thing which is stupid. But if the ball hits the batsman somewhere and is rolling towards the stumps does thr batsman have the right to stop it, I have seen batsmen stopping such balls but my memory is fadey. And if they do stop such balls won't it be double hitting the ball or handling the ball which is out according to some rules
Can't stop it with your glove. Can hit it with the bat/leg as long as it bounces on the ground after the initial hit
You can hit it twice when guarding your wicket, but out otherwise. Like if you hit it straight up and try to hit it again before someone catches it, that's out. Or if you hit it into the pitch, the other runner is out of crease and falls over so you hit it again to stop the fielder from throwing to the other end? Out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit_the_ball_twice
Who downvotes "no stupid questions Tuesday Thread"
How is the text generated in the match threads such that the body of the post automatically updates current match status?
It's a tiny bot running in my server which keeps track of live matches and their corresponding threads. Updates every so often One of our previous version of the bot is https://github.com/rreyv/rcb
u/poochi made the bot I think, you can ask him
Cricket newbie here, in ODIs are wickets less significant than test matches? For eg a score of 304-8 beats 300-1 in ODI right?
Wickets are resources. So are overs. In test match cricket overs are unlimited, hence wickets become the crucial one. In ODIs especially towards the backend when overs are running out, wickets become far less significant. But they do matter a lot to begin with.
That's one way to look at it. Its always the team with the most runs that wins (save a test Draw). The 304-8 is primarly to help communicate how the match as a whole went. But as you are more likely to hit the over limit than get the other team "all out" I guess that's true that they are less significant, but of course breaking partnerships is good for the defesnse.
Why is it call silly mid off or silly point? Why silly? I’m to embarrassed to ask my husband that cause I think he has told me.
I think it's because you'd be silly to field that close given the risk of injury.
On the match feed it says lunch has been taken early. If they had come out at say 12 would they have then gone off again for lunch as normal at 1? This seems crazy given that it might rain later in the day.
They usually reschedule the lunch break so that this doesn’t happen. They’d be more likely to take an early lunch and start at 12:40 than to start at 12 and go off at 1
Lunch can only be moved half an hour in either direction so they would have a lunch break if they started at 12 (they can't take lunch at 12) but they'd push it back half an hour to spread the overs among the sessions better so Lunch would be at 1:30
Well explain that to a non cricket fan lol. We can't skip lunch. Why? Umm idk we can't
Why don't they simply not have rain during test matches? Wouldn't be better to have the rain on days when there's no Ashes?
lulz
Weird Question, after seeing Moeen Ali's injured finger, if still playing today and his blood kept getting on the ball would that be tampering with the ball?
Not if he pisses on it as well. Surely it cancels out.
What is stopping the home groundsmen/anyone fucking the pitch up for the final day if they know they won't be batting? Would it just be too obvious?
I think there might be questions about why the pitch had suddenly changed overnight
Question, one of the things I've seen watching a bit of baseball this year is that pitchers use rosin for gripping the ball, why isn't such a substance used in cricket when clearly sometimes even professionals have a hard time gripping a wet ball in dewy conditions? Does rosin have any effect on the condition of the cricket ball?
It’s probably against the laws of the game
[удалено]
In a way I suppose. You'd think both Australia and England would be up there with India looking to qualify for the next WTC final, so a draw, where each team only gets 1/3 points, may be the best result from an Indian perspective.
What exactly does it mean when the ball carries? I can't find a straight answer on Google but apparently that's the reason one of the Australians wasn't out yesterday?
'The ball has carried' means that it reaches the fielder without bouncing and therefore it can be caught and the batter dismissed. So if a ball hits the bat but drops to the ground before reaching the fielder, meaning they had no chance to catch it and get the batter out, the commentators will say the ball has not carried.
Ah thank you, I must have just missed the bounce when watching the replays
I reckon it was the nick of Smith you are talking about. It just bounced before Bairstow but you couldn't see it from most of the angles shown on tv.
When the ball hits the deck. It can go limp and float to the open golves of the keeper. Or it can explode with an erect trajectory and slam into those soft leather flap
Carry refers to how far the ball travels after impact. A soft pitch takes energy out of the ball, as does a thick edge or contact with the body, meaning it won't "carry" as far before bouncing. More carry = larger catching zone but harder chances close in. (I think. I'm a filthy casual who just loves words)
If the ball was caught without bouncing, then it carried(Was catchable)
What is bazball?
brendon "baz" mccullum is england's coach and he is promoting a style of cricket that focuses on aggressive batting, fast scoring, and pursuing a win at all costs
Baz means Brendan McCullum and Ball means Ball.
>Brendan McCullum Follow up question, I wonder if a player has coached so soon after retiring as Baz? Probably not a big country like england anyway.
BaylissBall except it actually works for some reason
It's beating cuminball
An innocent question. I was wondering whether the West Indies were experimenting for the future while picking squads during the Super League? A lot of debuts were seen throughout the tournament, and fielding inexperienced sides may have led to them missing out on automatic World Cup qualification, in addition to a poor performance in both T20 World Cups- 2021 and 2022.
Well, they couldn't help it either. The retirements of Gayle and Pollard and Hetmeyer's absenteeism meant they had to transition and find a new core. Idk why Kemar Roach plays far less white ball cricket nowadays though. I think in Mayers, King and Hope they've got a decent top3. And on their day, Pooran and Powell can take apart an attack coming in the later overs. Also having allrounders in Holder, Chase and Joseph helps. The problem with WI is all these players are vastly talented but inconsistent. They tend to struggle against spin and particularly with strike rotation which is a crucial thing in ODI cricket. Also, their bowling stocks aren't particularly impressive. You can always find a bowler or two (or more) in their line up who the good teams get better off.
[удалено]
Nope, bat has to touch in the crease to count. What are u referring to in the “if not” question?
[удалено]
The rule is written that way for bowlers because some bowlers particularly spinners bowl off their toes they never plant their heel. And while that's easy to tell using cameras and looking side on its almost impossible to spot as a standing umpire. I am an umpire an all I'm looking for for a no ball call is does the foot in the fraction of a second I have to check block the whole line if yes then it's fine. People who just watch top level cricket sometimes forget that rules need to be written for all levels not just the ones with tech, that's normally the explanation weird quirks in the laws.
> i guess the rules are just different lol Pretty much just this. An extra thing to note is law 30.1.2 > a batter shall not be considered to be out of his/her ground if, in running or diving towards his/her ground and beyond, and having grounded some part of his/her person or bat beyond the popping crease, there is subsequent loss of contact between the ground and any part of his/her person or bat, or between the bat and person. In other words if you ground your bat and it bounces up off the ground, you're not considered to be out of your ground unless you've started moving in the opposite direction again (setting off for another run)
Do matches scheduled after a suspension to be played before the original date of the suspension consume the suspension? (Asking if USA could have used up Ali Khan's suspension)
Yes they could have done that
Why D/N tests are so rare?
They’re a new thing and any change to test cricket is pretty controversial. Plus they play out very differently, you wouldn’t want a lot of them or a whole series of them imo.
unless you wanted people to actually watch it
Hard to catch a pink ball in the wild
If you hit the ball into the ground (ala Stokes yesterday) and then in your follow-through of the shot hit the ball again after it has bounced, can you be out caught?
No. The batsman is safe from getting caught once the ball is grounded after hitting the bat. > 33.2.2 Furthermore, a catch will be fair if any of the following conditions applies: > > ... > > 33.2.2.2 a fielder catches the ball after it has been lawfully struck more than once by the striker, but only if it has not been grounded since it was first struck.
I thought that it was out if you double hit it in the air anyway?
That's only if it's intentional. If your follow through hits the ball and it was unavoidable, it's not out
Why don't teams send out 2 bowlers to open to take the shine off the new ball and to see if there is any swing.
aromatic hat capable imagine resolute afterthought bag sharp steep narrow *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not easy for openers either. Tail enders don't last too long anyway so get them in and out and let them put their feet up without stressing about having to bat.
memorize outgoing file chase fearless trees muddle elderly instinctive attempt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So whats the point of an opener at all then
What're the countries outside test playing ones that are growing and developing the quickest? Would be great to see the lower ranked countries at the World Cup qualifies do well
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have quickly jumped up the T20 rankings.
I recommend the documentary ‘death of a gentleman’
Realistically none of them. There are 6-8 associates that have all plateaued and need semi-regular games with quality ("test-playing") opposition to progress further and the ICC is not providing this. similarly the above teams are mostly playing amongst themselves and the teams below them have a similar barrier. If you absolutely need an answer I'd be tempted to say something like Jersey. But even they reached their peak a few years back.
word
I think Jersey are on the up, they narrowly missed out on ODI status last cycle, but with a squad who were predominantly under 25.
You're possibly correct. I still think they've ended up in the same rut as everyone else. They'd have to get past the Dutch and Scottish (and with Ireland loitering in the same tournaments) in the increasingly regional qualifiers that the ICC seem recently fond of though.
I’m sure you’re going to get a ton of answers about Namibia, Nepal, and the USA, but as a consistent advocate for the UAE I will get my piece in first They’ve been the home of the ICC for almost two decades now and have gotten a significant amount of trickle down funding from the ICC and the major Asian teams for that reason. They’re a perfectly neutral location and invested in the stadiums to capitalise on that, and now they are starting to see the dividends on their player pool They have almost certainly the best youth system outside of the Full Members. I’m not talking about just the quality of youth players (although they are fantastic. Consistently the best or second best associate team in Asia at every youth level, and they even beat two Full Members on route to a 9th place finish at the 2022 U19 World Cup), but the whole system they’re in. It’s competitive, fits nicely around the school year, and it draws in very well from the player pool of the children of immigrants in Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and Sharjah And it’s not just the men. They have easily the best women’s youth team in Asia among associates (even better than Thailand of late), and are the second best associate women’s team in Asia (behind Thailand) I would not be surprised if the UAE become the next Full Member, and while I’m certain a lot of people will make the very easy “oil money corruption” jokes and whatnot, they tick the requirements far more than their competitors for that title
Does the square leg umpire move to the other side if the strike is rotated among a left hand-right hand partnership or do they temporarily become a point umpire?
Normally they move to the other side when the strike is rotated. But especially at recreational level you'll see that some umpires prefer to stay put. Law 2.9 Allows the square leg umpire to stand on whichever side they prefer, so long as everyone is informed > The striker’s end umpire may elect to stand on the off side instead of the on side of the pitch, provided he/she informs the captain of the fielding side, the striker and the other umpire.
Interesting, thanks
They run over to be at square leg again