Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

Cricket


football forum
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sign up to remove this ad.
3 hours ago, Stan said:

That would mean the following (figures hypothetical for benefit of the example) :

England bat first and score 100 losing all their wickets.

Australia bat second and score 400 losing all their wickets. 

England bat third and score 253 losing all their wickets. 

England therefore only totalled 353. Australia therefore don't need to bat again as their innings total was higher than England's total across 2 innings (by 47 runs). 

 

In ODI cricket, like this world cup, and in your example:

Team A scores 250 losing 6 wickets 

Team B scores 252 losing 4 wickets means they win by six wickets as that's how many wickets they had left. 

If Team B scored 252 losing 7 wickets, they'd win by three wickets as that's how many they'd had left before being all out. 

You win 'by runs' if you bat first and defend your total (restrict the team batting second getting to the total, as follows:

Team A scores 250 (doesn't matter how many wickets lost) 

Team B scores 200 by the end of the innings OR losing all their wickets. 

Therefore Team A won by 50 runs. 

I get it now. I thought it went on how many wickets you had compared to the other team.

So say team A was 250 for 6 and team be reached the total with 3 wickets they won by 3 wickets because they won by the difference. Didn't realise it was how many you had left.

I know enough about cricket to follow 1 day but there are bits i don't get. More in test cricket though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
32 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I get it now. I thought it went on how many wickets you had compared to the other team.

So say team A was 250 for 6 and team be reached the total with 3 wickets they won by 3 wickets because they won by the difference. Didn't realise it was how many you had left.

I know enough about cricket to follow 1 day but there are bits i don't get. More in test cricket though. 

Happy to answer any further questions :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

England not making the next stage will not be good for the tournament. Just needed someone to support Stokes in this and the last match. Also, they have looked brittle in the face of pressure. 

Guess Pakistan will be supporting us, when we take on Bangladesh and EnglandxD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

That is shameful from England.

It's like since the Pakistan match and especially in the Sri Lanka/Aus matches they've lost their rhythm. Appear to be shot of confidence. Not to discredit the opponents but England appear to have suddenly changed?! 

Definitely makes the tournament more interesting! Bangladesh on the brink of top 4. Sri Lanka just a bit further away. Pakistan with an outside chance.

I'm hoping we beat West Indies anyway but to do that knowing we can still qualify should we lose against a resurgent (?) England would be comforting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wickets fell like dominoes once Starc took Stokes’ wicket. Good stuff, Australia get better every match; and if Smith can get over being a little bitch about being banned for a year, I’d wager number six is good as gold. Only India worry me at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stick With Azeem said:

Someone just told me New Zealand lost to us in 1992 when they were unbeaten till they faced us because they wanted to play the semi final in their home country. 

Cricket has always been a gamblers game. 

I think England did something similar in 1995, they made sure they finished in a position in their group so they could play Sri Lanka in the quarter finals. Problem is Sri Lanka with the bat twatted them badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
34 minutes ago, Stick With Azeem said:

We should have more centuries like these, now a days centuries in ODIs have lost the meaning of scoring a century 

Eh? How so? 

Babar did brilliantly today to steer Pakistan to win today but it's hardly a unique century or rare occurrence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

Eh? How so? 

Babar did brilliantly today to steer Pakistan to win today but it's hardly a unique century or rare occurrence. 

Most of the centuries in ODI cricket are like 140-130 scores in one sided games

Centuries like these and Braithwate are not that common in ODIs as before

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kinda bored with the 1992 jokes now. The only one I am finding funny is this from always witty Naila Inayat. 

 

Kudos to Sri Lanka for making this tournament exciting. They might not make it to the next stage but their victory over England has really brought this tournament to life. 

England must be absolutely worried now. Favourites for the tournament, but on a verge of an exit. It's not going to be easy for them against us or New Zealand. Funnily Bangladesh might have a chance considering we play four matches in ten days and might just rest players against them or Sri Lanka. 

If England fuck up then that Bangladesh vs Pakistan match is a virtual quarter final. 

Pakistan technically has the easiest fixtures, but they need England to screw things up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

football forum
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...