|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 3, 2015 15:42:47 GMT
A thumping win for Luke Wright and the Melbourne Stars v Melbourne Renegades today ( www.espncricinfo.com/big-bash-league-2014-15/engine/match/756763.html). Wright top-scored with 39, including 5 4s and a 6, as Stars reached 169. Then Renegades were bowled out for only 57 with Tom Cooper and Extras tying on 10 for top-score. Wright is comfortably heading the scoring for Stars this season with 130 runs at a strike-rate of 141.30 and has also held 4 catches. Another former English performer, Keven Pietersen, returned to the Stars and made 25 in more sedate fashion in this game. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jan 3, 2015 17:28:27 GMT
Delighted for 'Melbourne Stars' gaining their first win. A desperately needed victory after losing by just one run in their last match. This may be the team's turning point. Great to see Lukey doing well and making a mark on the tournament. www.melbournestars.com.au/team/team-stats |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 11:48:17 GMT
First ball duck to Brett Lee for Luke Wright today. But he then played his part (three runs from two balls) in a thrilling 'super over' victory for Melbourne Stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jan 5, 2015 12:05:54 GMT
bm, You got there just before me! What an amazing match (Melbourne Stars v Sydney Sixers) - quite incredible - which will only enhance the tournament and Franchise T20. Both teams scored 150 off their respective 20 overs, so a 'Super-Over' was set and MS easily won this by scoring 19 off 7 (!) balls thanks to two sixes by Faulkner off Brett Lee. SS never got close. Poor old Lukey got a golden but KP scored 54 off 43 balls which is another sign that his form is returning. Melbourne Stars were cantering to victory but after KP was out at 93-3, MS collapsed but then just managed to cling on to that tie and the following Super-Over. Michael Lumb smashed 80 for the Sydney Sixers but to no avail. It is encouraging to see that certain England batters are having a strong influence on this BBL. live.cricket.com.au/#/5026/17 |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 5, 2015 12:14:57 GMT
bm, You got there just before me! What an amazing match (Melbourne Stars v Sydney Sixers) - quite incredible - which will only enhance the tournament and Franchise
T20. Both teams scored 150 off their respective 20 overs, so a 'Super-Over' was set and MS easily won this by scoring 19 off 6 balls thanks to two sixes by Faulkner off Brett Lee. SS never got close. Poor old Lukey got a golden but KP scored 54 off 43 balls which is another sign that his form is returning. MS were cantering to victory but after KP was out at 93-3, MS collapsed but then just managed to cling on to that tie and the following Super-Over. Michael Lumb smashed 80 for the Sydney Sixers but to no avail. It is encouraging to see that certain England batters are having a strong influence on this BBL. live.cricket.com.au/#/5026/17Very true, s and f. For purists of cricket, of course, the whole concept of a superover is to deflate the tensions of the final over and ruin the drama of the game, which actually reached a perfect finish with that tied score. But this is not cricket, its Whackaball entertainment, and that demands the artificiality of the finish, however contrived. Good to see Luke Wright chosen for that extra over, and hilarious to see Pietersen's pattacake routine with White, who fortunately had the gumption to hold on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 12:33:40 GMT
I believe it was Allen Stanford who invented the super over?
Personally I quite like it. I don't see it as deflating the tension in the final over : you still go into that final ball with three results available. But if one of those three options comes to pass, we then get a nice little coda to the match.
Surely it would only deflate the tension if one side deliberately played for the tie in order to take into a super over, the way that in football sometimes you see a side at the end of a gruelling cup match looking to play out time with the scores level and take it to a penalty shoot-out, because they think that's their best chance of victory.
Super over is such a lottery it's hard to conceive of a cricket side thinking it had a better chance of winning the game that way than by going for it off the last ball...
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jan 5, 2015 12:37:38 GMT
I don't think we should apply purist cricket ideals to T20. I love the super over concept, 'cos I like being on the edge of my seat!
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 5, 2015 12:39:03 GMT
I believe it was Allen Stanford who invented the super over? Personally I quite like it. I don't see it as deflating the tension in the final over : you still go into that final ball with three results available. But if one of those three options comes to pass, we then get a nice little coda to the match. Surely it would only deflate the tension if one side deliberately played for the tie in order to take into a super over, the way that in football sometimes you see a side at the end of a gruelling cup match looking to play out time with the scores level and take it to a penalty shoot-out, because they think that's their best chance of victory. Super over is such a lottery it's hard to conceive of a cricket side thinking it had a better chance of winning the game that way than by going for it off the last ball... The critical word there is final, borderman. It's not final if there's a possibility of something to follow, hence it loses that tension. And its just possible that creating that chance will in time result in others gaming the system in the way you describe, just to get that one extra, "final" chance.....and then someone will extend the superover to a best of 3! Mind you, Pietersen is supposed to have asked "how many overs are there in a Superover" at the 20-over mark in this match, and was laughed at for being dumb. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jan 5, 2015 12:41:58 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 12:44:07 GMT
Still disagree about the diminution of the tension; if anything I think the tie-breaker element adds to it. But I love the KP joke; he probably didn't say it but it's humour lies in the knowledge that it isn't too hard to imagine that he might have!
on edit: slightly off-topic but the KP joke reminds of when the Labour Party was setting up the electoral college for the election of the party leader and arguing over the per centage breakdown of the votes between MPs, constituency parties and the trade unions. In the end it was 30:30:40 with the largest block going to the unions. But I vividly recall Terry Duffy, gen sec of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers, saying that he supported 50:50:50...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 13:01:50 GMT
If the scores are level but the team batting second is bowled out, does it still go to a super over?
I'm trying to imagine the circumstances in which a side might settle for a tie to get another chance in the super over. Last ball of the 20th over and the scores are level with the last pair at the wicket. The batsman swishes and misses and the ball goes through to the keeper. Do you risk the winning run and an almost certain run-out or stand your ground and end level with 9 wkts down and come back out for the super over?
It only works if the final wkt falling on the final ball with scores level means that the side that has been bowled out loses. If it goes to a super over anyway, you would obviously go for the winning run even if the ball is in the keeper's gloves. I'm not sure of the rules on this. Does anyone know?
One for our companion at Horsham last summer, Neil The Umpire. Although even he might not know , because I don't think they have super overs in the Birmingham League !
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jan 5, 2015 13:50:32 GMT
Interesting how this 'Super-Over' match and the overall success of the BBL is having a marked effect on Twittersphere. It's creating a marked polarisation between those wanting a UK Franchise tournament and those who don't. One interesting point: I read a 'Cricinfo' article which states that the ECB introduced the 'Super-Over' for last season's county T20 competition 'after lengthy consultation'. Was it used in any match? I can't remember. www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2014/content/story/688259.htmlPS: Done some research and remembered that Glamorgan v Kent match on June 13th ended in a tie (177 runs each). Was there a 'Super-Over' or did the ECB rescind the idea before the season began? Confused from Hove. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 5, 2015 14:12:22 GMT
Interesting how this 'Super-Over' match and the overall success of the BBL is having a marked effect on Twittersphere. It's creating a battleground line between those wanting a UK Franchise tournament and those who don't. One interesting point: I read a 'Cricinfo' article which states that the ECB introduced the 'Super-Over' for last season's county T20 competition 'after lengthy consultation'. Was it used in any match? I can't remember. www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2014/content/story/688259.htmlPS: Done some research and remembered that Glamorgan v Kent match on June 13th ended in a tie (177 runs each). Was there a 'Super-Over' or did the ECB rescind the idea before the season began? Confused from Hove. Not half as confused as confused in Kent ( wearekent.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3318&start=10) seem to have been in discussion after the match. As far as I can see, the conclusion was the Cricinfo had jumped the gun and that no such rule was incorporated intoi the 2014 T20 Playing regulations. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jan 5, 2015 14:29:40 GMT
hhs, Many thanks for that. As you suggest, 'Cricinfo' got their info wrong and no such rule was implemented. Which is interesting as, perhaps, the ECB view the county T20 more as a league than an actual tournament? Which is an irony as the Big Bash states in the title it is a league! Even more confusing. PS: How about this for an assist and saving KPs blushes, otherwise known as the pattacake. https://vine.co/v/OdFBU9iZz9T/embed |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 17:05:19 GMT
Obviously there has to be some form of eleiminartor in knock-out games and so there is provision for the super-over in the English T20 semi-finals and final, but it doesn't apply in the group stages, where it is 1 pt apiece. That may have been what got poor old cricinfo all confused.
There was one year - think it was the season when Leics defied the odds and won the T20, so it would have been 2011 - when astonishingly both semis-finals went to a super-over at Edgbaston on the same day.
But I don't believe it has happened in English cricket since.
|
|
