• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

The Hundred 2023

mikemanc said:
But neither was Carse. As far as I can tell the only difference is Carse took off standing on the rope, Brook took off over the boundary
Click to expand...
They said at first it’s coz he’s potentially propelled himself off the boundary but then said it’s coz he touched the boundary last which aye doesn’t make sense because you see loads of these catches where they’re touching the boundary/over the boundary last
 

Ghfd said:
But he was not in contact with the ball , when he was over the boundary

he re established in bounds to take it again but then was off balance and he threw it to his mate

ive forgotten the Carse one
Click to expand...
Unless I'm misremembering which is very possible, Carse jumped from the rope and pushed the ball back into play whilst not touching the rope. Because he took off from 'over' the boundary it was give as 6 which I get.

Brook caught it inside, threw it up and stepped over. Then he jumped from over the boundary to palm the ball back into play whilst not touching the ground. So if you throw the ball out of play then jump from our of bounds that's ok? But if your first contact is from outside the boundary it isn't?
 
mikemanc said:
Unless I'm misremembering which is very possible, Carse jumped from the rope and pushed the ball back into play whilst not touching the rope. Because he took off from 'over' the boundary it was give as 6 which I get.

Brook caught it inside, threw it up and stepped over. Then he jumped from over the boundary to palm the ball back into play whilst not touching the ground. So if you throw the ball out of play then jump from our of bounds that's ok? But if your first contact is from outside the boundary it isn't?
Click to expand...
It must be, as they did check it and got the ok

in the end the welsh won anyway
 
mikemanc said:
Unless I'm misremembering which is very possible, Carse jumped from the rope and pushed the ball back into play whilst not touching the rope. Because he took off from 'over' the boundary it was give as 6 which I get.

Brook caught it inside, threw it up and stepped over. Then he jumped from over the boundary to palm the ball back into play whilst not touching the ground. So if you throw the ball out of play then jump from our of bounds that's ok? But if your first contact is from outside the boundary it isn't?
Click to expand...
From what I can tell it’s because Carse literally used the boundary toblerones to launch himself higher, I’m not sure the commentators got it right
 
mikemanc said:
Unless I'm misremembering which is very possible, Carse jumped from the rope and pushed the ball back into play whilst not touching the rope. Because he took off from 'over' the boundary it was give as 6 which I get.

Brook caught it inside, threw it up and stepped over. Then he jumped from over the boundary to palm the ball back into play whilst not touching the ground. So if you throw the ball out of play then jump from our of bounds that's ok? But if your first contact is from outside the boundary it isn't?
Click to expand...
Consequence of the following.

19.5.2 A fielder who is not in contact with the ground is considered to be grounded beyond the boundary if his/her final contact with the ground, before his/her first contact with the ball after it has been delivered by the bowler, was not entirely within the boundary.

So Carse was deemed “grounded beyond the boundary” on his first contact with the ball, so six. Brook wasn’t on his first contact. Going out of play after the first contact is OK unless you are actually grounded and touching the ball at the same time. Curious law. But correctly applied. Good umpiring.
 
Last edited:
Fleagle said:
Consequence of the following.

19.5.2 A fielder who is not in contact with the ground is considered to be grounded beyond the boundary if his/her final contact with the ground, before his/her first contact with the ball after it has been delivered by the bowler, was not entirely within the boundary.

So Carse was deemed “grounded beyond the boundary” on his first contact with the ball, so six. Brook wasn’t on his first contact. Going out of play after the first contact is OK unless you are actually grounded and touching the ball at the same time. Curious law. But correctly applied. Good umpiring.
Click to expand...
Agree they got it right by that law, thanks. But the law is a nonsense IMO, it doesn't feel right to be able to touch the ball from a position beyond the boundary.
 
Wednesday 23rd August

Women 3pm
Manchester Originals v Southern Brave
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester

Men 6.30pm
Manchester Originals v Southern Brave
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester
 
Hettonlass said:
Wednesday 23rd August

Women 3pm
Manchester Originals v Southern Brave
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester

Men 6.30pm
Manchester Originals v Southern Brave
Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester
Click to expand...
Big one for the Brave, Manchester will want to ensure they play their semi at home also. Could be a high scoring game this
 
Sillypoint said:
read a stat that the money spent on players who havnt featured at all has cost more than 2 of the womens teams entire budgets, i dont think that includes the injury call ups like Geraham Clark either
Click to expand...
It's ridiculous mind. Such a waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere within the game. It's genuinely worrying
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top