At the point of release? The ball still had a long way to travelJust said on another thread. They must have crossed. Stokes isn't that quick. He couldn't have been where he was otherwise.
Imo as the camera of course didnt show it, i think as it was a blur
World Cup Thread
- Thread starter brandon
- Start date
- Status
Chappers
Striker
True, but still looks to me that he might have just been on his way back. Just watched it several times and you cant tell from what is shown.
You see him throw it and then the camera pans out and stokes is on his way back.
SAFC 2012
Striker
Obviously buzzing we won but imagine wed lost in them circumstancesSome very bitter comments on twatter. "False win", "should be shared" etc etc ffs they are the rules, they are there in Black and white before we start!!
Chappers
Striker
Seen it from a different camera and for me he has turned and in on his way back when its thrown. Not when its picked up but as you say if the rule is when released then its 6 runs
Silly Point
Winger
England cap sat proudly on my desk this morning
dafunk2
Winger
Even my lass (no) who can't stand cricket (but watched the last hour) was still talking about it this morning when we got up. Absolutely incredible sporting event that will live long in the memory!
Listening to the Sky Cricket podcast. How hammered is Graham Gooch?
Just been told on SMB that England should drop Root (or "stop persisting with him") based solely on his innings yesterday
Simon Taufel....can go fuck himselfSimon Taufel has said England shouldnt have been awarded 6 and only 5
Just been told on SMB that England should drop Root (or "stop persisting with him") based solely on his innings yesterday
Last edited:
mackembhoy
Striker
The best thing about this win is all the Indian fan tears moaning about rules.
S
stephen cartwright
Guest
Thinking back we needed 15 off the last over in the fifty. Stokes didn’t score in the first two balls in that over
He got 14 off 4
I’m still drained after it all
He got 14 off 4
I’m still drained after it all
TravellingMackem
Winger
The rule states that at the moment of the event, the runs already ran count, plus the four. The problem is what is the event - the throw or hitting the bat? We had scored 1 run at the throw but 2 runs when it hit the bat. There doesn’t appear to be in the ICC code of conduct any definition as to what the event actually is. Therefore the 5 or 6 debate is ambiguous
EXACTLY
The laws refer to the throw or act. 1) The throw clearly took place before the players had crossed - which would mean 5 runs. However, the act (ball hitting Stokes bat) took place after the throw and hence becomes the key in determining whether it's 1 or 2 runs (plus the overthrows). Awful Taufel should be aware of it, I don't know why he's referring to the throw - it was superseded by the act. Dribbling Aussie Thundercunt.
TravellingMackem
Winger
It really doesn’t define what the “act” consists of though. Is hitting the bat included within this? Or is it reserved for hitting the fielder or stumps or other eventualities like kicking the ball and things?
It’s such a loose definition, I’m sure somewhere there is some clarification but having googled the laws of the game I can’t find it anywhere
Well, if the batsmen haven't crossed by the time the ball hits the stumps then we don't need to worry about overthrows. My view is that it's specifically added to the law to accommodate any event that takes place after the throw.
JohnSmithUK
Winger
Players look a little rough at the Oval.
It's clear that my post above is drivel. So I take back what I said about Taufel... he's a whinging Dribble Aussie Thundercunt
Law 19.8, pertaining to "Overthrow or wilful act of fielder", says: "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act."Law 19.8, pertaining to "Overthrow or wilful act of fielder", says: "If the boundary results from an overthrow or from the wilful act of a fielder, the runs scored shall be any runs for penalties awarded to either side, and the allowance for the boundary, and the runs completed by the batsmen, together with the run in progress if they had already crossed at the instant of the throw or act."
The version of the law that I'd read on newspaper site somewhere didn't mention the wilful act of the fielder. Hence I was assuming that the act was simply anything that took place after the throw. It's clearly not.
Any who gives a fuck. We won
- Status
