*Official* England Tour of Sri Lanka 2018

[vcs]

No idea.
Are there situations imaginable where one can benefit from (deliberately) not grounding ones bat?

Apparently Silva half-ran, while expecting the ball to go for four, and then hurried back to his end when someone pulled it in at the boundary. Didn't ground his bat at the non-strikers end. At least he avoided an Azhar Ali situation.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

In deep muck here. Well battled SL.

 

[Groundking]

Yup, need one of the top order to contribute massively so. Time for Root to finally step up to thep late and stop ****ing about?

 

[wpdavid]

In deep muck here. Well battled SL.

Yeah, I don't fancy this at all. I'd be tempted to send Jimmy in to face as much of the last over as he lasts.
And then go down with a minor niggle overnight so the regular openers can start from scratch tomorrow.

EDIT
Or Leach, as Root sees fit.

But SL will be delighted with their day's work.

 

[vcs]

Haha Jennings getting a nightwatchman.

Weak.

 

[Daemon]

Haha Jennings getting a nightwatchman.

Weak.

Not really, all this means is that Curran will be coming in at 9 to dash SL's hopes and dreams

 

[OverratedSanity]

Haven't been able to watch much of this but looks like it's been a fascinating test match. Shame for sl that it'll just end with Curran being Curran again in the 2nd innings.

 

[91Jmay]

Bad ending to innings, could be a match winning lead. Need a top order ton.

 

[StephenZA]

Pleasantly surprised at the scorecard. Well done SL.

 

[Stapel]

Apparently Silva half-ran, while expecting the ball to go for four, and then hurried back to his end when someone pulled it in at the boundary. Didn't ground his bat at the non-strikers end. At least he avoided an Azhar Ali situation.

As I see it, he didn't deliberately fail to ground his bat to gain an advantage. Very poor umpiring if you ask me. Anyway, umpires make silly mistakes too. Best to just forget it, I think. This match is wonderfully set up!

 

[Burgey]

As I see it, he didn't deliberately fail to ground his bat to gain an advantage. Very poor umpiring if you ask me. Anyway, umpires make silly mistakes too. Best to just forget it, I think. This match is wonderfully set up!

Haven’t seen the incident, but if he didn’t ground his bat so he could hurry back and not be run out, that’s a pretty big advantage isn’t it?

 

[Burgey]

Surprising SL haven't yet gone off in protest at the penalty runs.

Underrated post.

 

[Bijed]

Yeah, I don't fancy this at all. I'd be tempted to send Jimmy in to face as much of the last over as he lasts.
And then go down with a minor niggle overnight so the regular openers can start from scratch tomorrow.

EDIT
Or Leach, as Root sees fit.

But SL will be delighted with their day's work.

I can't think of the last time someone nightwatchmanned for an opener. I know Morne Morkel opened in place of Graeme Smith in that Sydney test where Smith broke his hand and came out to bat at the end, but SA faced 26 overs before the end of that day so he wasn't really a nightwatchman, more genuinely promoted (I assume based on his 40 in the first innings, though even without the hindsight of his 2-ball duck in the second, it seems an odd choice).

Similarly, I think Philander opened at one point when SA last toured India, but again I think it was an experiment to protect van Zyl, rather than him as nightwatchman.

 

[cnerd123]

No idea.
Are there situations imaginable where one can benefit from (deliberately) not grounding ones bat?

Last ball of the over
Batsman wants to keep strike
Batsman also wants to score a run
Run the first run short, complete the second run fairly
Therefore you've scored 1 run, but also kept the strike
This is unfair play and gets penalised under the laws.

TBF in this condition it just sounds like they got penalised for carelessness:
Sri Lanka hit with five penalty runs after one-short incident - ESPNcricinfo

Then again it is International cricket, and harsher interpretations of the Laws are favoured by the ICC in order to remove all grey areas.

SL went from 146/5 to 336 a/o - gotta love it when a team can give this England side a taste of their own medicine.

 

[Stapel]

Haven’t seen the incident, but if he didn’t ground his bat so he could hurry back and not be run out, that’s a pretty big advantage isn’t it?

A) That was not the situation. He was just outside the batting crease (and possibly thought he had grounded his bat?), and could have easily grounded it, before taking the second run. They simply jogged back. No hurry at all.
B) The advantage is not about avoiding a run-out, but keeping the proper batsman at strike, rather than the tail-ender. I don't think that was the case.

 

[Bijed]

Last ball of the over
Batsman wants to keep strike
Batsman also wants to score a run
Run the first run short, complete the second run fairly
Therefore you've scored 1 run, but also kept the strike
This is unfair play and gets penalised under the laws.

I'm sure you're correct per the laws, but why isn't it considered that you've scored no runs here, as if you didn't run all the way between each crease for the first one, you can't have done so for the second? Is it just because you'll have certainly done one run's worth of running?

 

[cnerd123]

I'm sure you're correct per the laws, but why isn't it considered that you've scored no runs here, as if you didn't run all the way between each crease for the first one, you can't have done so for the second? Is it just because you'll have certainly done one run's worth of running?

Im not sure but I think it's because 1 run = when both batsmen ground the bat behind the crease at the other end. Where they start from is irrelevant - that's why backing up as a bowler runs in became a big deal.

So if the batsmen don't ground their bat in properly on the first run, they didnt get that run, but if they do it correctly on the second run, that run counts, even tho they ran a shorter distance for it.

But really theyve run a longer distance if you think about it - slightly more than halfway on the first run to cross, and the slightly more than halfway back to their end to complete the second. So more than 1 runs length run to score 1 run, and a possible penalty after for deliberate short run. So it's doesn't make sense to do that anyways.

 

[Bijed]

Im not sure but I think it's because 1 run = when both batsmen ground the bat behind the crease at the other end. Where they start from is irrelevant - that's why backing up as a bowler runs in became a big deal.

So if the batsmen don't ground their bat in properly on the first run, they didnt get that run, but if they do it correctly on the second run, that run counts, even tho they ran a shorter distance for it.

Good point - I guess the start point has to be irrelevant otherwise batsmen taking guard outside of their crease would have to ground their bat before setting off for a run.

Another question: How close do you have be to correctly completing the run before taking the second for it to count as one short, rather than just turning back? Might sound a silly question, but I'm guessing that if you ran like 18 yards down the pitch, plonked your bat down, then ran back to where you started you wouldn't get any runs? Just wondering where the cut-off is

 

[cnerd123]

A short run is a short run even if you're off by a millimetre (provided the umpire spots it). You have to ground your bat beyond the crease.

Deliberate short run is entirely based on the umpire's judgement of your intent. However, if the umpiring in this incident is correct, I think at International Level any time you're short by a substantial margin or have made no attempt to make your ground you will be considered deliberate. Still an element of umpire discretion tho.

 

[marc71178]

Underrated post.

I saw it and didn't register who wrote it, just assumed it was you.