• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Bangladesh in the West Indies 2018

SillyCowCorner1

Request Your Custom Title Now!
BD had to make 8 off 6 balls with 6 wickets in hand, and still managed to effed up.

Now they want the runs that was not given to them because the ball died prior to the boundary rope. The umpire made his decision prior to the ball reaching the ropes. The fielder didn't bother giving chase...he was celebrating the wicket.

The rule is fair. Umpire's call is final.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
The bowler has done nothing wrong, but imo he should rebowl the ball because his team is benefitting from an automatic dot ball from a proven umpire error.
If batsman hits a six in the re-bowl how is that fair? The same argument can be used to say that the six would not be scored (in the same ball) if umpire didn't eff up.
 

Mr Miyagi

Banned
If batsman hits a six in the re-bowl how is that fair? The same argument can be used to say that the six would not be scored (in the same ball) if umpire didn't eff up.
The umpire stuff up is the cause of the issue. But a team is meant to have legitimate 300 balls in odi and 120 balls in t20i to score from.

While the bowler has done nothing wrong, at present they get a benefit of a free dot ball at the batting teams expense for the umpire's stuff up.

By simply rebowling it, the balance is restored be they get a wicket, or hit for 6.
 
Last edited:

Mr Miyagi

Banned
What if there was no chance of scoring a run even if it were not a dead ball?
You mean like edges through to the keeper? There's a chance off seamers for a run there (often suicidal though), not so much off the spinners.

Any modification could easily take into account whether the wicket keeper has appealed for a catch and not demand a ball rebowled.
 
Last edited:

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If you remove leg byes you incentivise negative bowling.
Not really. It's not like leg byes are that common, and you'd still give away plenty of runs.

Maybe if you removed leg byes and removed the limitation of fielders behind square
 

Top