• 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.

WC Tools!!

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
So did I.
Not if you get bowled out. Otherwise you get this potential scenario...

Team A 250/9 (50 overs) = RR 5.00
Team B 240ao (40 overs) = RR 6.00... RR50 4.80

Taking it off "overs faced" would give the losers a better NRR. Which is just wrong.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
^^^^And to expand on that...
I always thought the NRR went by the number of overs they actually played and not the full 50.
It depends whether you're bowled-out or not.

If you reach your target off 42 overs it's not right that you get penalised, but if you get bowled-out in said time it is.
 

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
And I have just realised that the points system is wrong!
Its 2 for a WIN, 1 for a TIE
Not 4 for a WIN, 2 for a TIE

But I spose it works out to be the same so....
 

Clown Roy

Banned
WC Tools!!

Ed Joyce.

Proper teams = Duck's
Minows = 50's

Yet has unbelievably been given ricockulous recent plaudits.

The guy just look's like he couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
As I say - think the big pic really rams the point home, y'know.

Sorry if it irritates you a bit, tho. :p

I say blame Martyn.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Aww, poor old 16toS. :laugh:

I'll ask Martyn, see what he can do. :) I don't have a photobucket site, so I just have to make do with what there is. If someone else can post that pic somewhere, a bit bigger than the original, but perhaps a little smaller than the one we've used to date, be great. :thumbup1:
 

Top