Another cricket puzzle
Daniel Ashworth
Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
the margin would be expressed in runs?
Daniel
James Smith
SPOILER
If the team playing third declared after a number of wickets, and the
other team won won after losing the same number of wickets by hitting
a four or a six, then they would have won by say three runs.
Jim
Don Del Grande
>Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
>then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
>eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
>then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
>the margin would be expressed in runs?
Here's a possibility:
Scores level, and the side batting fourth has lost nine wickets (but they
only need one to win). The batsmen score a run, but one of them is run out
trying for a second. (The laws are not particularly clear as to whether or
not an umpire can call "Time" once the first run is scored.) In this case,
the batting side wins by "one run"...or "zero wickets".
---------------------------------------------
Don Del Grande, del_g...@netvista.net
Somebody should start including how much time (or overs, if in the last 20)
was remaining if the side batting fourth wins a match
Jeremy Piets
> Here's one more cricket puzzle to try:
>
> Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
> then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
> eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
> then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
> the margin would be expressed in runs?
>
> Daniel
Does this question allow for situations where a team would bat fourth if
required, but does not (that is, their win is expressed as winning by "an
innings and X runs")?
Didn't think so.
Jeremy.
--
Fall far and fall well
(Delete NOSPAM to reply)
Daniel Ashworth
No- I intended to exclude that- the team actually has to bat fourth.
Daniel
Daniel Ashworth
Grande) wrote:
>dash...@zipworld.com.au (Daniel Ashworth) wrote:
>
>>Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
>>then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
>>eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
>>then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
>>the margin would be expressed in runs?
>
>Here's a possibility:
>Scores level, and the side batting fourth has lost nine wickets (but they
>only need one to win). The batsmen score a run, but one of them is run out
>trying for a second. (The laws are not particularly clear as to whether or
>not an umpire can call "Time" once the first run is scored.) In this case,
>the batting side wins by "one run"...or "zero wickets".
My understanding is that the batsman shouldn't be given out under
these circumstances, but I guess that if both batsmen and umpire are
unsure of the score it is possible. I had another solution in mind
that is a little less controversial.
>
>---------------------------------------------
>Don Del Grande, del_g...@netvista.net
>Somebody should start including how much time (or overs, if in the last 20)
>was remaining if the side batting fourth wins a match
I agree in the case of limited-overs matches. It frequently then makes
more sense to say a team won with 4 balls to spare than to say they
won by 5 wickets. I wouldn't however express the result of a test
match in that way however since the team batting last hasn't beaten
the other team by say a session- it's the draw that they've beaten by
a session.
Daniel
A. Mcgee
complete the first run, the game is over, and the side
batting second has won by one wicket. Nothing happening
thereafter is at all relevant.
In article <37d81759...@news.supernews.com>,
del_g...@netvista.net (Don Del Grande) wrote:
>dash...@zipworld.com.au (Daniel Ashworth) wrote:
>
>>Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a
match wins,
>>then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of
wickets,
>>eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7
wickets down
>>then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a
circumstance where
>>the margin would be expressed in runs?
>
>Here's a possibility:
>Scores level, and the side batting fourth has lost nine
wickets (but they
>only need one to win). The batsmen score a run, but one of
them is run out
>trying for a second. (The laws are not particularly clear
as to whether or
>not an umpire can call "Time" once the first run is scored.)
In this case,
>the batting side wins by "one run"...or "zero wickets".
>
A. Mcgee
Team A (bat first) 200 & 150-7dec
Team B (bat second)175 & 179-7
However the total of 179-7 is reached, this is a win for Team
B by three wickets. The second innings of Team A is over,
whether by being bowled out or by declaration.
In article <37D6599A...@cc.newcastle.edu.au>,
James Smith <en...@cc.newcastle.edu.au> wrote:
>Daniel Ashworth wrote:
>>
>> Here's one more cricket puzzle to try:
>>
>> Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a
match wins,
>> then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number
of wickets,
>> eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7
wickets down
>> then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a
circumstance where
>> the margin would be expressed in runs?
>
Daniel Ashworth
Ashworth) wrote:
>Here's one more cricket puzzle to try:
>
>Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
>then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
>eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
>then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
>the margin would be expressed in runs?
>
>Daniel
OK- A week has passed without my intended solution appearing, so here
it is:
SPOILER
Scores are level with the team batting fourth nine wickets down. The
batsman is stumped off a wide- this means the team batting last is
all-out, but because of the run for the wide passes the winning
target. The margin in this case would be 1 run (alternatively you
could state this as 0 wickets- but surely a win by a zero margin is a
tie)
Daniel
Patrick Hamlyn
>Here's one more cricket puzzle to try:
>
>Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
>then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
>eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
>then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
>the margin would be expressed in runs?
Well sure, the team batting fourth *loses*
OK it's not what you wanted, but you didn't rule it out :>
In2Home User
Once the wide is called, the match is over - the stumping is irrelevant.
Team B win by 1 wicket.
Andrew McGee
Daniel Ashworth <dash...@zipworld.com.au> wrote in message
news:37df7960...@news.zipworld.com.au...
> On Wed, 08 Sep 1999 12:06:31 GMT, dash...@zipworld.com.au (Daniel
> Ashworth) wrote:
>
> >Here's one more cricket puzzle to try:
> >
> >Under normal circumstances if the team batting fourth in a match wins,
> >then the margin of victory will be expressed as a number of wickets,
> >eg. if they pass the required score for victory with 7 wickets down
> >then they win by 3 wickets. Can you come up with a circumstance where
> >the margin would be expressed in runs?
> >
Daniel Ashworth
<us...@freethought.in2home.co.uk> wrote:
>Nice try, but I have to debate this one as well.
>
>Once the wide is called, the match is over - the stumping is irrelevant.
>Team B win by 1 wicket.
>
>Andrew McGee
Generally the umpire at the bowler's end will in fact wait for the
result of a stumping decision before signalling a wide. I've seen this
taken to the extreme of waiting for a stumping decision from the third
umpire before signalling. This doesn't appear to be covered explicitly
in the laws though. Subsequent to the stumping decision the wide will
definitely count though- that is explicitly covered:
Law 25: Wide Ball
8. Batsman Given Out Off a Wide
Should a Batsman be given out off a wide, the penalty for bowling it
shall stand unless runs are otherwise made.
I've got to say though that in circumstances as tight as these the
batsman would hardly care if he were given out, as long as his team
won the match :-)
Daniel