The Hundred Final.

[bednobs]

I know there's a lot of cricket snobs here but hadn't the hundred been great?
Pretty disappointed at sb in the womens final earlier. Come on sb men

[-SharonA-]

Looks like they're going the same way!!

[LeonBlank1995]

I honestly think the god awful half time music is for people to get a cup of tea. Truly revolting.

But yes, it's no Ashes but enjoyable.

[bednobs]

are you sure sharon :)

[-SharonA-]

Wellll. We'll see. :-)

[Tilly2]

It's all a bit garish isn't it?
Exciting to watch though. :-)

[LeonBlank1995]

How well would Geoff Boycott and Chris Tavare do in The Hundred? Do you think either ever played a reverse sweep in their careers, even in the nets?

[bednobs]

whoever would have thought it :)

[douglas9401]

Well I for one was outraged after lipreading the comments of the burd who dropped an easy catch. :-)

[bednobs]

lol the blonde pony tail person?

[bednobs]

well done sb!

[DTCwordfan]

it's been very enjoyable, but a little too commercial at times....it will survive though. You have a win, bednobs! Brilliant runout of Liam Livingstone, perhaps the moment that turned the game.

[bednobs]

let's hope itll be back next year

[-SharonA-]

I wanna go next year!!

[THECORBYLOON]

What's the rationale for a free shot only for no-balls (excluding ones for height and fielding infractions) but not for wides?

[jno]

I don't know but I believe it's already the case in 20-20 matches and perhaps 50-over matches. I suspect the difference is that a wide is careless, but giving away a run and having to bowl again is sufficient punishment; a no-ball (only the front-foot kind) is downright illegal and involves the bowler trying to bowl a shorter and therefore quicker delivery than is allowed.

Of course you might argue that a non-striking batter starting to run before the ball is delivered is equally illegal, but batters and rulemakers seem to disagree.

[douglas9401]

Hmmm, I have much to learn about rounders in pyjamas.

[DTCwordfan]

At least none of them are putting kits on - yet!! Next year, the 'Sturgeon Slayers' perhaps - from Edinburgh....Maybe we can get Minty and Albs to play!!

[douglas9401]

Aye, at least the typo didn't crash the gag, that would have been horrible. x

[THECORBYLOON]

"Of course you might argue that a non-striking batter starting to run before the ball is delivered is equally illegal,"

The difference is the bowler can adjust the manner of delivery and if the batsman misses, he can be stumped.

A bowler is also careless when overstepping by a fraction of an inch and can cause injury with a bouncer.

The wides and bouncers reduce the chances of hitting the ball yet an error of a fraction of an inch could result in an additional eight runs.

[New Judge]

//Of course you might argue that a non-striking batter starting to run before the ball is delivered is equally illegal,...//

Why would you argue? It's not illegal but the non-striker is liable to be run out. Law 41.16.1:

"If the non-striker is out of his/her ground at any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be Run out."

But that, of course, applies to cricket. I don't know whether the same applies to the game that was played this afternoon.