BBC BLOGS - Test Match Special
« Previous | Main | Next »

Ask Bearders #170

Post categories:

Bill Frindall | 17:24 UK time, Tuesday, 13 May 2008

Welcome to Ask Bearders, where Test Match Special statistician Bill "The Bearded Wonder" Frindall answers your questions on all things cricket.

Below are Bill's responses to some of your questions posed at the end of his last column and if you have a question for Bill, leave it at the end of this blog entry. Please do include your country of residence - Bill loves to hear where all his correspondents are posting from.

Bill isn't able to answer all of your questions, however. BBC Sport staff will choose a selection of them and send them to Bearders for him to answer.

Q. It was the first game of the new season at my local club last weekend, and I took an unusual catch. The batsman crashed a long-hop into short leg's head; fortunately the fielder was wearing a helmet, and it looped off his helmet to me at square leg. The ball had not been grounded so the wicket counted, but our opposition were grumbling that the ball was dead and the wicket should not be given. Who was right? Tom

Bearders' Answer: The opposition was dead right! If the ball is deflected off a helmet worn by a fielder, it remains in play. However, Law 32, note 3 (e), states that the striker cannot be caught out from the delivery.

Q. Following Marcus Trescothick's recent retirement from Test and limited-overs international cricket, I wonder if he was he England's best batsman of the modern era. Who has scored the most runs for England in both formats since the start of the year 2000? J. Entwistle (Sheffield)

Bearders' Answer: Yes, 'Tres' is substantially England's highest scoring batsman since the start of the current century, being the leading scorer by a distance in both formats.
In Test matches, Trescothick scored 5,825 runs, avge 43.80, with 14 hundreds and 19 fifties in 76 Tests. The only other England player to score 3,500 runs in that period (prior to the start of England's home series against New Zealand) is Michael Vaughan with 5,391 runs.
In limited-overs internationals, he scored 4,335 runs, avge 37.37, with 12 hundreds and 21 fifties in 123 games. Paul Collingwood (3,526 runs) is the only other England batsman to exceed 3,500.

Q. I was playing in a recent amateur league match in Edinburgh when an unusual situation arose. Very strong winds meant that the bails kept on being blown off. Having no heavy bails, a decision was made to play on without bails at all. The opposition ninth batsman was subsequently given out when the ball looped up off his pad and trickled on to the stumps at a speed almost certainly too gentle to have dislodge the bails. Was this decision correct? Also what would happen in first-class or Test cricket were the use of bails impossible? Would play stop? John Logan (Edinburgh)

Bearders' Answer: Law 8 (note 5), which applies to all levels of cricket, allows the umpires to dispense with bails if heavier (lignum vitae) ones are unavailable. They must be dispensed with at BOTH ends and replaced as soon as conditions permit. This has occurred in first-class and Test cricket but not often because umpires usually carry a set of heavy bails.
In your match the decision was correct because in those circumstances (Law 28, note 4) the wicket is deemed to have been 'put down' if the umpire concerned is satisfied that that the wicket has been struck by the ball. Its velocity is irrelevant.

Q. I am interested in the phenomenon of bowlers running out the non-striker while he's backing up. I think it is called "Mankading". How many times has this happened in Test cricket? Does the ball count as having been bowled? Is there some reason that this practice is considered poor form? Larry (Leeds)

Bearders' Answer: India's outstanding all-rounder, 'Vinoo' Mankad, was the first of four bowlers to run out a non-striking batsman for backing up before he had bowled the ball in Test cricket. His victim at Sydney in 1947-48 was Australia's Bill Brown and Mankad had successfully rehearsed this unusual dismissal against the same batsman at the same venue when the tourists played an Australian XI there a month earlier. Mankad had also warned Brown when he had backed up in their next match against Queensland.
The subsequent three Test match instances involved Ian Redpath (Australia) by Charlie Griffith (West Indies) at Adelaide in 1968-69, Derek Randall (England) by Ewen Chatfield (New Zealand) at Christchurch in 1978-79, and Sikander Bakht (Pakistan) by Alan Hurst (Australia) at Perth in 1978-79.
The ball doesn't count because it hasn't been bowled! It's only bad form if the bowler hasn't previously warned the batsman - who is stealing a run. Law 42, note 15, now permits the bowler to attempt to run out the non-striker only before entering his delivery stride.

Q. I believe there are a number of instances in Test cricket where all 11 batsmen have scored double figures. Could you please tell me what the most runs scored is by the batsman with the lowest score within the team? John B (High Wycombe)

Bearders' Answer: There have been 11 instances of all 11 scoring at least 10 in a Test innings. The highest score by the lowest contributor to such an innings is 12 by R.G.Nadkarni for India (359) v New Zealand at Dunedin in 1967-68.

Q. Did Don Bradman ever bowl in first-class or Test cricket and, if so, what are his stats? Also, what was his catching record? Clive (London)

Bearders' Answer: The Don bowled 2,114 balls (leg-breaks) in first-class cricket, 160 of them in Test matches. In all first-class matches he took 36 wickets at 37.97 runs apiece with a best of 3-35 for the 1930 Australians against Cambridge University at Fenner's. His two Test wickets (best analysis 1-8) were West Indies wicket-keeper Ivan Barrow at Adelaide in 1930-31 and the prime scalp of Wally Hammond (bowled for 85), also at Adelaide, on the "Bodyline" tour of 1932-33.
Bradman held 131 catches in his 234 first-class matches, 32 of them in 52 Tests. He also made a stumping off the leg-breaks and googlies of Frank Ward when deputising as wicket-keeper for South Australia against New South Wales at Sydney in 1937-38.

Q. What is the highest Test innings by a player who did not hit a boundary? Has there ever been a Test hundred without fours or sixes? Sam Plackman

Bearders' Answer: Geoffrey Boycott's 77 for England v Australia at Perth in 1978-79 is the highest score in Test cricket without a boundary. He batted 454 minutes and faced 337 balls. His only four included two overthrows. Lindsay Hassett, TMS summariser and former captain of Australia, described this marathon as 'an exceptional innings by someone who could not find the middle of his bat'.

Q. Which batsman holds the record for the most innings scores in the 90s in Tests or limited-overs internationals? Jai

Bearders' Answer: Steve Waugh (Australia) and Rahul Dravid (India) head the leaderboard for one of the least coveted records in Test cricket having each failed to escape from the nineties on 10 occasions.
In the short (50/55-overs) format, the list is headed by India's Sachin Tendulkar with 17 nineties from 407 innings, 190 more than anyone else. Next on the list are three batsmen with nine nineties. Only three batsmen have been stranded in the nineties in international Twenty20 games: Damien Martyn and Ricky Ponting (Australia), and Herschelle Gibbs (South Africa).

Q. Who is the youngest person to have played first-class cricket in England? Dan (Southampton)

Bearders' Answer: Charles Robertson Young was 15 years 131 days old when he played for Hampshire against Kent at Gravesend on 13 June 1867. Born in Indiaat Dharwar near Bombay, the son of an assistant superintendent revenue surveyor for Southern Marathee County, his date of birth has been confirmed as 2 February 1852 at the India Office.

Q. What is the lowest total that has been successfully defended in a completed limited-overs game (excluding any that were shortened by the Duckworth/Lewis Method)? Matt

Bearders' Answer: The lowest total to win batting first in English domestic limited-overs matches is 98 by Worcestershire against Durham (82) in a 60-overs Gillette Cup match at Ropery Lane, Chester-le-Street on 4 May 1968.
The lowest in limited-overs internationals is 101 for 9 (30 overs) by Australia v West Indies (87 off 29.3 overs) in a rain-abbreviated floodlit World Series match at Sydney on 8 December 1993. The lowest in a full 50-overs international is 125 (42.4 overs) by India v Pakistan (87 off 32.5 overs) in a Four-Nations Cup match at Sharjah on 22 March 1985.

Q. I wonder if you could clarify for me an issue with wicket-keeping gloves. A couple of years ago it seemed the law had been tightened up to say that a strap between thumb and glove was allowed as long as it was not webbed. I'm sure recently more and more keepers have reverted back to an illegal glove. Am I mistaken or does the law vary for different levels of the game? Paul (Canterbury, Kent)

Bearders' Answer: No. Law 40, note 2, of the 2000 Code (incorporating 2003 changes) applies to all levels of cricket. It stipulates that gloves shall have no webbing between the fingers except joining index finger and thumb, where webbing may be inserted as a means of support.
If used, the webbing shall be (a) a single piece of non-stretch material which, although it may have facing material attached, shall have no reinforcement or tucks; and (b) such that the top edge of the webbing (i) does not protrude beyond the straight line joining the top of the index finger to the top of the thumb and (ii) is taut when a hand wearing the glove has the thumb fully extended.

Q. Is it true that you used to score for Reigate Grammar School at their old St Alban's Road Ground in Reigate? This year is the Silver Jubilee of the Nutley Hall CC playing at St Albans Road, and we delight in telling the opposition that you were there as a lad. Bill Benton (England)

Bearders' Answer: No, prior to my debut for TMS the only scoring I had ever done for was Temple Bar, the Kingswood (Surrey)-based cricket club for employees of the Legal & General Assurance Society sited opposite to where I was living. However, I did play many matches on the Old Reigate Horse Show Ground in St Alban's Road for Reigate Grammar School's various age teams, my last two seasons (1956-57) being for the 1st XI, but I was never the scorer.
In those days your ground was cared for by a Mr Hammond. Although an excellent mower of outfields and neat trimmer of hedges, his knowledge of pitch preparation was a little patchy and the square was a little rough. I began as an opening batsman and probably my most remarkable feat there was to score 35 not out and carry my bat through an innings of 57 all out.
If Nutley Hall CC requires any help with its celebrations, please contact me via my website!

Comments

Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    Hi Bill, love the column!!!

    Following on from a recent question about the highest test innings without a boundary (good old Boycs!!!), I was wondering if you could tell me what the highest test innings is made up solely of boundaries!

    I somehow doubt Boycs is the record holder here!!!

    Cheers

    BFP, Kent

  • Comment number 2.

    Hello Bill and Greetings from Maastricht,

    I have always wondered how the amount of runs required to avoid the follow-on are calculated?.

    Tot straks
    Arjan Posterholt

  • Comment number 3.

    FAO Sam Plackman

    This knock may also be of interest

    With regard to innings scored with few boundaries, Graeme Thorpe's 118 in Lahore in November 2000 contained only 2 boundaries and I believe only one prior to his passing 100

  • Comment number 4.

    Hi Bill, I love the column! Its helping me through my dissertation!!

    I throughly enjoy listening to Billy Birmingham's 12 th Man, like I am sure alot of people do. One of the clips mentioned "all five Australian batsmen scoring hundreds!!" It promted me to think of the most amount of hundreds scored in one innings in both test match and one day cricket, and also in a match?

    Thanks (Paul, Liverpool).

  • Comment number 5.

    Hi Bill,

    I've been wondering how many batsmen have scored ducks in the first innings and have then gone on to score centuries in their second? What is the largest score differential for one batsmen between his first and second innings? Has there been a batsmen particularly prone to such extremes of form to the extent that, contrary to the norm, he seems to perform much better in the second innings than the first on a regular basis and, if so, who holds the record for the most sub-10 first innings scores followed by a significantly larger (three figure?) second innings score?

    I'm interested in the answers in terms of the history of Test/First class cricket as well as in modern terms - curently playing/recently retired...

    Sorry if this is a lot of work..!

    Chris
    Edgbaston, Birmingham

  • Comment number 6.

    Bill

    Was the England team picked for the 4th Test against New Zealand in 1999 statistically (their combined test averages amounted to just 238.58) the worst batting line-up ever selected?

    I was surprised to see Andy Caddick batting at number 8 until I noticed that there were three genuine rabbits below him.

    The team - with their final test averages in brackets - was as follows:

    Atherton (37.69), Maddy (11.50), Hussain (37.18), Thorpe (44.66), Stewart (39.54), Ramprakash (27.32), Irani (17.20), Caddick (10.37), Mullally (5.52), Tufnell (5.10), Giddins (2.50).

    The figure quoted for Stewart is his overall average although he famously had a lower batting average when keeping so perhaps I should have used that?

    NB: The team who played in the last England Test in Napier averaged 354.53.

  • Comment number 7.

    Re #6

    Also which England team had the highest combined average?


    And I forgot to say who I was

    Thanks Bill

    Matthew, West Yorkshire

  • Comment number 8.

    Bill

    I once played in a game where a player, considered to be one of our better batsmen, was in for in excess of 30 minutes before he was bowled for a duck. What is the longest test innings for a batsmen who failed to score?

    Jon, London

  • Comment number 9.

    Hi Bill,

    As I understand it, if a ball is bowled and played by a batsman he is allowed to stop it from rolling back onto his stumps. However what happens if the ball is played, a run is taken and completed and the ball still rolls onto the stumps and removes a bail, is the batsman out? Also, with the same scenario, if a run is taken is the non-striking batsman allowed to stop the ball from hitting the stumps?

    Lyndon
    Rugby

  • Comment number 10.

    question 5 - BunyeeYumper

    a partial answer only, sorry,

    in tests there have been more than 120 cases of batsmen scoring 0 in one innings and 100+ in the other

    of these 55 ducks were first innings and and 74 in the second

    the highest differential was 242 (a 2st innings duck) or 231 (1st innings duck), by Ponting vs IND 2003 and Nourse (SA) vs AUS 1935

    between innings when one was not a duck the highest difference was Hanif Mohammad for PAK vs WI in 1958, he scored 17 in the 1st and 337 in the second innings, a difference of 320

    (he is one of only 4 batsmen to score 300 in one innings and complete a second, Sandham and Gooch of ENG and Taylor of AUS being the others, who all scored 50+ in the non 300 innings)

    sorry i don't have an easy way to search for this in 1st class matches

    question 4 - Squizz117

    in tests the most hundreds in an innings is 5, done twice, once by AUS vs WI in June 1955 and once by PAK vs BANG in Aug 2001

    in ODIs the record is 2, more than 70 times, the most recent being PAK vs BANG in Apr 2008

    by in a match i take it you mean in a test match, that record is 8, SA vs WI Apr 2005

    (in a ODI PAK vs AUS in Nov 1998 managed 4)


    question 8 - JonHaley

    GI Allot managed a duck after 101 minutes and 77 balls, of batting in a test innings, NZ vs SA 1998

  • Comment number 11.

    Hi Bill

    Andrew Flintoff's Test averages are:

    Bat: 32.50
    Ball: 32.02

    Which means a team of batting Flintoffs would score more runs than a team of bowling Flintoffs would concede.

    How many other test players have this claim to fame and who would win by the biggest margin?

    Thanks!
    Neil

  • Comment number 12.

    question 11 - themorto

    hundreds upon hundreds, just taking a couple of famous ones at random

    Bradman Bat=99.94 Bowl=36.00

    G Pollock Bat=60.97 Bowl=51.00

    Tendulkar Bat=55.31 Bowl=52.66

    however i assume you mean All-Rounders, which raises the question of "what is an all-rounder"? obviously the 1st two don't count, but Tendulkar? he's taken 42 wkts

    assuming you mean a minimum of 50 wkts and 1000 test runs

    Kallis Bat=57.14 Bowl=31.30
    Sobers Bat=57.78 Bowl=34.04
    Hammond Bat=58.41 Bowl=37.81

    the only 3 with differences above 20, Flintoff is at 32 on this list

  • Comment number 13.

    Dear Bill,

    Some years ago whilst playing in a Middlesex League Match for Stanmore against Finchley, I drove a half-volley back down the pitch. The ball was in the air but neither the bowler nor mid-on would have had any chance of preventing it from passing between them for a certain boundary.

    There was, however, the matter of my fellow opening bat, Peter Edwards, or, more specifically, his rib cage, towards which the ball was hurtling. Having no time to move out of the way, and with characteristic adeptness, he played a one-handed leg glance, deflecting the ball past a wrong-footed (and nonplused) mid-on, and over the boundary.

    The umpire signalled four runs and that was that; but I have always wondered what rules were in play at the time:

    - Was Peter obstructing the field?
    - What if the ball had been caught?
    - Should the ball have been called dead?

    I should be grateful four your astute analysis.

    Yours Faithfully

    David Weston

  • Comment number 14.

    Question 5 - With regards to batsmen doing better in the second innings than the first, I remember that John Crawley came under some criticism for this practice.

  • Comment number 15.

    Hi Bill, I was at a Pub Quiz last week and a question came up about Nelson as a cricket score. I knew that is 111 but why? And does it have any particular infulence in the scoring? Thank You Tom, Weymouth

  • Comment number 16.

    Bill, could you tell me if there has ever been an instance where a fielder (other than the keeper) has taken a hattrick of catches? It happened in a Hampshire League game last weekend as the bloke took all 3 of a bowler's hattrick and I did it years ago in a tour game, taking the 2nd,3rd,4th of a bowler's 4 in 4. But has it ever happened in first-class or international cricket?

  • Comment number 17.

    Hi Bill,

    I was wondering, in Test matches, what percentage of teams who have won the toss have gone on to win the match?

    Thanks,

    John, Oxford.

  • Comment number 18.

    Hi, Bill.

    Marvellous column - keep it up.

    Several years ago England went into a match with, I think, 4 ......sons as seam bowlers. I can remember Anderson, Johnson and Harmison. Who was the fourth?

    Thanks

    Andrew Ponsford

  • Comment number 19.

    Hi Bill

    I was wondering what's the earliest a 6 has ever been hit in test cricket, or ODI cricket, in terms of number of overs into the match, since today Nasser Hussain was asking Brendon McCullum if he'd consider trying to hit a 6 first ball in a test.

    Thanks

    Dominic Gillan

  • Comment number 20.

    SpursareGods at 15. Nelson's 111 is generally thought to denote one eye, one arm, one b*** (as in small spherical object hit with the bat!).

  • Comment number 21.

    #17 John

    Of the teams winning the toss in tests, 34.4% have gone on to win the match, with 30.4% losses and 35.1% draws (and ).1% ties). Of course, this varies considerably between teams. Australia have won 49.9% of the times they have won the toss, and Bangladesh only 4%.

    Nick

  • Comment number 22.

    question 18 - Ponk

    a trick (silly?) question!

    johnson only played in 3 tests and only in one, the first, did he play with Anderson and Harmison, this was in 2003 vs ZIM, the other two bowlers used were Giles, a spinner, and Butcher, a seamer, who was the SON of a previous Test Player

    question 15 - SpursareGods

    a common question on these blogs, basically the answer is no-one really knows, the two most common explanations are

    1- the three 111s represent a wkt without bails, a bad omen for batsmen

    2- nelson lost 3 body parts (not true) and the ones represent his bad luck

    see

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_%28cricket%29

    there are no special scoring requirements


  • Comment number 23.

    Re. the non-striker who was nearly hit by a ball struck by his partner:

    (1) If the umpire judged that the non-striker could have gotten out of the way of the ball, and therefore his failure to do so was deliberate: and if it was judged that he had, in doing so, prevented the fielder from fielding the ball (whether it prevented a catch, or merely saved one or more runs): then the non-striker should indeed have been given out for Obstructing The Field, on appeal by the fielding side.

    (2) If the ball had then carried to a fielder after hitting the non-striker (either his body or bat), I believe the striker would be given out, caught.

    (3) I don't know what the Laws say in this situation: but I suspect most umpires would call Dead Ball if they thought the impact had changed the result of the shot, in circumstances where the non-striker could not be given out Obstructing the Field. For instance, if the ball was heading straight to a fielder (along the air or in the ground), and deflected involuntarily by the non-striker for a boundary.

    Whether this would be legal or not, I don't profess to know. In fact I suspect the umpire should have called Dead Ball in this situation right away, and only didn't do so because he thought the shot would have been a certain boundary anyway.

  • Comment number 24.

    Thanks, Jonathan.

    It sounds like the umpire has more freedom to judge what is fair and proper than I had imagined. He also, incidentally, dismissed the claim from the non-striker (made in the bar after the match) that the runs should have been accredited to him!

    Dave

  • Comment number 25.

    Regarding all-rounders with a batting average higher than the bowling average: Consider the four great all-rounders of the 1980s.

    RJ Hadlee... 27.16 batting, 22.29 bowling.
    IT Botham... 33.54 batting, 28.40 bowling.
    Kapil Dev... 31.05 batting, 29.64 bowling.
    Imran Khan... 37.69 batting, 22.81 bowling.

    And another, more recent:

    SM Pollock... 32.31 batting, 23.11 bowling.

    All of them have a bigger batting/bowling average difference than Flintoff.

    Of those, I would rate Botham (at his best, i.e. up to 1983) as the best batsman, despite Imran's higher average - Botham has more centuries, fifties and match-turning innings to his name: Imran's average is boosted by a much larger number of not-outs as the fragile Pakistan lower order collapsed around him, and by a considerable number of middle-ranking scores in the 30s and 40s compared to far fewer outright failures. Hadlee is clearly the best bowler, again although Kapil took more wickets and Imran's average is similar.

    Pollock was always underrated as a batsman, often being thought of as a "bowler who could bat", when in fact his batting average is higher than Hadlee's or Kapil's. Hadlee more truly fitted that description of a "bowler who could bat", with an average under 30. Both Pollock and Hadlee only scored two centuries: Pollock, though, has more fifties and, like Imran and Kapil, more decent 30s and 40s than outright failures. Whereas Hadlee - like Botham - had the problem that if he didn't get a big score he was as liable to be out cheaply.

    So where does Flintoff fit in? I don't believe him to be anywhere near the bowler that any of the older generation of all-rounders were - although he is certainly superior to Kallis, of the current generation. As a batsman, though, he at one stage had the potential to be better than any of them, but has ended up having the problems of Imran, Kapil and Pollock - an inability to convert his good starts into actual hundreds, coupled with Botham's inability to remain not-out.

  • Comment number 26.

    Hi Bill

    I was wondering whether the use of a squash ball in his gloves by Adam Gilchrist while batting on a number of occasions was against the laws of cricket? It appears to me that the squash ball was an aid which is not permitted under the current laws of cricket. Can you shed some light on this? Thanks

    Haidermota (Pakistan)

  • Comment number 27.

    Dear Bill (or anyone who knows),
    Our opening bowler recently began his spell and in delivering his first ball, wrenched his shoulder. The ball was deemed a wide a subsequently went to the boundary for four wides (or five if you like). The bowler was unable to continue and he was replaced.
    What were the opening bowlers figures?
    Regards
    DH
    Radstock.

  • Comment number 28.

    #26 - this question was raised shortly after the World Cup final last year. It was ruled that the use of a squash ball is perfectly legal.

    #27 - Quite simply, the bowler's figures are 0-0-5-0. He hasn't delivered a legitimate ball, hence zero overs, and he's conceded 5 runs (all no-balls and wides are charged against a bowler's figures)

  • Comment number 29.

    Bill
    Great column as usual
    After reading the question about the ball coming of the fielder's helmet, I was wondering whether it applies to the wicket keeper, and also to the batsman.

    So if the ball were to carry of the wicket keeper's helmet (while it is on his head) is it also not out?

    And if a batsman were to top edge a shot into his helmet and then the ball was caught, would that be out?

    Thanks, Konrad

  • Comment number 30.

    re. 14,23 and 24. Obstructing the field has to be wilful. It is for the umpires to decide if it was wilful or not.
    Secondly, if the obstruction is judged wilful, it is the striker who is out even if the non-striker did the obstructing.
    If the act of the non-striker was not wilful then the ball is not dead, so any runs would be credited to the striker. Or, if a legal catch is taken, the striker is out.
    Whatever happens, the non-striker cannot be out (except run out) and certainly cannot get credit for the runs!
    A moot point arises if the non-striker does not move at all, and is hit by the ball and prevents a catch - is NOT MOVING a wilful act? or just stupid, perhaps.

    .... and for those interested in number-patterns we have a snapshot from today's YorksvDurham
    Sayers c McKenzie b Onions 8
    Lyth c McKenzie b S Harmison 7
    McGrath run out 6
    Rudolph not out 5
    Gale not out 4
    Extras 3

  • Comment number 31.

    question 29 - Konrad Gooner

    for the purposes of helmets the 'keeper counts as a fielder, so a "catch" off his helmet would not count

    Law 32 Point 3, e
    "However, it is not a fair catch if the ball has touched a protective helmet worn by a fielder, although the ball remains in play..."

    but the laws say nothing about a batsman's helmet, so any ball that is played from his bat to helmet and then caught would be out

    Law 32. 1. Out Caught
    "The striker is out Caught if a ball delivered by the bowler, not being a No ball, touches his bat without having previously been in contact with any member of the fielding side and is subsequently held by a fielder as a fair catch before it touches the ground."

  • Comment number 32.

    Afternoon Bill,

    Loving the column as always.

    Heres one I always wondered about (and apologies if it's been asked before)

    Does a bowler HAVE to bowl in a certain style for the entire over? For example, can a spinner suddenly thunder a full pace bouncer at the batsmen half way through an over before returning to off break etc?

    Thanks in advance, and long you may your work continue.

    Matthew Theobald, Nottingham, UK.

  • Comment number 33.

    question 32 - Theo67

    no, a bowler can change the type of delivery whenever he wants (imagine a fast bowler who couldn't bowl his slow 'un, or a swing bowler who couldn't bowl a cutter!)

    he doesn't even have to tell the umpire of a change in "style" he only has to inform the batter, via the umpire, of a change in delivery approach (over or round the wicket) or hand (left or right, not very common)

    Law 24
    "1. Mode of delivery
    (a) The umpire shall ascertain whether the bowler intends to bowl right handed or left handed, over or round the wicket, and shall so inform the striker.
    It is unfair if the bowler fails to notify the umpire of a change in his mode of delivery. In this case the umpire shall call and signal No ball...."

    note MODE not speed

    probably the most famous player who really mixed up fast bowling with spin was GS.Sobers, from the cricinfo biography

    "He was remarkably versatile with the ball, bowling two styles of spin - left-arm orthodox and wrist spin, but was also a fine fast-medium opening bowler."

    and probably the best all-rounder ever too!

    (see my post 12 above, forget Botham, Khan, et al...)

  • Comment number 34.

    Re: 14, 24, 24 and 30

    Thanks Dave the Dog Trainer.

    What you say seems, for the most part, fair. However, I am surprised to learn that the striker can be given out when the non-striker is deemed by the umpire to have obstructed the field.

    I have only ever been involved in one obstructing the field incident (and have witnessed no other). I played the ball gently back down the pitch and the non-striker set out for a quick single. The bowler, non-striker and ball all converged to a point near to where a silly mid-on might stand. I remained unmoved having already called, "No", to my partner. The non-striker turned around, lowered his shoulder, stepped into the path of the bowler who was about to pick up the ball, and knocked him off his feet. He then managed to regain his ground comfortably; but a conference between the fielding captain, bowler and wicket keeper resulted in an appeal being raised and the non-striker being given out.

    I must say that I would have been rather upset if I had been given out under such circumstances.

  • Comment number 35.

    question 343 - Dave Weston

    don't worry you, as the striker, couldn't be out if your partner obstructed the field for ANYTHING other than a catch

    the laws are clear on this (my CAPS)

    Law 37 (Obstructing the field)

    "1. Out Obstructing the field
    EITHER batsman is OUT Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action...."

    the only case of the striker always being out is for obstructing a fielder trying to take a catch

    "3. Obstructing a ball from being caught
    The STRIKER is OUT should wilful obstruction or distraction by either batsman prevent a catch being made...."

  • Comment number 36.

    sorry, that should be 34 not 343, that indeed would be a long blog

  • Comment number 37.

    35 you are quite correct, everything I wrote in 30 was in response to the question about obstruction preventing a catch,
    In other situations of course the culprit would be the one given out e.g. trying to prevent himself being run out.
    Thanks for clarifying.

  • Comment number 38.

    hey bearders

    what is the highest score ever scored by a debutee in a international test match?

    also what is the highest score ever scored by a player in his final test match of his international career?

    thanx

    wally

  • Comment number 39.

    31- Thanks Ian

  • Comment number 40.

    Mr B

    Out of the total amount of test wickets to have been taken, how many or percentage have fallen on Nelson, double Nelson etc. Its always a score I pay most attention too.

    regards

  • Comment number 41.

    Dear Bearders

    Following his release from the England match, Mattew Hoggard is allowed to play for Yorkshire against Durham, replacing a player who's already batted and bowled in the match. How is this allowed?

    David
    Newcastle

  • Comment number 42.

    #40

    There have been 65861 test innings, of which 8640 were not out - so 57221 completed innings (not including the current test).

    Of these, 48 innings ended on 111, 3 ended on 222 and 1 ended on 333.

    Compare that with 61 ending on 112, 8 on 223 and 1 on 334.

  • Comment number 43.

    Hi Bill,

    Anderson's wicket off a no-ball on day 1 reminded me of how often 'wickets' are taken only for the batsmen to be reprieved by the Umpire.

    Is it possible to find out the ratio of these 'wickets' to no-balls and if so, how does it compare to the actual ratio of wickets to balls in test cricket?

    Yours

    Dann Irving (London)

  • Comment number 44.

    Hi Bill,

    Long time reader of your excellent column, and have only recently managed to come up with something worth asking.

    Chris Martin has often been described as the worst batsman ever to have played (with a Test average of 2.something I believe) - is he the owner of the lowest ever test average?
    Also, apparently he is one of a few members of a distinguished club of people who have taken more wickets than they have scored runs - I wanted to know if you could confirm this, and tell me who the other members of this distinguished club may be.

    Thanks,

    Mo
    Canterbury UK

  • Comment number 45.

    My 15 year old son made his first ton in a senior match last Sunday 11th May 2008. He was playing for Cardiff 3rds v Ponthir 3rds in the South Wales Premier League ( Sunday Division). He opened the innings and ended on 100 not out at the close of the innings which was a limited over match of 40 overs per innings.

    What was remarkable is that he reached his hundred with an all run 4 off the last ball of the innings which was a drive hit wide of mid on. His batting partner successfully avoided being run out by a direct throw upon completion of the second run. The ball cannoned off the broken wicket and the batsmen proceeded to run a third run with the non-striker again narrowly missing being run out going for the third run as an attempted direct throw at the stumps missed the target and the ball deflected off the wicketkeeper's boot enabling my son to call for and complete the fourth run and thereby his century.

    Has this ever happened in First Class Cricket? Have you ever heard of it happening previously?

    DCWPreece
    Cardiff Cricket Club
    16th May 2008

    PS Keep up this great "tour de force"of yours. I hope that you never get "stumped" for an answer!

  • Comment number 46.

    Some months ago, I queried if Gavin Hamilton's test record is unique: 1 test, a pair, no wickets despite bowling in both innings, no catches.

    I have, since, found a competitor: Rashid Patel of India played one test against New Zealand in 1988, opened the bowling and went wicketless, and made a pair. He did take one catch though.

    To make matters worse, he went wicketless in his only one day international as well and did not get to bat.

    Is he the only international cricketer who didn't bother the scorers in any form of cricket, either with bat or ball?

  • Comment number 47.

    question 44 - TravellingMosha

    indeed of all the bastmen who have played 30 innings or more Martin is the one with the lowest average

    the top (bottom) 5 are (AVE-RUNS-WKTS)

    CS Martin - 2.55 - 74 - 136
    I Manjuaral - 3.68 - 81 - 28
    M Singh - 3.81 - 99 - 88
    BS Chandrasekhar - 4.07 - 167 - 242
    FH Edwards - 4.21 - 160 - 80

    from this you can see in the top 5 only Chandrasekhar (and Martin) managed more wkts than runs

    of other players several, Tufnell, Valentine, came close but the only other I can find (there might be others) is BA Reid, with an ave of 4.65 and 93 runs but 113 wkts

    (in ODIs this is much more common with 3 players in the bottom 5 averages taking more wkts that scoring runs, McGrath, Donald and Anderson, although their averages are higher)

  • Comment number 48.

    Hi Bill,

    I am in Canada now but originally from Ireland. Which current English first class cricketers hail from the Emerald Isle?

    CP

  • Comment number 49.

    question 38 - Wally Hammond12345

    55 players have manged 100+ in their 1st innings in tests, of these 5 players have scored 200+ on debut

    RE Foster (Eng) 287 (1903)
    JA Rudolph (SA) 222no (2003)
    LG Rowe (WI) 214 (1972) also managed 100no in the 2nd innings
    MS Sinclair (NZ) 214 (1999)
    DSB Kuruppu (SL) 201no (1987)

    As for last Tests WH Ponsford (Aus) scored 266 in 1934 (in the 1st innings of last test, he scored 22 in the 2nd), which is doubly remarkable as he is one of the 55 who managed 100 (110) in his first test innings, 10 years ealier

    however, surprisingly, this isn't the record, that goes to A Sandham (Eng) who scored 325 in the 1st innings of his last test (he scored 50 in the 2nd) vs WI in 1930 when he was 40 (this was the test record when he scored it, the first 300+)

    the highest score in the players very last innings (not match) in test cricket is 258, by SM Nurse (WI) in 1969

  • Comment number 50.

    Dear Bill,

    Here's one I found particularly unusual. As a Cambridge student I keep half an eye on the UCCE, and I noticed in their first class game against Somerset last month that opener Mark Bott bagged a king pair - not that unusual in itself, but the interesting part is that he was out to the same dismissal (LBW) from the same bowler (Charl Willoughby) in both innings. As far as it's possible to find out, has this ever happened in first class cricket before - accepting that records of balls faced are relatively new (although interestingly Bott was also at the wicket for the same amount of minutes - 4 -in each innings)?

    Thanks,
    Rupert, Cambridge

  • Comment number 51.

    Hi Bill,

    I wondered if you could tell me which test team and player averages the most centuries per innings? In addition do you know which series has had the highest centuries per match ratio?

    Thanks,

    Mark Worrall, York

  • Comment number 52.

    question 51 - Maw50

    well the record would be a hundred every innings for Andy Ganteaume, as he only played one test innings, scoring 112 in 1948 for WI

    Rodney Redmond managed a hundred in his two innings for NZ, giving him a ratio of one ton per match

    however assuming a minimum of 10 tons (and that the question relates only to tests) the most per innings would be, surprise surprise, Bradman, with 29 100s in 80 innings, or 52 tests (2.75 innings per ton)

    the next is G Headley with 10 hundreds in 40 innings (22 matches) giving 4 innings per 100

    the series with the most tons was Aus vs WI 1955 with 21 hundreds in 5 tests (4.2 a test, just over 1 per innings), however,

    WI vs SA in 2004 managed 20 hundreds in only 4 tests (5 a test, 1.25 an innings), equaling the 5 per test for the Ind vs Eng 3 match series in 1990 (15 tons) and Pak vs India 2006 (again 15 in 3)

    but all the above are beaten, easily, in the 2 match test series between Ind and SL in 1997, where 12 hundreds were spread over only 6 innings (the 1st test was drawn after only 2 innings), or SIX per match

    and the difficult one:

    this is the number of TESTS and HUNDREDS for countries (TESTS per 100)

    AUS 693 - 693 (1.00)
    BAN 53 - 13 (4.08)
    ENG 871 - 729 (1.19)
    IND 418 - 360 (1.16)
    NZ 340 - 203 (1.68)
    PAK 335 - 304 (1.10)
    SA 332 - 262 (1.27)
    SL 177 - 154 (1.15)
    WI 445 - 410 (1.09)
    ZIM 83 - 42 (1.98)

    i hope i did the maths right there

  • Comment number 53.

    In answer to pbhawalkar:

    There are a few cricketers who have achieved less than Gavin Hamilton in their test careers. Hamilton did, at least bat (twice, being dismissed for his pair) and bowl (failing to take a wicket, but at least conceding runs.)

    Probably the most useless test career ever belonged, in fact, to J. C. W. "Jack" MacBryan. A specialist opening batsman, he had the misfortune to be playing at the same time as Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Sandham, and several others who seldom got a game. His only Test came when he was selected to bat out of position, in the middle order, against South Africa in 1924, when for various reasons a great number of specialist middle-order batsmen were unavailable.

    South Africa won the toss and batted first: during about half a day's play, MacBryan did not bowl, hold a catch or make a run-out, and is said by some to have never even touched the ball at all: then rain washed out the rest of the match, making MacBryan the only player never to bat, bowl, or achieve anything in the field in the course of a Test career. And that was the end of his career: for the next match and the subsequent tour of Australia, England's more usual specialist middle-order batsmen were back in residence, MacBryan could not even get into the squad, and couldn't get in as an opener either.

    Now... whether it's worse to bat and bowl ineffectively, as Hamilton did, or to not bat and bowl at all, as MacBryan did, is a somewhat subjective question...

  • Comment number 54.

    I was bowling some of my best long-hop off breaks the other week, and they were being despatched to the boundary with alarming regularity. When the batsman miscued one, he smashed into the thigh-pad of his batting partner at the other end and it looped into the air and i caught it. Cue the celebrations as we thought he was out, but the batsman refused to move and the umpire, who didn't know the rules, said not out.

    Who was right?

    Mark
    Edinburgh

  • Comment number 55.

    question 54 - Giantranco Cando

    yes it was out

    law 32 Caught, point 3

    it is a fair catch if...
    "e) a fielder catches the ball after it has touched an umpire, another fielder or the other batsman. However, it is not a fair catch if the ball has touched a protective helmet worn by a fielder, although the ball remains in play."

  • Comment number 56.

    Question 54 - definitely out. This happened in the Minor Counties final between Staffordshire and Wiltshire at Lords, when Steve Dean of Staffs who was on 99, drilled a ball towards long on but the ball hit his partner's foot and the bowler North took a spectacular caught and bowled. Later it appeared on Question of Sport.

  • Comment number 57.

    Hi Bill

    I know you're hopeful that the ICC "Super Test" of 2005 will have its test status removed in the near future but I was curious to know if you considered it to still be a first-class match and have therefore included it in your first-class records?

    Thanks

    Richard Stone, Birmingham

  • Comment number 58.

    Hi Bill

    When was the last occasion England took the field in a Test with 11 players from different counties ? And how many previous occasions have there been ?

  • Comment number 59.

    #19 Dominic

    Not an exact answer to your question about early sixes, but in First Class cricket I believe Matthew Fleming hit the first ball of his career for six. I wonder if this is a unique record ?

  • Comment number 60.

    Hi Bill

    I was wondering what the highest score a batsman has made when his team have scored less than a hundred? was this in county or international cricket?

    Thanks
    Chris, West Wales

  • Comment number 61.

    Re #41 - the ECB has a long and convoluted set of regulations which apply either when a player is released from a Test squad, or is called into a Test squad at short notice (perhaps as emergency cover when someone is injured in a warm-up). As always, when the Laws say one thing, and a competition regulation says something different, the competition regulation takes priority.

  • Comment number 62.

    Hi Bill,

    Always enjoy your column.
    Q. who is the person who has had the misfortune of being the 12th man the most times for England without actually making a test appearence?

    Cheers
    John Vinson
    Barcelona

  • Comment number 63.

    Hi Bill

    I love reading your column just to find out what I didn't already know!

    My husband came up with a question whilst watching the Sunday play of the test - can a batsman be out lbw if he's hit on the body in front of the stumps whilst attempting a sweep shot?

    I'd guess no, but I could be wrong.

  • Comment number 64.

    Hi
    I have a question,
    England in the current test match there whole tail is left handed, Broad, Sidebottom, Panesar, Anderson. Are there any other occurrences when this has happened apart from with England in New Zealand?

  • Comment number 65.

    Dear Bill,

    I heard once that Phillip Defreitas was dropped from the England team on 21 occassions, which, if true, is probably more of a relection on the fickleness of the selectors than upon the player's performances. Is this correct and, if so, is it an English or possibly a world record?

    Thanks

    Dave Weston

  • Comment number 66.

    Re: 19 and 59

    I know a chap who, as a young man, was invited by his club's third team captain to open the batting and to play the anchor role - Fifty not out was suggested as his goal. I don't think that being out third ball for 12 runs was what the captain expected!

    P.S. His respect for captains must have grown since then as he later captained his Club and also, for several years, the Club Cricket Conference.

  • Comment number 67.

    question 63 - MerseyAddick

    you are wrong, the batsman is out if struck on any part of his body (except the hands/gloves) in front of the wkt (assuming all the other LBW criteria are fulfilled)

    Law 36 LBW

    1...(c) the ball not having previously touched his bat, the striker intercepts the ball, either full pitch or after pitching, with ANY PART OF HIS PERSON...

    A few years ago I gave a batter out (from my team) as he ducked what he thought was a bouncer, only for it to turn out to be a very loopy, and slow, long hop. The batter ended up on his backside with his head turned towards the 'keeper, inside his crease. The ball, eventually, struck him on its way down on the back of the head, plumb in front of the wicket. The bowler ran to see what damage had been done (none) then appealled. I'm sorry to say I gave him out LBW!

  • Comment number 68.

    Hello Bill, i noticed that whilst M.Vaughan was scoreing his 17th century in the recent test against New Zealand, it was also his 6th at Lords! Even taking into account that there are often 2 tests per summer at the home of cricket a % of over 35% seems quite high?
    Is this the highest % of 100's at 1 perticular ground for any test match batsmen?

  • Comment number 69.

    Hi Bill,

    after being a huge cricket fan for the last 25 years, unfortunately my playing day's are now behind me, though i am keen to be still involved in the gme.

    i have always been good with figures and with my knowledge of the game i am interested in taking up the art of scorer like your good self.

    Though i have scored in sunday matches in the past i am a bit out of practice and wonder if you could give me some idea's on good points of reference to brush up on my skill's.

    Regards

    scoobieh

  • Comment number 70.

    Hi Bill,

    Slight disagreement at the local club- wondering if the font of all knowledge can help out.

    If when requiring one to win with one wicket remaining the batsman is stumped off a wide, how is the result recorded? Either:

    1. The ball is dead once the winning wide has been bowled, resulting in a win by one wicket.

    2. The ball is not dead until the keeper removes the bails. The batting side would still win, but would it be by 0 wickets or by 1 run?

    Many thanks,

  • Comment number 71.

    Brian Lara has the record for the most runs off a single over in Tests with 28; I was wondering what was the most runs scored off an over without the batmen hitting a boundary?

    Alf, Chipping Norton

  • Comment number 72.

    #70 - this has been discussed on several previous occassions. The 1-run penalty for the wide ends the match, and as the ball is deemed to have been wide from the instant it left the bowler's hand, nothing that happens after that is relevant.

    The stumping does not count and should not be recorded; and the batting side win by 1 wicket.

  • Comment number 73.

    1,000 runs before the end of May.
    Traditionally, the feat of scoring 1,000 runs before the end of May is noted as being a 'first class runs' feat. Given that players now have numerous tough one day matches instead of easy first class matches against weak University sides, I was wondering who has achieved '1,000 runs before the end of May, including one day matches' in modern times?

  • Comment number 74.

    Andrew Flintoff's Test averages are:

    Bat: 32.50
    Ball: 32.02

    Which means a team of batting Flintoffs would score more runs than a team of bowling Flintoffs would concede.

    How many other test players have this claim to fame and who would win by the biggest margin?

    ---------------

    Of course technically you realise that any player who averages more than 10/11'ths of his bowling averge with the bat would beable to claim the same, Flintoff would actually only have to average 29.11 with the bat to beat his 32.02 bowling average due to 11 batsmen but only 10 wickets.

  • Comment number 75.

    question 74 - HackerJack

    this question was asked (by you) in post 11 and answered, fully, in posts 12 and 25

    basically LOTS of players/all-rounders beat that difference (look up for details)

  • Comment number 76.

    Bill,

    I notice that the '08 first class season is not due to finish until Sept 27th. Is this the latest date that FC cricket has been played in the UK?

    I seem to recall the '04 Champions Trophy final at the Oval (it was cold) being played on something like the 25th Sept but that wasn't FC of course.

    How long before the season runs into October i wonder?

    Thanks

  • Comment number 77.

    Dear Bill,

    Three consecutive wickets is called a "Hat trick" but what are the terms, if any, for four or five consecutive wickets? I am writing to ask because our captain (Skips) of our cricket club Haddocks CC, playing in the Cardiff Midweek League, achieved this amazing feat during a evening game.

    Thanks

    Ilyas

  • Comment number 78.

    question 77 - Abertaff

    well in "english" there is no special name for 4 or 5 consecutive wickets (4 in 4 and 5 in 5 are what they are generally called)

    but in "australian" the term DOUBLE HAT-TRICK is used for 4 wickets in 4 balls (because there are 2 batters who start a group of 3)

    5 in 5 has never been achieved in 1st class cricket but i assume the aussies would call it a TRIPLE HAT-TRICK

  • Comment number 79.

    What is the largest deficit on 1st innings turned around? Brearley's England famously won the Headingley Test in 1981 from 227 runs behind on 1st innings. India also famously beat the aussies having been asked to follow on 274 runs behind.

    Is 274 the biggest deficit a side has gone on to win from? (India vs Australia, 11/03/01 @ Eden Gardens) It is listed on cricinfo as the largest victory margin after a follow-on, but turning around a 1st innings deficit doesn't necessarily have to involve a follow-on

  • Comment number 80.

    #79 Darkness

    The largest deficit in the first innings of a test for the team that went on to win the match was at the Oval in August 2006. England scored 173. Pakistan scored 504. England were 298/4 when Pakistan forfeited the match. (I'm glossing over some details here!)

    Apart from this, the largest deficit overturned was 291 at Colombo in August 1992 when Australia beat Sri Lanka by 16 runs. (Aus 256, SL 547/8d, Aus 471, SL 164)

    Nick

  • Comment number 81.

    Hi Bill

    This is my first blog, but had to contact you about a match played at the County Ground, Taunton recently.

    Somerset played Sussex in a four day County Championship Division One match. In Sussex's first innings there were no extras, is Sussex scored 203 all out.

    When was the last time this happened in a completed first class innings, all runs of the bat.

    Many Thanks

    Mark Sells
    Taunton
    Somerset

  • Comment number 82.


    question 81 - Senor Marco

    in all 1st class cricket this has happened 27 times when the total was MORE THAN 300

    the last time the innings total beat 300 without extras was Somerset vs Essex in 2007, when in Somerset's 1st innings they scored 312 in reply to Essex's 144. The 312 included 3 fifties and 2 40s but no extras.

    The highest ever 1st class innings without extras was an unbelievable 647 in Victoria's 1st innings vs Tasmania in Feb 1952

    i'm sorry but i don't know if there has been another case of this since 2007 somerset where the innings was less than 300 (as in your example)

  • Comment number 83.

    Michael Vaughan is the 600th player to win an England cap.

    I have two questions:

    (a) who are England's other 'centurions'?

    (b) what is the shortest period between 'centurions'?

    Ricalan

  • Comment number 84.

    When a batsman has a runner when can he be given out stumped/run out?

    If the batsman misses the ball, remains in his crease, but the runner is out of his ground, can he be stumped?

    If the batsmen plays a shot and leaves his crease and the ball is thrown onto the stumps while the runner is in his ground, is that run out?

  • Comment number 85.

    Hi Bill,

    I've always liked the score 123-5 (i.e, one, two, three, for five).

    Along the same lines has a score of 765-3 ever been reached in any first class or test level game.

  • Comment number 86.

    No. 85 stfletch

    Two possibilities of a team being on 765-3:

    West Indies 790-3d v Pakistan at Kingston in 1958, their 3rd wicket fell at 602.

    Sri Lanka 952-6 v India at Colombo in 1997, 3rd wicket fell at 615 and 4th at 790

  • Comment number 87.

    question 84 - MiteAx

    the striker can be stumped if either he or the runner is out of their ground and all the other requistes for stumped are fulfilled

    and the same applies to run out

    basically both the runner AND the batsman need to be in their ground


    law 2 point 8 (RUNNERS)
    ...
    "Additionally, if he (the striker) is out of his ground when the wicket is put down at the wicket-keeper's end, he will be out in the circumstances of Law 38 (Run out) or Law 39 (Stumped) irrespective of the position of the non-striker or of the runner. If he is thus dismissed, runs completed by the runner and the other batsman before the dismissal shall not be scored."...

    law 27 point 2 (RUN OUT)
    ...
    "(e) When a batsman with a runner is striker, his ground is always that at the wicket-keeper's end... so that that ground will also belong to ... the runner"

    question 83 - Ricalan

    cap number 100 was S.Woods 13/2/1896
    (which was 19 years after 1st test)

    200 A Ducat 2/7/21 (25 years)

    300 B Edrich 10/6/38 (17 years)

    400 P Walker 9/6/60 (22 years)

    500 N Cowans 12/11/82 (22 years)

    600 M Vaughan 22/11/99 (17 years)

    so the closest two centurions were Ducat to Edrich which was 16 years 11 months 8 days, closely followed by Cowan to Vaughan, 17 years 10 days

  • Comment number 88.

    Hi Bill

    If a delivery hits a batsman's pads plumb in front of the stumps and then goes on to hit the wicket, should he be given out lbw or bowled? Does it depend on whether the fielding team appeals for lbw?

    Richard Williams
    Nottingham

  • Comment number 89.

    question 88 - HuntersBiteMark

    the wkt is BOWLED, which takes precedence over all other forms of dismissal

    also the fielders cannot appeal for a specfic type of dismissal, their appeal is general

    the two relevant laws are;

    LAW 27

    "4. Appeal "How's That?"
    An appeal "How's That?" covers all ways of being out."

    LAW 30

    "2. Bowled to take precedence
    The striker is out Bowled if his wicket is put down ..., even though a decision against him for any other method of dismissal would be justified."

  • Comment number 90.

    Hi Bill,

    I wonder if you might be able to help with a question I have:

    Can you tell me the timeline for fielding restrictions in Limited Over Internationals since the first recognised LOI in 1971.

  • Comment number 91.

    Thank you PortoIan.

  • Comment number 92.

    Hi Bill,

    Following Strauss dismissal on 111 is there any truth in the superstitioon that this number is unlucky? Have more wickets fallen on that score or batsmen got out on that score than others in say the range 100 to 120?

    e-i-l-r-a-h-c- from Essex

  • Comment number 93.


    question 21 - eilrahc

    as to the first part of your question i can't find any (easily accessable) records for team scores on a nelson "although an investigation by the magazine The Cricketer in the 1990s found that wickets are no more likely to fall on Nelson and indeed, the score at which most wickets fall is 0"

    however i can show players individual scores around nelson

    in all tests this is the number of wkts fallen on a certain PLAYER score, from 105 to 115

    105 - 69
    106 - 48
    107 - 48
    108 - 47
    109 - 59
    110 - 47
    111 - 48
    112 - 61
    113 - 50
    114 - 48
    115 - 45

    which, if anything, shows a rise on 112

    again the most common score 0, by a long way (7115 times)

  • Comment number 94.

    With regards to the question of batsmen with runners, and which (or both) has to make their ground to avoid being run-out or stumped...

    Does anyone remember an England/Australia match in 1989 where Ian Healy called for a runner in the last couple of overs, then forgot about it and completed a run faster than his runner (I think it was Dean Jones)? I think it may even have been a two...

    Both of them actually made their ground on that occasion (and Jones was ordered straight off the field again, with decidedly undiplomatic language from England's captain David Gower, on the grounds that Healy was obviously fit to run if he could outrun his runner.) But it would have been poetic justice if the batsman (who got in) had been run out because the runner failed to make his ground for a *second* run that the striker completed...

    If I remember rightly, Australia subsequently ended up with a tie in that match because Healy, now as non-striker, managed to complete a sharp single off the last ball. (with the 3-match series being consequently tied 1-1. Who got the trophy, and why? Was it decided on net run-rate, or awarded to England for losing fewer wickets in the tied match?)

  • Comment number 95.

    question 94 - Jonathan Ellis

    england won the series on less wickets lost overall (21 vs 22)

    the results were (may 1989):

    1stODI Eng 231/9 beat Aus 136/ao
    2ndODI Eng 226/5 tied with Aus 226/8
    3rdODI Aus 279/4 beat Eng 278/7

    but they got revenge in the 6 match ashes tour winning 4-0

  • Comment number 96.

    Dear Bill,

    I have always wondered what the highest discrepency between the scores of the two opening batsmen in their partnership has been, As i was watching a club match recently where the open partnership was 136 with one batsman being on 127 when he got out and his partner being on 9!!

    Gary, Durham

  • Comment number 97.

    Dear Bill,

    It is often stated that the primary task of opening batsmen is to see off the new ball, implying that the new ball is itself especially dangerous, and that for this reason the best stroke-makers usually play at 3 or 4. Sure I've seen the new ball bounce and seam alarmingly, but then the old ball can spin or reverse-swing viciously. What do the stats tell us? How do average scores for numbers 1 and 2 compare with 3, 4 and 5 in the batting order? (I'm thinking test and first class cricket here - obviously the fielding restrictions in limited overs games changes the equation somewhat.)

    Steve, Tanzania

  • Comment number 98.

    In the 2nd test against New Zealand, Andrew Strauss scored at least double the number of runs obtained by the next best English batsman in both the 1st innings (60 from Strauss vs 30 from Vaughan and Broad) and the 2nd innings (106 from Strauss vs 48 from Vaughan).

    Is this the first time the same batsman has been twice as successful as any other teammate in both innings of the same test match?

  • Comment number 99.

    question 98 - Coronal

    No

    i'm not sure how many times it's happened but at least twice

    A.Flower managed it against SA for Zim in 2001, scoring 142 in the 1st innings (the next best was 71) and 199 (next best 85) in the 2nd (both complete innings)

    his brother, G.Flower, also managed it against NZ in 1997, with scores of 104 and 151, the next bests being 42 and 57 (although the 2nd innings was declared at 9 wkts, but lets face it Engs 2nd innings with Strauss wasn't complete)

  • Comment number 100.

    Bill

    I imagine that the ultimate responsibility for the accuracy of the pitch markings at first class games rests with the umpires.

    Do they, in fact, actually check that the pitch is 22 yards long and that the crease markings are correct before the game starts?

    And, if so, have they ever found inaccuracies (I'm talking about Test cricket of course)?

    JOHN MARTIN

 

Page 1 of 2

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.