'-1's'?

[dr nick]

whats the story with this?

http://www-aus.cricket.org/db/ARCHI...RECARDS/NSW_WA_ING_02NOV2003_PLYR-V-PLYR.html

notice there is a '-1' column, and Rogers and Steve Waugh both have one.

 

[dr nick]

steve waugh also got a "10"

 

[dr nick]

and it says he got 103, but the scorecard says 101.

whats going on?

 

[llosis]

Good question.

Could the -1's refer to something to do with no-balls faced (under the new no-ball rule). Just a guess...

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by llosis
Good question.

Could the -1's refer to something to do with no-balls faced (under the new no-ball rule). Just a guess...

More likely just a scoring mistake that's screwed up the stats.

 

[pazza]

Short Runs?

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by pazza
Short Runs?

i'm sure i've worked out where the 10 came from. The match review said steve waugh slammed a six, but there are no 6's in his scoring sheet. what must have happened is he hit a 4 of a no ball, then a 6 off the free hit ball. i still would have thought it would be a 4,6 in the scorebook though.


as for short runs, i doubt it coz what happens there is the umpire signals "one short" and the batsman swap ends. the scorer just writes 1 instead of 2.

what would have happened is the umpire may have signalled a boundary, and the strike remained with the person who hit it. afterwards theyve had a look at the replay and realised the guy didnt touch the rope, and they'd run 3.

if they only ran a 2 no probs, but they must have been at the wrong end from that point on, thus the -1. Just a guess.

 

[Sammy D]

Did Steve Waugh hit the winning runs?

 

[jim boy]

The score sheet is no longer shows it, but as there were only two no-balls, you'd have to say it was somehow meant to reflect that the 'free hit' balls don't count in the stats.

 

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by Sammy D
Did Steve Waugh hit the winning runs?

No,O'Brien hit a 6 to win the game.