BBL BBL|08 Game 52: Hobart Hurricanes v Melbourne Renegades @ Blundstone Arena

[red+black]

great bowling, great choice to not bowl Meredith

 

[Hamingja]

Ah that's right.

The one weakness of Hobart this year is that they haven't really had anyone who could be relied on to lower the RR. Milenko's been about the closest to it.

Botha was the man. Must have got tapped on the shoulder about chucking and chose to retire instead.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Just don't bowl a no ball and its impossible to chase.

 

[Badesumofu]

Top spot! You beauty!

 

[Kappa]

Is Wade snapping at his bowlers again

 

[Crashy]

Wade was right, that wasn't a wide.

 

[eddiesmith]

Lol the idiot commentators thinking Wade was angry at the call, no it was his stupid bowler...

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Made it difficult, but good win

 

[Hamingja]

Is Wade snapping at his bowlers again

Umpire that time!

 

[madmug]

Botha was the man. Must have got tapped on the shoulder about chucking and chose to retire instead.

He bowled for 20 years & then at the end he gets a message???

Maybe it was his back injury? Just maybe.

 

[Hamingja]

He bowled for 20 years & then at the end he gets a message???

Maybe it was his back injury? Just maybe.

He has been through the being cited, remodelling the action, testing process before.

Not worth it for him if he was again.

Nair from the Thunder was cited and it has taken him like 12 months to be able to bowl again.

Just a strange place to pull the plug immediately with a back injury. He went from playing every game to retired. Just like that. You could take a couple of games off and nurse through the season.

 

[Mudeo]

He should be out of the attack. The 2nd high full toss should not have been called but given that it was Meredith should be done.

A front-foot no-ball should absolutely not override a full toss. What if he bowled 2 beamers that were both front-foot no-balls?

The rule isnt you are off after 2 full toss deliveries it is if 2 deliveries are deemed dangerous by the umpires then they are off. TBH the first full toss Meredith bowled would of hit the top of the stumps if Finch didnt inside edge it so and the other was outside off by a foot so not dangerous again. You could bowl 6 over the waist full toss deliveries but if they pose not danger to the batsman then you wont get pulled from the attack.

 

[madmug]

He has been through the being cited, remodelling the action, testing process before.

Not worth it for him if he was again.

Nair from the Thunder was cited and it has taken him like 12 months to be able to bowl again.

Just a strange place to pull the plug immediately with a back injury. He went from playing every game to retired. Just like that. You could take a couple of games off and nurse through the season.

He was being treated for his back injuries all through the series. It didn't 'just' happen.

 

[red+black]

The rule isnt you are off after 2 full toss deliveries it is if 2 deliveries are deemed dangerous by the umpires then they are off. TBH the first full toss Meredith bowled would of hit the top of the stumps if Finch didnt inside edge it so and the other was outside off by a foot so not dangerous again. You could bowl 6 over the waist full toss deliveries but if they pose not danger to the batsman then you wont get pulled from the attack.

Fair call. No his deliveries were not dangerous. But my question stands, I should look it up.

If a bowler bowls two dangerous deliveries, if one of them is a front-foot no-ball, is he permitted to continue bowling?

 

[eth-dog]

The rule isnt you are off after 2 full toss deliveries it is if 2 deliveries are deemed dangerous by the umpires then they are off. TBH the first full toss Meredith bowled would of hit the top of the stumps if Finch didnt inside edge it so and the other was outside off by a foot so not dangerous again. You could bowl 6 over the waist full toss deliveries but if they pose not danger to the batsman then you wont get pulled from the attack.

Nope, 2 over waist high.

 

[red+black]

I'm sure it's in here somewhere: https://www.lords.org/mcc/laws

 

[Mudeo]

Fair call. No his deliveries were not dangerous. But my question stands, I should look it up.

If a bowler bowls two dangerous deliveries, if one of them is a front-foot no-ball, is he permitted to continue bowling?

No he shouldnt continue bowling. If anything it makes it worse as it gives the batsman less time to react.

 

[Mudeo]

Nope, 2 over waist high.

If im wrong he would have been dragged after the 2nd one

 

[eth-dog]

If im wrong he would have been dragged after the 2nd one

Second one was a front foot which made the waist high irrelevant.

 

[red+black]

Second one was a front foot which made the waist high irrelevant.

As I said, IF that is the rule then the rule is wrong and needs to be changed.

 

[eth-dog]

As I said, IF that is the rule then the rule is wrong and needs to be changed.

It won't be.

 

[red+black]

It won't be.

Which is WRONG. Tell me you disagree and justify it.

I can guarantee this. If someone does bowl two beamers and one is a front foot no-ball, the umpire will remove the bowler from the attack, regardless of the rules, and neither the bowler nor fielding captain will protest.

 

[Mudeo]

Second one was a front foot which made the waist high irrelevant.

So then someone deliberately comes in and bowls a front foot no ball but a beamer at his face for 6 deliveries in a row but doesnt get dragged from the attack by the umpires because they were front foot no balls? That is what you are saying

 

[eth-dog]

So then someone deliberately comes in and bowls a front foot no ball but a beamer at his face for 6 deliveries in a row but doesnt get dragged from the attack by the umpires because they were front foot no balls? That is what you are saying

That's the rule.