there are people trying to imply that sanga is innocent in this whole affair. anyone who's played the game, knows for certain, how it works. its a nudge wink situation. what sanga said was aptly clear. randiv was a mere accomplice. fans will always color it as confusion.
this is especially the case when there's past precedence, and it seems like an awfully similar tactic of hitting below the belt - they did it against ganguly, tendulkar and now with sehwag.
regardless of the outcome, sri lankan cricket has lost face in the end by a foolish act by its star skipper and a promising young cricketer.
GENTLEMEN PLAYING IN THE SPIRIT OF CRICKET should not indulge in childish spoilsport tactics.Its GROWN-UP men at play-FAIR PLAY,winning or losing should not change anything.
Re: ABOVE ALL
by RAJ sharma on Aug 18, 2010 12:08 AM
SHAME ON THE LANKAN SQUAD,it is sad as a player like Sangakara has fans in our country as well and an incident like this does not set a good example for young cricketers anywhere,just leaves a bad memory.
after reading all about this Rule that says "Once the Winning Run been Taken (Whether by means of hitting by Batsman or an Extra Run(s)), the Game will be Over & Ball will Consider as Dead Ball after winning run.."
So, my Question to ICC is that...
'If Chasing Team Requires 1 run to win & batsman hit the ball for 4 (a boundary) & if batsmen completed single (required to win & hence Game Over) before ball reach the boundary rope, then why batsmen is awarded with 4 runs, instead of just 1 run (because ball should be considered Dead after winning run) ???'
Re: A Big Question to ICC...!!!
by vip read on Aug 18, 2010 09:23 AM
If this is the rule then how come a run-out of a no ball be valid? If Sehwag was run out while taking the first run he would have been out.
Re: Re: A Big Question to ICC...!!!
by MeetFireWithFire on Aug 18, 2010 10:20 AM
Yes it is true that a player could run out in a "No-ball". However Sehwag's case is different. If the winning run is obtained of a "No-ball", the action of play becomes dead which means one cannot get run-out and also that what ever runs scored by that batsmen becomes null and void as well.
Re: A Big Question to ICC...!!!
by MeetFireWithFire on Aug 18, 2010 10:13 AM
You got it wrong!
If there is only one run to win and if the batsmen hits the ball for a boundary and during which he also scampers for single, he would be awarded four runs. The rule says that if the delivery is in action of play, runs will be counted. But in Sehwag's case it is a "no-ball" which as per current rule, means that the delivery would become dead and any action of play after that would become null and void.
Re: Re: Re: A Big Question to ICC...!!!
by MeetFireWithFire on Aug 18, 2010 11:01 AM
It is a combination of both in the Sehwag's case. No-ball ended the match and the ball became dead as the match is ended.
why should law be changed? Let's say batsman is 2 runs away from 100 and the team needs 1 to win, should batsman be allowed to take the second run. Once the first run is taken the game is over. Same holds here. Once the winning run was scored by the team, game is over
Re: What the hell?
by wizardo id on Aug 18, 2010 03:38 AM
running is different from a shot played. if one hits a six then he should be awarded the runs regardless. especially since thats followed already for the winning run
Re: Re: What the hell?
by satsan on Aug 18, 2010 05:32 AM
The law is just fine! How about this situation? If the batting team needs 1 run to win and have 1 wicket left, lets say the bowler bowled a wide and the batsman got stumped - the law says the game is over when the wide is bowled and the batsman is not out. If you count the sixer of the same shot, then the wicket also counts - so the law treats both teams fair.
INDIA supported MURALI to gain 800th wicket in his last International test match. But SANGAKKARA and SURAJ RANDIV played dirty politics against INDIA's hero SEHWAG..This shows how jellous and selfish SANGAKKARA is ! He is spoiling SRILANKA's name which was lifted by great cricketers like SANATH JAYASURIYA and ARJUNA RANATUNGA
Its very disgusting to see the SriLanknas resorting to such tactics to deprive 3 of the best ambassadors of the game a century so well deserved.Clearly indicates that the Sri- Lankans are bad ambassadors of the game To set an example the Captain & Randiv should be banned from the rest of the present tourment & fined full match fees. Spectators on either side feel cheated & the shorter format of the game will loose it's charm.None of the Sri- Lankan Cricketers should be permitted to participate in the IPL 4.If this is the spirit while representing a country you can well imagine their loyalties when the same players play for different franchises & bat/bowl against each other. They are all here in the IPL to make a quick buck so stop them right now lest the disease spreads to other cricketing nations Group Capt S.P.Kute
Not necessary as the rule has been wrongly interpreted by the umpires. If Shewag' score is made 2105 and total 177 for 4,the matter will rewst and no other will cricketer knowingly will repeat this kind of deliberate behaviour.
a ball hit is a ball hit and it takes skill.regardless of a no ball the runs should go to the batsman and the chasing team as the same would have been counted in any other stage of the game. its not the batsmans fault.
Re: change the law in cricket
by adi piran on Aug 17, 2010 11:45 PM
Once the winning run is made the game is over. Same holds when you are 2 runs away from 100 and score a single which happens to be winning run. Just because second run can be run doesn't mean you can run it.
