Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Cricket World Cup Thread


  • Please log in to reply
3815 replies to this topic

#61 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 02:15 PM

We won our first match today, against Holland. :)

S Africa/N Zealand match looks intersting.
  • 0

#62 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 03:02 PM

182/1 in 30.3 overs. Rain interrupts play.
Duckworth and Lewis will get into the act.
  • 0

#63 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 03:21 PM

Duckworth and Lewis? Who are they? :confused:
  • 0

#64 tedward

tedward

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 147 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 04:11 PM

I'll let Agnostic explain who duckworth and lewis are, but i thought you would know since they were only introduced to the game after england had a world cup final place gifted to them due to the rain.

Im going for australia to win but the biggest threat being the kiwis. - running off now to check how they did aginst south africa

:)
  • 0

#65 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 04:20 PM

Oh, you mean the rain rules. I was thinking the these 2 people were playing in the match today, but the scorecards didn't mention them. :confused:
  • 0

#66 zhurnalist

zhurnalist

    Registered User

  • Administrators
  • 11892 posts

Posted 16 February 2003 - 11:11 PM

How come the Aussies are always winning everything?

My Great-great-grandpa, my great-grandpa, my grandpa and my dad were all born in India, they all played cricket and the last three generations always complained about the Aussies being the best...

is it the meat?
  • 0

#67 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:00 AM

So zhurn....
You must be a fourht generation "Pommie Bastard" from the British raj?
Remember that all ozzies will think themselves better than the poms, but the poms by nature will never accept that!!
  • 0

#68 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:01 AM

We must base the comparison of us poms and the evil aussies on how good we both are at rugby I think. :)
  • 0

#69 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:02 AM

Excuse me...
Will never entertain the possibility of that!!
My cousin in Wales always says the Queen loves me!
  • 0

#70 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:11 AM

"Will never entertain the possibility of that!"

Oh. Why not?

Does the Queen love you personally, because she's spare if you want her. ;):D
  • 0

#71 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:22 AM

z
I have the utmost respect for your Queen. AShe's done a lot and adapted a llot over the past 50 yrs. God save her!
I would suggest and have in the past that she retire and let Charlie wear the crown!?
  • 0

#72 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:25 AM

I meant 'spare', as in loose. Unmarried. Free. Humourously of course. :D

Why don't you want to use Rugby capabilities as the basis for comparisons between our 2 great nations?
  • 0

#73 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:50 AM

z
Just the fact that you accept OZ as a great nation will thrill the millions in that country no end.
they might start to warm up the beer even. Or slow down the bowling?
  • 0

#74 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 12:56 AM

Okay, trav. You win that one. You didn't answer my (trick) question, to which the only real arguement would be that the England is better the Australia and rugby. This reply would have enabled me to make a remark about an Aussie admitting that his country is inferior to another country at something, and it being a miracle. :D

I've no problems with agreeing wholeheartedly that Australia is a brilliant sporting country, which when considering the much smaller population it has to Britain is even more remarkable.

"they might start to warm up the beer even"

NO!!!! Can't beat a cold beer. :)

"Or slow down the bowling?"

Now your talking!
  • 0

#75 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 01:14 AM

z
you might have had a few newcastle browns there mate. The spelling leaves alittle to be desired (like mine)!
I find it hard to believe that a Pom drinks COLD beer! However; I went to Lords on Australia day 3 years ago and after being shown the ground (which was closed) by a S. African guide, went to the tavern, and was served a VB by a girl from Sydney!!!! How's that?
  • 0

#76 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 01:18 AM

"I find it hard to believe that a Pom drinks COLD beer"

Well, people all around the world like different things. People in Britain are no exception. ;)

"However; I went to Lords on Australia day 3 years ago and after being shown the ground (which was closed) by a S. African guide, went to the tavern, and was served a VB by a girl from Sydney!!!! How's that?"

Not Out. :D

I'll go to bed now. See ya!
  • 0

#77 gonzo

gonzo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14844 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 05:07 AM

Canada has a cricket team ? No shit?............ zxb you look like your a big fan. its a game i gave no clue about, it looks very confusing to me. I will have to check it out on the web. I wonder why we Canucks never adopted all these sports like all the other colonies?.
Something else we can blame the Americans on. ;) .
Do you like our style of football? (funny shaped ball and tackling variety)
  • 0

#78 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 09:07 AM

zxb,
This is the Duckworth and Lewis rule:

- The D/L method sets a revised target for the side batting second (Team 2) when overs have been lost by a suspension in play. The revision is not in proportion to the numbers of overs the two sides can receive but is in accordance with the run-scoring resources the two sides have at their disposal. These resources include both overs and wickets in combination.

- A single table gives the resources remaining at any stage of an innings for any number of overs left and wickets lost. The resources are expressed in terms of the percentages of the resources of a full 50-over innings.

- If either innings is shortened after it has started then the balance of resources of the two sides is upset and a revised target needs to be set in accordance with the resources available to the two sides. To find the resources available for either innings, you use the table to find out the resources lost from that innings and subtract this from the resources with which the innings started. If the innings started with 50 overs to be received, the resources at the start of the innings are 100%. But if the innings is shortened before it starts, or if the match is of less than 50 overs per side, then the resources at the start are less than 100%.

- To find the resources lost from an innings due to an interruption:
(i) note the numbers of overs left and wickets lost at the start of the suspension; use the table to find the resources remaining

(ii) note the same at the resumption of play and from the table read off the resources now remaining

(iii) subtract (ii) from (i) to give the resources lost.


- To find the resources available subtract the resources lost from the resources that were available when the innings started.

- When a revised target has to be set, find the resources available for both sides and calculate the revised target as follows, always rounding down to a whole number.

- If the resources available to Team 2 (denote this by R2) are less than those for Team 1 (R1), then the target is revised downwards in proportion to the resources.

Thus Team 2's revised target = Team 1's actual score x R2/R1, plus one run. (One run less than the target gives a tie.)

If the resources available to Team 2 are greater than those for Team 1, then Team 2's target must be revised upwards. The excess runs required are calculated by applying the excess resource to the average 50-over total of 235 (or whatever number is decided upon for the appropriate class of game).

Thus Team 2's revised target = Team 1's actual score + (R2 - R1) x 235/100, plus one run. (One run less than the target gives a tie.)

I've played cricket ever since I was so high, and I cant understand it myself.
  • 0

#79 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 10:37 AM

Kimberley, Feb 17: Pakistani tearaway Shoaib Akhtar recorded the fast delivery in World Cup history on Sunday, then said speed mattered little to him as long as he took wickets.

Shoaib was timed at 98.5 miles an hour when he bowled to Namibian tailender Rudie van Vuuren during Sunday`s 171-run romp in South Africa, in which he claimed four wickets.

"I am delighted to have bowled the fastest ball in the World Cup but I am here to take wickets and put my team on the right track to win the title," he told AFP on Monday.

The 27-year-old, dubbed the "Rawalpindi Express", holds the unofficial record of bowling the fastest delivery at 100.04 miles per hour during a one-day game against New Zealand in Lahore in May last year.

"For me the delivery I bowled in Lahore was the fastest," he said. "Its okay to hit the speedometer as long as I keep taking wickets.
  • 0

#80 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 17 February 2003 - 10:46 AM

Gonzo
of course Canada has a cricket team.
Actually, (and I'll have to find the corroborating evidence) the first international series played was not between England and Australia, as many blieve, but between USA and Canada!
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru