Topic: ODI cricket and general cricketing discussion [self - mod] - page 1137. (Read 160477 times)
Today there was a statement from Nazmul Hassan (president of the Bangladesh Cricket Board). He hinted that Shakib Al Hasan may miss the upcoming Indian tour. The team will be leaving in two days time, so I don't think that Shakib is left with many options. In case Shakib is left out of the squad, then the playing XI will be very much weakened. Already they are missing two big names (Mohammad Saifuddin and Tamim Iqbal).
It's not really strange. Cricket fans are not very tech savvy, they go to a field and lay down eating chips. It's not a gentleman's game it's a lazy spectator's sport. A lot has changed with the new formats limitations and the T20 mode, but its still a grill. And the only reason anyone talks about Cricket on Bitcointalk is because of signature campaigns. Not because of the game itself.
Basically all the sports fans who watches these sport are viewing for the love of the game and usually we watch at the comfort of our home or in the stadium and as a viewer you are putting your ass down and watching the game and if you view that as laziness then nothing more to tell 
.I know that this is a really old post but after seeing this now i feel like commenting.
I don't really think that you can associate a sport with how tech savvy its viewers are.
At last, it comes down to money and profits, like most of members here trying to get most out of the campaigns.
Anyone can have their opinion about things, quoting the post of DarkDays to show his high octane high energy games he plays and view, just want to show his hypocrisy. Not commenting on the campaigns as he is also involved in one and i just want to show his love for high octane games like brick mortar, virtual casino and on top of that Poker, he just view cricket for lazy spectators.At last, it comes down to money and profits, like most of members here trying to get most out of the campaigns.
I'm a semi-professional Poker player based in Singapore.
I am very familiar with both the online casino and brick & mortar casino industries, and obviously know Poker like the back of my hand.
I am very familiar with both the online casino and brick & mortar casino industries, and obviously know Poker like the back of my hand.
Sure, The format has changes lately, considering T20 formats but it was necessary to open new small formats to gather more viewers.
The game needs to change with the changing taste of the fans. A few decades back, ODI cricket was considered revolutionary. But when Kerry Packer suggested the idea for the first time (sometime during 1970s), it met with huge opposition from the traditionalists. He couldn't convince the boards, and in the end, he rolled out his own competition (World Series Cricket). Ironically, the cricket boards later realized that this format could earn a lot of revenues for them, and they later approved it.
The same had happened with the T20 format as well. It was an Indian media tycoon (Subhash Chandra, the owner of Zee Entertainment Enterprises), who first came up with the Indian Cricket League. The BCCI was initially opposed to it, until they realized how much money they could make from a similar league. After sometime, they came up with their own league (the IPL) without giving any credit to Mr. Chandra.
I don't really think that you can associate a sport with how tech savvy its viewers are. Cricket has always been a gentlemen's game if you watch it properly and get the intricacies of it .
I wonder how you went back and took this specific post to respond which is posted months ago 
. Either way coming to the point it is just a sport and view it as part of entertainment when you are having some free time and we all see sports in that context to relax from the hurdles and stress.Not sure how you differentiate sports into categories.
cricket- Gentleman's game
Football- Hooligans game
Golf, F1- Rich mans game
Kabaddi - poor mans game
These are just terms added by the media or a concept in the minds of the general public and majority of these terms comes from the roots of these sports, cricket was started by the English and they conquered the world and they planted the seed where ever they went and these people were looked upon as upper hierarchy because they ruled the place where they conquered and hence they were called as gentleman and that is the brief history since you brought up this
.Cricket fans are not very tech savvy
which sport needs tech savvy people to watch the sport . @7788bitcoin has a point that the rules were made before the tournament but it was the dumbest rule set i have seen in cricket, earlier we had similar incident in 1992 world cup when the umpires cut short the game when South Africa need 22 runs from 13 balls against England and after the rain the umpires decided to cut short and asked to score 21 runs in 1 ball 
, it is said that because of television demands the umpires were forced to come with a decision like that, either way these dumb rules continued in 2019.
, it is said that because of television demands the umpires were forced to come with a decision like that, either way these dumb rules continued in 2019.Well.. the rules are constantly evolving. There was a lot of outcry after the 1992 world cup match, and that is how the Duckworth-Lewis rule came in to effect (there were a few deficiencies in this rule as well, and eventually it was replaced with the Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method). But the problem is that the results if the past matches can't be changed. South Africa was robbed of a win in 1992 and nothing can change that outcome.
The boundary count rule was really dumb thinking. But at the same time, we need to remember that no one actually noticed it until it was put into effect during the final match. No one even thought about the possibility of the final match ending in a tie, because the chances of something like that occurring was very very remote. As I said earlier, the rule was changed as a result of protests from the cricket fans, but the final result remains unchanged.
I was mentioning about the statement made by Ben Stokes after the match, in which he was claiming that he had asked the umpire (Kumar Dharmasena) to reverse the overthrow decision. Dharmasena later clarified that Stokes never had such a conversation with him.
Ben Stokes is not new to controversy, he came to the limelight when he was arrested from a night club after a brawl and then the other controversy was when Sun publish the story about his family tragedy which was unfortunate, Ben Stokes is the real start of their world cup campaign and he won many close games for England even in the recent Ashes but Stokes is dragged into these unwanted topics and even i heard this from Stokes and Dharmasena said he did not hear anything from him .It is all old story and will be forgotten in quick time. The cricket fans may not be happy with it, but as per the official records England are the world champions. And the thing to remember here is that New Zealand players never protested against either the rule regarding the number of boundaries or the decision by Dharmasena to award the overthrows. They were not happy, but refrained from protesting, taking in to account the spirit of the game.
For many of the cricket fans (including me) what happened during the final was a sham. I believe that New Zealand were the real champions and not England. But after a while all this will be forgotten and only the records will remain. As per the official records, England are the champions and New Zealand are the runners up. And this is what going to matter in the future.
I was mentioning about the statement made by Ben Stokes after the match, in which he was claiming that he had asked the umpire (Kumar Dharmasena) to reverse the overthrow decision. Dharmasena later clarified that Stokes never had such a conversation with him.
Ben Stokes is not new to controversy, he came to the limelight when he was arrested from a night club after a brawl and then the other controversy was when Sun publish the story about his family tragedy which was unfortunate, Ben Stokes is the real start of their world cup campaign and he won many close games for England even in the recent Ashes but Stokes is dragged into these unwanted topics and even i heard this from Stokes and Dharmasena said he did not hear anything from him . England would always be regarded as the cheaters. At least they should have kept quiet. Ben Stokes tried some drama by claiming that he asked the umpire to reverse the decision to award 6 runs of the overthrow, and it was rubbished by the umpire himself. And this just proved that the Brits are a bunch of liars.
I did not follow these drama after the match but England won the world cup according to the rules that were present before the tournament and hence you cannot call them cheaters but that was not the best decision or rule you can have for a world cup final, i am not aware whether the rule was there from the beginning or changed at a later part but these rules are accepted by every team before the tournament and not during the match. No... I wasn't referring to the rules. I wouldn't complain against the rule, as it was in place for quite sometime. I was mentioning about the statement made by Ben Stokes after the match, in which he was claiming that he had asked the umpire (Kumar Dharmasena) to reverse the overthrow decision. Dharmasena later clarified that Stokes never had such a conversation with him.
~snip
What is the point in changing the rules, after the damage was done already. For the millions of cricket fans around the world, New Zealand were the real champions. England would always be regarded as the cheaters. At least they should have kept quiet. Ben Stokes tried some drama by claiming that he asked the umpire to reverse the decision to award 6 runs of the overthrow, and it was rubbished by the umpire himself. And this just proved that the Brits are a bunch of liars.
@7788bitcoin has a point that the rules were made before the tournament but it was the dumbest rule set i have seen in cricket, earlier we had similar incident in 1992 world cup when the umpires cut short the game when South Africa need 22 runs from 13 balls against England and after the rain the umpires decided to cut short and asked to score 21 runs in 1 ball What is the point in changing the rules, after the damage was done already. For the millions of cricket fans around the world, New Zealand were the real champions. England would always be regarded as the cheaters. At least they should have kept quiet. Ben Stokes tried some drama by claiming that he asked the umpire to reverse the decision to award 6 runs of the overthrow, and it was rubbished by the umpire himself. And this just proved that the Brits are a bunch of liars.
, it is said that because of television demands the umpires were forced to come with a decision like that, either way these dumb rules continued in 2019. England would always be regarded as the cheaters. At least they should have kept quiet. Ben Stokes tried some drama by claiming that he asked the umpire to reverse the decision to award 6 runs of the overthrow, and it was rubbished by the umpire himself. And this just proved that the Brits are a bunch of liars.
I did not follow these drama after the match but England won the world cup according to the rules that were present before the tournament and hence you cannot call them cheaters but that was not the best decision or rule you can have for a world cup final, i am not aware whether the rule was there from the beginning or changed at a later part but these rules are accepted by every team before the tournament and not during the match. I think this is good news, judging a winner by boundary count was never good.
It was a dumb rule to decide the winner by the number of boundaries scored, majority of the people did not had any idea about this rule until the final and if everyone knew about this rule before the tournament the ICC could have got some criticism and no one expected a final to be a tie even in the super overs and now the decision to repeat the super over until you see a decisive winner is a fair rule. What is the point in changing the rules, after the damage was done already. For the millions of cricket fans around the world, New Zealand were the real champions. England would always be regarded as the cheaters. At least they should have kept quiet. Ben Stokes tried some drama by claiming that he asked the umpire to reverse the decision to award 6 runs of the overthrow, and it was rubbished by the umpire himself. And this just proved that the Brits are a bunch of liars.
^^ V8 Follow this for more.
Fascinating edition of Stumped last night https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3csymnh with lots of weird new to me stuff about drafts and a nice interview with President of the MCC, Sangakkara. A bit inclusive this and equality that but overall nice.
I think this is good news, judging a winner by boundary count was never good.
It was a dumb rule to decide the winner by the number of boundaries scored, majority of the people did not had any idea about this rule until the final and if everyone knew about this rule before the tournament the ICC could have got some criticism and no one expected a final to be a tie even in the super overs and now the decision to repeat the super over until you see a decisive winner is a fair rule. 
Quote
"In Semi-finals and Finals, there is one change to the Super Over regulation in keeping with the basic principle of scoring more runs than the opponent to win, the Super Over will be repeated until one team has more runs than the other," the ICC stated in a release on Monday (October 14).
Quote
"Following on from a recommendation from the ICC Cricket Committee, the Chief Executives' Committee agreed that the use of the Super Over as a way to decide results at ICC events will be retained. Both the Cricket Committee and CEC agreed it was an exciting and engaging conclusion to the game and will remain in place covering all games at both ODI and T20I World Cups," the release further added.
^ I think this is good news, judging a winner by boundary count was never good.
LOL.. I am from India and I am female. And to be honest, I have never heard about her and I have never watched any of her matches. I tried watching the women's matches a few times. But I got bored after 5-10 minutes and I switched to the men's game. It is surprising that you guys care about the women's game. Perhaps I should try watching their matches regularly.
I have not watch an entire match but have seen highlights but i have heard about Mithali Raj as she is competing for a very long time and was the Indian women's captain for a long period and has scored runs but in India only Men's cricket is famous and you cannot find audience for Women's game, but what surprised me is that you are a female who is in the bitcoin market for a long time 
.^^ Sithara : Recent performance in Women World cup changed the situation and Now good amount of Girls started follow Women cricket along with many dudes.
Not surprising news, it was expected after WC Final blunder.
After World Cup furore, ICC scraps boundary count rule
Not surprising news, it was expected after WC Final blunder.
After World Cup furore, ICC scraps boundary count rule
Quote
The contentious boundary count rule that resulted in England winning the 2019 World Cup despite the final against New Zealand ending in a tie has been scrapped by the International Cricket Council (ICC) and will no longer be used at future ICC events.
The ICC’s Chief Executive Committee on Monday however agreed that the use of a Super Over as a way to decide results at ICC events will be retained. “Both the Cricket Committee and CEC agreed it was an exciting and engaging conclusion to the game and will remain in place covering all games at both ODI and T20I World Cups,” an ICC release said.
“In group stages, if the Super Over is tied, the match will be tied. In Semi Finals and Finals, there is one change to the Super Over regulation in keeping with the basic principle of scoring more runs than the opponent to win, the Super Over will be repeated until one team has more runs than the other.”
In the 2019 World Cup final, widely rated since as the greatest to have ever decided the tournament in its history, England managed to tie the target of 242 that was set for them by New Zealand. The Super Over also ended in a tie but England’s tally of 22 boundaries against New Zealand’s 17 throughout the tournament helped the hosts win the title for the first time in its history.
The ICC’s Chief Executive Committee on Monday however agreed that the use of a Super Over as a way to decide results at ICC events will be retained. “Both the Cricket Committee and CEC agreed it was an exciting and engaging conclusion to the game and will remain in place covering all games at both ODI and T20I World Cups,” an ICC release said.
“In group stages, if the Super Over is tied, the match will be tied. In Semi Finals and Finals, there is one change to the Super Over regulation in keeping with the basic principle of scoring more runs than the opponent to win, the Super Over will be repeated until one team has more runs than the other.”
In the 2019 World Cup final, widely rated since as the greatest to have ever decided the tournament in its history, England managed to tie the target of 242 that was set for them by New Zealand. The Super Over also ended in a tie but England’s tally of 22 boundaries against New Zealand’s 17 throughout the tournament helped the hosts win the title for the first time in its history.
@JSRAW this is an excellent decision taken by ICC though this rule should have been scrapped off way earlier, and it makes me wonder if this rule didn’t exist in the World Cup match could there have been a different winner?. Another interesting rule regarding the super over especially for the semi finals, and finals now we will get to see a clear winner even if the super over is tied. This rule will play a big role during next years T20 World Cup, no more tied semi finals and finals which shall benefit fans who’re watching the game right from the start.
^^ Sithara : Recent performance in Women World cup changed the situation and Now good amount of Girls started follow Women cricket along with many dudes.
Not surprising news, it was expected after WC Final blunder.
After World Cup furore, ICC scraps boundary count rule
Not surprising news, it was expected after WC Final blunder.
After World Cup furore, ICC scraps boundary count rule
Quote
The contentious boundary count rule that resulted in England winning the 2019 World Cup despite the final against New Zealand ending in a tie has been scrapped by the International Cricket Council (ICC) and will no longer be used at future ICC events.
The ICC’s Chief Executive Committee on Monday however agreed that the use of a Super Over as a way to decide results at ICC events will be retained. “Both the Cricket Committee and CEC agreed it was an exciting and engaging conclusion to the game and will remain in place covering all games at both ODI and T20I World Cups,” an ICC release said.
“In group stages, if the Super Over is tied, the match will be tied. In Semi Finals and Finals, there is one change to the Super Over regulation in keeping with the basic principle of scoring more runs than the opponent to win, the Super Over will be repeated until one team has more runs than the other.”
In the 2019 World Cup final, widely rated since as the greatest to have ever decided the tournament in its history, England managed to tie the target of 242 that was set for them by New Zealand. The Super Over also ended in a tie but England’s tally of 22 boundaries against New Zealand’s 17 throughout the tournament helped the hosts win the title for the first time in its history.
The ICC’s Chief Executive Committee on Monday however agreed that the use of a Super Over as a way to decide results at ICC events will be retained. “Both the Cricket Committee and CEC agreed it was an exciting and engaging conclusion to the game and will remain in place covering all games at both ODI and T20I World Cups,” an ICC release said.
“In group stages, if the Super Over is tied, the match will be tied. In Semi Finals and Finals, there is one change to the Super Over regulation in keeping with the basic principle of scoring more runs than the opponent to win, the Super Over will be repeated until one team has more runs than the other.”
In the 2019 World Cup final, widely rated since as the greatest to have ever decided the tournament in its history, England managed to tie the target of 242 that was set for them by New Zealand. The Super Over also ended in a tie but England’s tally of 22 boundaries against New Zealand’s 17 throughout the tournament helped the hosts win the title for the first time in its history.
My best wishes for this girl. She must be a legend in India?
LOL.. I am from India and I am female. And to be honest, I have never heard about her and I have never watched any of her matches. I tried watching the women's matches a few times. But I got bored after 5-10 minutes and I switched to the men's game. It is surprising that you guys care about the women's game. Perhaps I should try watching their matches regularly.
One thing I would like to say about the women's game in India. A lot of women do watch cricket here, and I am also one of those die-hard cricket fans. But very few of us play cricket regularly. The last time I played cricket was two decades back, when I was in primary school. IMO, cricket is more like a sport that people enjoy watching, rather than playing.
Well these are some impressive achievement for Australian Nation. ?I hope the girls keep going and break the record set by the boys.
I think they are going to surpass Men's record soon, they are unstoppable right now. Quote
My best wishes for this girl. She must be a legend in India?
People used to call her (Lady Tendulkar) and Yeah she is Legend. she used to be only famous face in Indian Women Cricket, but now most of the girls who are part of the Indian team are well known to the crowd. Jump to: