Ask Bearders #178

Who has scored the most 1st class runs and never played test cricket? Also who has taken the most wickets and never played a test?
Aaron, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Who has been the most successfull cricket captain of all time? from all countries.
eirebilly, lost in Holland.

Ron and Dean Headley, father and son, played Test cricket for two different countries. Have many other such close relations done the same?

Dear Bill,

In a club game this year (where we umpire ourselves and when a youth player happened to be umpiring at the non-striker's end), a batsman was caught at fine leg off a full toss that was over waist height. The umpire only (silently) signalled a no-ball after seeing the square leg umpire indicate that the ball was high. By this time, the batsman had already left his crease to walk off and the fielding side broke the wicket, claiming a run-out. A lot of discussion ensued! Should the batsman have been given out or not?

Thanks very much,
Gavin

Are there any stats for dropped catches ?. I was wondering the other day how many catches were dropped off the bowling of Andy caddick and Darren Gough when they played in test matches for England ?. And that if the catches had been taken how that would have affected their final wicket tallies ?.

Bill,

You mention in your last answer above that Victor Trott played for "Victoria, Middlesex, Australia and England". Did he therefore play for both countries? Was this a regular occurrence during the Victorian era? When was the present regulations brought into place?

Many thanks!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

A match could be completed in 30 balls:

1). The team batting first gets bowled out for 0 in 10 balls.
2). The team batting second gets bowled out in 10 balls but one of the wickets is a runout going for a second run such that they are all out for a total of 1.
3). The other team is all out for 0 of 10 balls again, giving their opponents a victory by an innings and one run.

With some suicidal declarations it could be even shorter.

Remember as a young boy readg about a cricket match where one side was made up entirely of players from one family - the Edrich's. Have mentioned this to a few people, and they think that I'm balmy.
Can you uprovide any details please to confirm my sanity?

Martin Morris
Wraysbury, nr Windsor

question 3 - Thoult

Majid Khan captained Pakistan in the 70s, his son, Bazid Khan, has played 4 times for Pakistan, one test and 3 ODIs, starting in 2004

the Nawab of Pataudi (Iftikhar Ali Khan) played for BOTH Eng and India, whilst his son (Mansoor) played "just" for India

the Hearne family (3 brothers and the son of one) at the turn of the last century seemed to take it in turns playing for both England and South Africa

there are also a few cousins who have played for different nations, and famously, Ed Joyce made his ODI debut for England against his brother, Dominick, for Ireland

question 9 - Open Gates

there are several books about the Edrich family and "their" team

Runs in the family by John Edrich or The Cricketing Family Edrich by Ralph Barker

and CricInfo has a useful page or two that mention the family XI, take this one for example

https://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/player/12619.html

there were several of these "family" teams esp. in the 1920 and 30s, several actually played each other, and occasionally there was a link between the 2 families as in the game between the Graces (WG and Dr EM included) and the Robinsons (Annie Robinson marrying DR EM Grace) in 1891, whose family included Crescens and Theodore, both 1st class cricketers

Here is a question from Madrid in Spain:

Mike Proctor was a stalwart at Bristol for many years as batsman (Walter Lawrence Trophy and, in the winter, 6 consecutive First Class centuries), fast bowler, captain, deadly catcher at slip and a lethal off-spinner when the mood took him.

Famously though, he only played a handful of Tests, but his returns were such that many people feel that he was probably the greatest all-rounder of all time.

So, the question is:

If his wickets and runs from Rest of the World matches are included, do they back his credentials as potentially the greatest, or not?

is it my reading of the Bearded Wonder's answers or is there a real mistake in there?

in an answer related to extras he states:

"England's total (339), the number of extras (60) and the highest individual score (58) are each the highest tallies when extras have top scored in Tests."

these figures certainly include the highest team score when extras were highest scorer, but the 58 was equalled and the 60 beaten (65) in ZIM 1st innings against SL in 1994, shortened to 8 wkts before the game was drawn

so did i read it wrong? or not?

4 - If the umpire is satisfied that the batsman left his wicket under a misapprehension that he had been dismissed, which sounds like the case here, the batsman should be recalled, and not dismissed run out. Off a no-ball, a batsman can only be run out if he is in the act of running.

5 - There are no official stats for dropped catches, and no universal standard for when a catch "should" have been taken

13 - I think implicit in Bill's answer was that the innings in question had been completed - the innings you refer to was terminated prematurely.

For aarongeordie. I think John Langridge of Sussex scored the most runs without playing Test cricket. James Langridge his brother represented England however.

What is the record victory by a side that has been enforced to follow-on in all first class cricket?

And (maybe related) what is the biggest difference between a team's first and second innings totals?

Thanks
buzz1989, Cambs, England

My thirst for bizarre cricketing stats needs to be quenched so I have another question

As not all cricketers play for the country where they are born I would like to know what is the highest individual test innings by a batsman playing against his country of birth?

buzz1989, Cambs, England

I realise it's not possible for two batsmen to be dismissed off the same ball, but say a tailender was batting with a frontline batsman and spooned a return catch to the bowler, who noticed the frontline batsman was out of his ground and ran him out. Could the fielding team appeal for the run out and not the catch? What if the tailender walked?

My Father in law, John Jameson, I know to be the first person to be run out in each innings, in the same test match.
He also recently recently informed me that he was actually run out in three successive test innings as he was also run out in his previous test innings.

Has anyone else managed this feat of being run out in 3 successive test innings?

Many Thanks,

Paul Tregellas, Solihull.

Am I right in thinking that the players with most runs and most wickets not to have played test cricket were both Glamorgan players? I know that Alan Jones is the one with most runs (his 1 'test' having been disqualified as it was against the Rest of the World). I have half a thought that the leading wicket taker not to have played test cricket was Don Shepherd?

9- Re the Edrich Team

I recently played a game at Ingham CC in Norfolk, in their pavilion is a picture of the Edrich XI. I believe Ingham was their local club

Saintlymark and captainschoice. Thanks for your replies. I thought it might have been someone like Clive Rice who played County cricket and SA domestic but was never allowed to compete internationally. Let's see what TBW says...

question 18 - No More Sweeping Puh-lease

if the catch was a "fair" one then the batsman is out and the ball is dead, anything that happens after that is irrelevent (it doesn't matter that the appeal comes after the run out, the catch happened first)

a more interesting situation, that has happened, is that both batsmen end up in the same crease and the run out is effected at the other end....the out batsman should be the last to have left (or entered) the crease, sometimes difficult to call

see

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36SLpqAymTE

question 16 - Buzz 1989

the biggest win after following on was IND vs AUS in 2001 when they won by 171 runs

this is also the 3rd highest difference between 1st and 2nd innings, the highest is PAK vs WI in 1958 when then scored 106 in their first knock and 657 for 8 dec in the 2nd, a difference of 551

question 1 - Aaron Geordie

Saintly Mark is correct:

DJ Shepherd took 2218 wkts in 668 matches for GLAM without ever playing a test

A Jones scored 36049 runs in 645 matches for GLAM, NATAL, N TRANS, and W.AUS also without playing a test

(for the record CEB Rice "only" scored 26331 runs and took 930 wkts in his 482 1st class matches)

question 19 - Trigpa

i'm afraid i don't know if he has the most consecutive run outs but i do know that JHB Waite finished his career (of 50 matches) in 1965 with two consecutive run outs (albeit across 2 tests)

not much help, i know, but interesting

In re. Percy Jeeves; he is commemorated at the Thiepval memorial in France. His photograph has been used as part of the display in the visitors centre.

I think he may also have been mentioned in a recent book on sportsmen in The Great War.

Pip pip,

Tim Godden Esq.

I would like to know when the England Test Team was last made up of eleven players from eleven different counties. Is this a regular occurrence?

I can think of several innings played by one-handed batsmen (due to injury) - Marshall, Cowdrey, Terry etc
But who has scored the most runs in a test match batting one-handed?

I would like to know the highest number of runs scored off a single ball.

I was in the unfortunate position of being involved in eight runs from a single ball, in a friendly match I believe, one of your colleagues, Jonathan Ledger was involved in for Wealdstone Corinthians. The square was placed extremely close to one boundary, whilst the other boundary was about 3 times further away, and slightly uphill. The batsmen hit a hard shot which would normally have registered four runs, but in this case pulled up just short of the boundary. The ball had to be ferried in, by which time the batsmen had run four and were in the process of running a fifth, at which point I hurled the ball towards the wicketkeeper, unfortunately 5 feet over his head, and crossing the short boundary. Major hilarity all round!

Bearders,

Re: The Aussies 1948

If I'm not mistaken the same pitch also has the lowest first class score 33? essex v Windies in the 60's

Question/Answer 14 point 4

Tom, you say "Off a no-ball, a batsman can only be run out if he is in the act of running."

This is not entirely correct, because Law 38 Run Out says that a batsman can be run out if at any time while the ball is in play he is out of his ground and the wicket is fairly put down by the opposing side. This shall apply whether or not a No ball has been called and whether or not a run is being attempted.

However, Law 38 does clarify that if the wicket is broken by the wicket-keeper, without the intervention of another member of the fielding side, then a batsman cannot be "run out" from a No ball unless he is attempting a run.

Declarations are tricky things to get right, so I would like to know what is the highest run rate in a victorious fourth innings of a test match where the third innings was declared. (does that make sense?)

buzz1989, Cambs, England

Hi Bill,

In a half follow up to HawaiianExpress' question above, has anyone been given out by the bowler stumping the batsman on the non-strikers' end?
I mean by the bowler seeing the batsman out of his crease trying to sneak a quick single at the end of the over, and hitting the bails off with his hand, or throwing it backwards and hitting the stumps during,after he bowls the ball?

question 30 - Neil N 12

theoretically a batsman could score any amount of runs off one ball, by the fielding team constantly throwing the ball past the 'keeper but never to the boundary, and the batsman just keep running, however....

in first class cricket the record is 10 by SHWood of Derbyshire from Burnup, MCC in 1900, but this is a special case as it was under a trial law having the boundary marked with a net, allowing the batsman to score a boundary and still run...

to be added to all this there are the "NOT lost" ball stories (it should be pointed out that if the ball is lost then the runs are limited to when the fielders call "lost ball", see law 20) which range from 63 runs to 286 runs when a ball is stuck in a tree, or in a tiger's paws, inside the boundary, but plainly visible and therefore not lost (the tree story would need that the two teams had not decided on a "penalty" boundary for hitting the tree beforehand) in all cases the stories end "until a fielder fetched a gun" and either shot the ball out of the tree or just shot the tiger.....these stories never have any evidence (which is not to say they are not true) and are not First Class matches

Thanks Porto and Saintly. I'm going to modify my question to TBW.
Which South African has scored the most 1st class runs and never played test cricket? And who has taken the most wickets and never played a test?

# 19 /26

Paul - I regret to inform you that 16 people have been run out in each innings of the same test, and five of them did it before your father-in-law John Jameson. The first was Charles Kelleway, for Australia vs South Africa in 1911. Two players - Mark Tayor and Ian Healy - have managed the feat twice.

However, I haven't managed to find anyone other than Jameson who has been out run out in three successive innings. If there has been another occurrence, it would have to be three innings across three separate tests.

Nick

#33

Buzz, I'm not sure whether this helps you, but the highest run-rate for a successful chase after a declaration was when England scored 174/7 off 23.7 8-ball overs at Port Elizabeth in March 1949 - equivalent to 5.47 runs per 6-ball over.

But, believe it or not, there have only been 10 instances of successful run chases in tests after a third innings declaration - so not a big sample to work with!

Nick

Re: 30. I saw an eight once. Young quickie bowling with eight round bat and aging off-spinner at cover. Ball driven past said aging off-spinner who ambled after it. Other fielders (shamefully) watch. Young quickie eventually decides to run after it himself. Young quickie overtakes aging off-spinner and picks ball up inches from boundary. Batsmen turn for fourth. Young quickie angry. Young quicky launches ball at high velocity. Leg Gulley retreats to '45' to back up. Ball clears keeper comfortably. Ball bounces on hard ground. Ball clears backing up fielder. Ball crosses boundary at long leg. Ball lost in undergrowth. Much laughter. Even angrier young quickie.

#29: I believe that in the '20s there was a score of 63 in a Test by a player batting one-handed. Maybe Bearders can confirm (or deny) this.

question 31

the lowest innings was 12 both in 1877 by Ox Uni vs MCC and Northants vs Glos 1907

there are at least 25 other recorded innings of less than 20

in 1963 at southend the home team scored 56 against the West Indies, with only one batsman on the home team making double figures...is that the match you were thinking of?

question 34 - Middle and Off

famously Vinoo Mankad did this (ran out a backing up non-striker) in a test against AUS in 1947/8

this gained so much notoriety that the act of running out a non striker by the bowler became called "to Mankad" or "mankaded"

see both the 4th paragraph here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinoo_Mankad

and the part titled "mankaded" here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_out

question 10 - me!

i've just re-read that post and realised that i omitted Jahangir Khan, who is the point of the post!

he was the father of Majid Khan (the PAK capt) and grandfather of Bazid.

Jahangir Khan played for test cricket for IND

so like the Headley's 3 generations of test cricketers and two countries

No 19 (trigpa)

Being run out in both innings of a tests has happened many times, but John Jameson rather surprisingly remains the only England player to have suffered the misfortune and it is still the only instance to have occurred in England. The complete list is:
PA McAlister (10,15), A-E, Melbourne, 1907-08
C Kelleway, (59,18), A-SA, Melbourne, 1910-11
J Ryder (5,6), A-E, Sydney, 1920-21
J Trim (0,0), WI-A, Melbourne, 1951-52
JB Stollmeyer (0.28), WI-E, Bridgetown, 1953-54
I Meckiff (4,2), A-WI, Brisbane, 1960-61
JS Solomon (45,36), WI-A, Melbourne, 1960-61
SN McGregor (3,11), NZ-SA, Dunedin, 1963-64
CH Lloyd (15,57), WI-I, Kingston, 1970-71
JA Jameson (82,16), E-I, The Oval, 1971
Zaheer Abbas (51,25), P-A, Melbourne, 1972-73
AR Border (7,1), A-P, Melbourne, 1981-82
MA Taylor (3,36), A-WI, Adelaide, 1988-89
Wasim Akram (4,0), P-WI, Faisalabad, 1990-91
MA Taylor (5,4), A-E, Adelaide, 1990-91
IA Healy (53,47), A-WI, Georgetown, 1990-91
AH Jones (81,26), NZ-P, Christchurch, 1993-94
J Angel (11,0), A-E, Perth, 1994-95
AC Parore (25,2), NZ-SK, Hamilton, 1996-97
WJ Cronje (21,24), SA-WI, Port Elizabeth, 1998-99
IA Healy (6,10), A-WI, Kingston, 1998-99
MS Atapattu (6,37), P-Z, Harare, 1999-00
SP Fleming (22,55), NZ-Z, Wellington, 2000-01

I am fairly certain that three in a row is unique but four other players succumbed three times in a series but not consecutive innings, namely:
Shujauddin, P-I, 1954-55 in P
NJ Contractor, I-WI, 1958-59 in I
WM Lawry, A-E, 1964 in E
CH Lloyd, WI-I, 1970-71 in WI

Re 1,20,25

Glamorgan does include take top spot in both lists, but Sussex is also up there too!

Most runs but no tests:
A Jones (Glamorgan, etc) 36049 @ 32.89
JG Langridge (Sussex, etc) 34378 @ 37.44
GL Berry (Leicestershire, etc) 30225 @ 30.25
KG Suttle (Sussex, etc) 30225 @ 31.09
Most wkts but no tests:
DJ Shepherd (Glamorgan, etc) 2218 @ 21.32
EG Dennett (Gloucestershire, etc) 2151 @ 19.82
JA Newman (Hampshire, etc) 2054 @ 25.02
GR Cox (Sussex, etc) 1843 @ 22.86

Among South Africans, Ken McEwan just pips Clive Rice - 26628 runs to 26331.

What is the difference between a run out and a stumping. In a recent match the batsman missed the ball and the keeper was standing back. The batsman went out of his crease and the keeper threw the ball and hit the stumps. Was this a run out or a stumping? The bowler wants to know if it is his wicket (stumping) or just a run out.

@ 18 and 23.

I believe that the fielding team could choose to take the run out dismissal instead of the catch. Certainly, once the caught player has been given out, the ball is dead and so no other dismissal can happen, BUT the caught player can only be given out if the fielding team appeal for it.

Without an appeal, the umpire cannot give a player out, and so the ball would not be dead. The fielding team could then appeal for the run out. They simply have to appeal 'How's that for run out' to specify the mode of dismissal to make it clear that they are not appealing for the catch and there should be no problem.

The test between England and Pakistan at The Oval in 2006 ended on the fourth day following Pakistan's refusal to continue play. Therefore, officially, the match ended in four days. At least, it did, then.

With the setting aside of the (correct) umpire-determined result and the decision to count the match as a draw, is the official length of the match now five days with no play on the 5th or does it remain at four days? Whatever - the events after play actually ceased are unsatisfactory however viewed.

46 - assuming the 'keeper put the wicket down without assistance from any other fielder, the question of stumped / run out depends on whether the batsmas was attempting a run. If he was attempting a run, then the dismissal is run out, if not, then the batsman was stumped.

47 - the batsman can leave his wicket (ie walk) without an appeal, and he will be deemed to be out, even without an appeal. In any case, an appeal covers all forms of dismissal, and the Laws of the game clearly state that Caught takes precedence over everything but bowled.

48 - a match scheduled for 5 days(or 4, or whatever number) is always listed as that, even if play finishes a day early for whatever reason.

question 47 - bluesboy 776

an appeal covers all forms of dismissal, the fielding side cannot chose which to appeal for

it is for the umpire to decide if "any" batsman is out after "any" appeal, and in the case of the catch vs run out the timing of the appeal is irrelevant as the umpire judges the catch first

this actually occured in a first class match where the bowler appealed and the batsman thinking it was for LBW said, quite clearly, "i hit it!", to which the umpire replied "thanks, OUT caught" - the batsman (and bowler incidently) not noticing the 'keeper had then cleanly taken the ball, and the umpire not being sure if the batsman had hit it!

see point two of law 32 for more clarification on the run out

https://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-32-caught,58,AR.html

With all this talk of run outs I was wondering which batsman had been run out on 99 the most?

buzz1989, Cambs, England

Dear Bill

I have been watching with interest the final county championship games and a rather bizarre situation occured to me.

What if it was the final ball in the Sussex-Yorkshire game and results elsewhere had meant that although a draw would be enough to see Sussex safe, Yorkshire would be relegated by 1 point (or vice-versa).

The match situation stands that the side needing the win are batting in the 4th innings, 9 wickets down and need 3 to win.

The batsman gets a good strike on the ball and they have just completed the second run when the ball is returned to the wicketkeeper (hence the match is about to end as a draw).

However a thought occurs to the batsman and he sets of out of his crease for the third run. The wicketkeeper, seeing this, whips off the bails and runs him out. This means the match ands as a tie and hence both sides get 7 points plus bonuses instead of 4 which is enough to see both teams safe.

1) Is this situation possible according to the rules?

2) Would the batsman be accused of failing to play in the spirit of the game? Even though he could argue that he felt forced to attempt the third, albeit suicidal, run as his side needed to win.

3) Have there been any similar, controvertial situations where a match result has been forced due to the points situation in a table?

Thanks
Paul, Hull

#52 - if a County championship match ends in a draw with the scores level, as would be the case in you scenario, the side batting gets 7 result points, rather than just 4 for the draw

question 51 - Buzz 1989

there have been 13 players run out on 99 in tests, none more than once:

Bill Brown AUS 1948
AR Morris AUS 1953
JEF Beck NZ 1954
RB Kanhai WI 1959
ML Jaisimha IND 1960
MJK Smith ENG 1961
Mushtaq Mohammad PAK 1973
G Gooch ENG1980
DN Patel NZ 1992
M Atherton ENG 1993
J Kallis SA 2001
DPMD Jayawardene SL 2001
N McKenzie SA 2002

and there have been 5 in ODIs, again none twice:

GE Smith SA 2002
AC Gilchrist AUS 2003
ST Jayasurya SL 2003
EJG Morgan IRE 2006
SR Tendulkar IND 2007

question 52 - Pey Pey

point 3 - the one that immediately jumps to mind is in the B and H competition in 1979 when in the last "group" game Somerset would be assured of progressing if they maintained their run rate, a heavy loss would mean a run rate loss

in order to achieve this the Somerset captain, Rose, declared his only innings (a limited over comp) closed on 1 after 1 over, the Worcs openers scoring the 2 required in 1 and a bit overs, thereby losing but maintaining his run rate

all of this was in fact for nothing as the other team with a chance of progressing, Glam, had their game rained off and so didn't have a chance of winning

a week later the TCCB (as it was then) disqualified Somerset from the competition

it is now "illegal" to declare in a limited over game, although previously Gavaskar gave a good impression of a batsman waiting without scoring for a declaration in the ODI world cup against ENG in 1975

a couple of other matches have had "odd", to say the least, bowling, or "iffy" declarations, in order to force a result

#8 - Technically a match could be completed in 0.0 overs as a wide does not count as a ball faced or bowled.

So all 10 batsmen are stumped off 10 consecutive wides at the start of each of the first three innings.

But in the fourth innings one quick footed soul manages to get a toe behind the line before the 'keeper can whip the bails off, thus ensuring his side's victory upon the 11th wide being bowled.

With all the talk of the end of the 'fab four' era, I was wondering how many bowlers have dismissed Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman in the same innings?

Andrew Flintoff I believe scored his maiden test match century in New Zealand in fairly quick style. I am wondering how this innings compairs with other maiden test match 100's as far as number of balls and time.

Bruce
Warrington England

Re 57

Four times, the bowlers being:
FA Rose (WI), Kingston, 1996-97
SM Pollock (SA), Port Elizabeth, 2001-02
PJ Wiseman (NZ), Ahmedabad, 2003-04
M Muralitharan (SL), Delhi, 2005-06

question 58 - BC Campbell 11

Flintoff's maiden test hundred, in his 13th test, was 137 in 163 balls at a strike rate of 77.40 against NZ in 2002

i can't compare that against everybody's maiden hundreds, but i can compare it against players who scored a 100 in their debut test:

last year Matt Prior scored 126 not out in 128 balls giving a s/r of 98.44

in 2004 DR Smith scored 105 in 105 balls, a s/r of 100

both of which compare very favourably with flintoff, and as they are debut matches i imagine there must be faster maiden 100s just not in debut tests

as a bench mark a couple of quick scorers:

Pietersen's (whose runs come at a strike rate of 63.39) maiden 100, coming in his 5th test, was 158 in 187 balls, which gives a s/r of 71.34

and MS Dhoni (s/r 63.02) managed in his 5th test 148 in 153 balls, giving a s/r of 96.37

and finally the fastest scoring batsman is S Afridi (s/r 86.13) but his maiden ton in his 2nd test (141 in 191 balls) only came at a s/r of 69.72

Can Anyone help with this please?

I have always wondered when a bowler runs into bowl and the batsman at his end is walking about 5 yards down the crease, why the bowler doesnt stop and and turn round and stump the batsman who is wondering at his end out, is this allowed? has it ever been done?

Cheers

Brett (Netherton)

question 61 - Wolves FC no.1 fan

look up .... post 42

(the answers are yes and yes by the way)

re. 52 I have another interesting "last ball of the match" scenario, where the batting side has a very strong interest in achieving a draw rather than a defeat . The 9th wicket falls on the penultimate ball of the last over, and a previous batsman had retired hurt.
Famously Colin Cowdrey went out to bat with a broken arm in plaster... but where is the logical conclusion? If the player was severely injured, or (if you will excuse my bad taste) dead - could he be carried to the wicket and propped up, in the hope that the bowler cannot bowl the final ball straight, thereby achieving the draw?
Law 2(9) states that a batsman who previously retired injured is "entitled" to resume his innings at the fall of another wicket, it does not stipulate whether he has to be able to reach the wicket unaided, or indeed able to stand up.

I should have mentioned that, if a retired hurt batsman does not resume his innings, the side is effectively All Out and in that scenario would lose the match. On the last match of the season that could mean the championship changing hands.

Dear Bill,

Playing with 10 men and blocking out for a draw we lost our 8th wicket at the start of the final over. Our number 10 (who was actually our final batsman) came to the crease and managed to survive the over; but just in case we had lost a wicket on the final ball (and thereby the match) the captain inserted the name of his six-week-old son (present at the match but asleep in his pram) in the scorebook as our 11th batsman. Had we lost a wicket on the last ball, would the 'availability' of a suitably dressed infant have been sufficient to prevent the loss of the match? And, if so, would he have been the youngest ever person to have played a match-saving innings?

Dave Weston, Walton-on-Thames

The current match between Leicestershire and Derbyshire is a close run contest - Derbyshire scoring 194 and 203, Leicestershire got 208 in their first innings and so need 189 to win. Should Leicestershire chase successfully, the difference in the innings totals will be no more than 25, possibly only 20. Has there ever been an occasion where the first innings scores of both teams and the second innings score of the team that batted first were the same, or anything close to this?

question 66 - Jimmy Ton

in the 4th test between AUS and ENG in 1982 ENG scored 284 in their first innings, slightly bettered by AUS 287, the ENG second innings was 294 which won them the match as AUS were all out for 288

all the 4 innings were all out, and all were within 10 of each other, and the result was a win by 3 runs (the 3rd closest by runs) so a fraction closer than the possible LEIC vs DERBY match

Re 47,49,50. Does the precedence rule not just apply to the one batsman who may have been out several ways from the same ball? i.e. if a ball was bowled that hit a batsman plumb on the pad, hit his bat, the stumps, went through clean to the keeper who caught it and stumped him, the precedence rules tell us that the batsman is out bowled, rather than caught, lbw, or stumped. So this does not apply in the case in question - it merely tells us what is to be recorded in the scorebook rather than who is out.

I think the answer becomes clear when you take the example to its margin. Say I am captain and I am convinced that the return catch to the bowler was a bump ball: even if the umpire disagrees, he has no place to give it out caught if I revoke the appeal for caught. However I see that the non-striker was clearly run out so I allow that appeal to stand and the non-striker is out.

The timing of the 'dismissals' is also irrelevant. The batsman isn't out if there is no appeal so the ball doesn't go dead when the catch is taken. Additionally if timing were a factor, then in the example I gave at the start of my comment the batsman would be out lbw. But the laws tell us he is not out lbw, he is out bowled.

If the batsman on strike 'walks' believing he is caught, it behoves the umpire to recall him upon the revoking of the appeal against him (see Batsman leaving his wicket under a misapprehension). If he still leaves the pitch, it appears to me he has clearly retired not hurt (equivalent to out). Which is surely deemed to be after the ball is dead.

I believe the only way it could be deemed that the catch must take precedence is if the umpire gives the catch out and clearly calls dead ball for that reason before the run out, and that is the reason the non-striker did not return to his crease.

Any more comments or do we need to refer to the wise Bearded Wonder?

I've just read law 32(2) which I should have done before.

Yes I see now that the catch precedence is different from the bowled precedence.

So I guess it then turns on questions of fair play and conscience: if it is an obviously clean catch, it is out caught and any argument to the contrary is sharp practice; but if the catch is in any genuine doubt, it must surely be run out - the umpires are there to be referred to but how can the captain be the guardian of fair play if he cannot follow his conscience?

I'm just glad that at my club the catch would probably have been dropped anyway...

It's possible to have a completed game with no deliveries at all made.

All batsmen in the first three innings are run out backing up at the non-striker's end.

Then, in the fourth innings, the opening bat is twice distracted or obstructed by a fielder while awaiting his first ball. The umpire calls two dead balls before each undelivered ball, and the second time (under Law 42.4) he awards five penalty runs to the batting side, who win the game.

Perhaps a bit unlikely, I suppose.

Re 63 - 65 and the last ball of the match scenario: assume the side batting last are 8 wickets down, out of range of a win, and have an injured batsman in hospital who clearly cannot resume his innings. If the ninth wicket falls to a no-ball or wide, the batting side have lost. If it falls to a legitimate delivery, is the match drawn? The batting side have one wicket left, even though the "last man" could not possibly come to the wicket.

Re: 47, 49, 68, 69!!

I think #49 nailed it when he said "In any case, an appeal covers all forms of dismissal" . I think mentioning the 'precedence' rule has just confused things.

When I appeal I don't specify "How'zat...caught", "How'zat...ran out".

If I make an appeal it is up to the umpire to decide if a dismissal has taken place at any point in play - not to decide which mode of dismissal I am appealing for.

If he judges that the catch was good then there's no more to consider as the ball became dead at that instant.

It doesn't matter if the appeal came after more action had taken place (i.e. the 'run-out' of the non-striker).

Re 71 - this question's been answered before. The umpire's can't assume (and may not know) whether an injured batsman is available to come to the crease or not - all that matters is that as the last ball of the match has been bowled, and the batting side is not all out, the result is a draw.

RE #67

This is a very interesting match not just because of the very close run totals

Border and Thomson declined over 20 singles and then failed to reach their target and on each of the first three days the close of play co-incided with the end of an innings.

I think a good question for Bill would be which are the most interesting test matches from a scorer's point of view (ie record and co-incidence-filled)?

Matthew
Yorkshire

Re: 65

The laws of cricket specify that the captain of each team must nominate his players in writing to one of the umpires before the toss.

Therefore, unless your captain's 6 week old son was a nominated player before the toss, I am afraid his plan would not have worked.

Marlow_Plucky, I've probably played around 1500 cricket matches in my time, and in only a small handful of these have the names of the players ever been establised prior to the toss of the coin.

Your rationale of not allowing players to bat who are not on the list, whilst accurate according to the laws, is not practical under such circumstances.

In football a 'perfect hat-trick' is one scored with the right foot, one with the left and a header. I have decided that cricket's equivalent of the 'perfect' hat-trick is an all-bowled one. Firstly, do you agree, and secondly has anyone ever achieved the "Meteor Hat-trick" in a test match?
Julian Meteor, Plymouth

question 77 - Julian Meteor

surely a "perfect" hat-trick, like football, should include one dismissal of each of the "big" 3, bwl, ct and lbw

i say this as there have been 0 cases (out of 37 test hat-tricks) of all bowled and only one case of all 3 in one type of dismissal (if we count ct and bwl as different from ct)

in 2000 vs WI McGrath took a hat-trick where all the victims were caught, albeit by different fielders

but there are 2 cases of one each, ct, bwl and lbw

Briggs ENG vs AUS 1892

Pathan IND vs PAK 2006

Thanks PortoIan. However, I STILL think that an all-bowled hat-trick would be a better (not to MENTION) purer feat.
I am SURE Bearders will agree and I cannot WAIT for him to settle this BITTER argument.
Julian Meteor, Plymouth

Hello Bill,
What is the longest time, in terms of balls faced, for an opening partnership to get off the mark (including extra's)?
Thanks,
Daniel Grey
Middlesbrough

Technically, a test match can end with no balls being bowled. A team can be bowled out for 10 without technically facing a ball if every batsman is stumped/run out off a wide.
Second innings the same but say they get 25 wides and 10 batsmen stuped/run out off 10 of them, they also have technically not faced any balls.
3rd innings team 0 all out, all stumped/run out off wides, team batting 2nd wins by an innings and 5 runs and no balls have been bowled in the match.

3rd innings was meant to be 10 all out on my last comment

Dear Bill

How many times has the same county won both the County Championship and the Second XI Championship in the same season?

Ray Grace
Haltwhistle

When a batsman defends his wicket with his bat after he has played/padded the ball to prevent the ball hitting the stumps, what would happen if a close fielder caught the ball on the full?

Would he be given out even if on his first 'hit' at the ball it had bounced on the pitch?

David

Berkshire

question 84 - dave62

he is out if the ball has not hit the ground after the first "strike" but not out if the ball bounces after the first hit

see point 3 of law 32 - caught

[a fair catch is one when...]

(d) a fielder catches the ball after it has been lawfully struck more than once by the striker, but only if the ball has not touched the ground since first being struck.

Is there any record for the run out from the longest distance?

Re:86

Please excuse me for recounting a personal recollection of a team mate of mine, Alastaire Fraser, younger brother of Angus, who had an enormous arm capable of propelling the ball over 140 yards.

We were playing in Hertfordshire, can't quite remember where, but the pitch was shaped like an isocoles triangle with the result that the mid-wicket boundary was over 100 yards.

A batsman struck the ball through leg side and Alastaire gave chase, picking the ball up near to the boundary as the batsmen turned for their third.

Clearly the batsmen had no idea just how good Alastaire's arm was and started the third at a gentle trot. The throw came in like an exocet missile - a flat one from 100 yards. The running batsman's face was a picture. He tried to accellerate; but the ball came in about six inches over the top of the stumps, straight into the gloves of the keeper who completed the run-out. He was not much more than half way through the 22 yards at this point and never even got to the crease but pulled up short, turned around and trudged back to the pavillion muttering to himself.

Bearders,

You forgot to answer my question.
I NEED to know the answer.
Thanks,

Julian Meteor, Plymouth

Am I correct in thinking Jason Gillespie has not played a test since his 201* against Bangladesh?

If so are there any other instances of batsmen signing off from test cricket with a double hundred?

question 89 - Arthiur Fox Ache

you are indeed correct that Gillespie scored a double ton (201 not out) in his last test, but he is not alone in this

there have been 3 other cases of a double in the players last test

PA da Silva SL scored 206 vs BANG in 2002
SM Nurse WI scored 258 vs NZ in 1969
WH Ponsford scored AUS 266 vs ENG 1934

but beating all of these is the only triple hundred in a last test

A Sandham ENG managed 325 vs WI in 1930

this was Sandham's 14th test and the first triple in test history, all of this aged 40

Hi Bill,

I was wondering if it was possible for a batsman to have an incalcuable strike rate. Say the batsman’s first ball was a no-ball, which which he scored 1 or 3 runs. Then, at the non-strikers end, the same batsman gets run out (or impedes the fielders), hence having runs to his name but not having faced at ball. Would the strike rate for this batman be incalcuable (?) and has it actually ever happened that a batsman has scored runs without facing a legitimate ball??

Tim, Bath

Bearders,
Any news on my question?
Julian Meteor, Plymouth

#91 - a no-ball counts as a ball faced by the batsman, as it is an opportunity to score.

What does the term Heavy Ball mean and how do slow and quick bowlers deliver it?

HAS ANYONE EVER CLEAN BOWLED THREE PEOPLE IN A ROW IN A TEST MATCH?

Julian Meteor, Plymouth

question 95 - Julian Meteor

in a test, nobody has achieved an all bowled hat-trick

look up to post 78 above

repeating your question will not get it answered more quickly (if at all)

Bill Frindall only answers some questions WHEN the blog is complete (whenever he decides that is) not in the middle of a blog

Which player has scored the most runs in test matches but has never been out?

BLOG COMPLETE. NO MORE QUESTIONS PLEASE.

Julian Meteor, Plymouth

question 97 - Buzz 1989

there are 60 odd players who have batted but never been dismissed in tests (there have also been around 20 players who have played a test, or 2, but never batted)

the highest individual innings was 54* by SG Law, but this was the only time he batted in tests so the highest aggregate goes to:

Afaq Hussain of PAK who batted 4 times in two matches (vs ENG in 1961 and vs AUS in 64) scoring 10*, 35*, 8* and 13* giving him a total of 66

4 innings appears to be the highest, although T Yohannann of IND managed this across 3 matches, but never scoring double figures

I have recently noticed the term "free hit" in cricket commentary. Is this the same as a no-ball? If not what is it?
Aaron, Newcastle-upon-Tyne