by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:54 pm
by Pat Malone » Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:56 pm
by Lightning McQueen » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:08 pm
by Rik E Boy » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:19 pm
Pat Malone wrote:Its 3 fielders. I believe its just to stop a tactic such as 'bodyline' coming back as its obvious what the ploy is should a captain put 4 fielders on the backward square boundary.
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:20 pm
Pat Malone wrote:Its 3 fielders. I believe its just to stop a tactic such as 'bodyline' coming back as its obvious what the ploy is should a captain put 4 fielders on the backward square boundary.
by Lightning McQueen » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:22 pm
Constance_Perm wrote:Pat Malone wrote:Its 3 fielders. I believe its just to stop a tactic such as 'bodyline' coming back as its obvious what the ploy is should a captain put 4 fielders on the backward square boundary.
I wondered if that was the reason, but in this day and age with limitations on short-pitched bowling, I wondered why the rule still existed (if this were the reason).
As far as Im aware there isn't a limit on how many fielders can be placed behind the wicket on the off-side?
by smithy » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:52 pm
by CoverKing » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:00 pm
smithy wrote:Not only behind square constance but I'm pretty sure there is/was a limit on the amount of fielders you can have anywhere on the leg side too.
by FlyingHigh » Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:25 pm
by CoverKing » Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:32 pm
FlyingHigh wrote:Does the 6-on-the-legside rule apply to all grades of cricket or just one-day internationals?
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 5:04 pm
by OnSong » Tue Feb 08, 2011 5:05 pm
Constance_Perm wrote:I still don't understand why in this day and age legside behind the wicket is more limited than offside behind the wicket when it comes to the number of fielders that can be placed.
Maybe I've spent too much time away from following cricket??
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:05 pm
OnSong wrote:Constance_Perm wrote:I still don't understand why in this day and age legside behind the wicket is more limited than offside behind the wicket when it comes to the number of fielders that can be placed.
Maybe I've spent too much time away from following cricket??
I guess because probing bowling around the off-stump is in the spirit of the game and bowling bouncers every ball at a batsman's face isn't.
by Media Park » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:09 pm
Wedgie wrote:I wear skin tight arseless leather pants, wtf do you wear?
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:11 pm
Media Park wrote:I believe the legside part of it is the short ball, angled towards the head/upper body of the batsman, rather than the odd short ball designed to unsettle them.
by smithy » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:50 pm
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:54 pm
smithy wrote:Here's another one for you constance tutter.
Why can't you be given out LBW if it pitches outside leg ?
I've never understood why?
When was this law introduced ?
If it is going on to hit the stumps the rules should be the same for the off stump should it not ?
Deep down *, I reckon the question you raised and the one I just did are somewhat related CP.
by OnSong » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:58 pm
by JK » Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:00 pm
OnSong wrote:What did Michael Clarke see in Lara Bingle
to ask him to marry her? There are always questions in cricket that have no definite answer.
by dedja » Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:28 pm
OnSong wrote:What did Michael Clarke see in Lara Bingle
to ask him to marry her? There are always questions in cricket that have no definite answer.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |