thevoice wrote:You'd reckon this'll test the ATCA social media policy with what's being said online. The brothers might have a holiday coming up.
It wasn't an ATCA competition was it?
by Tony Clifton » Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:33 am
thevoice wrote:You'd reckon this'll test the ATCA social media policy with what's being said online. The brothers might have a holiday coming up.
by thevoice » Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:55 am
Tony Clifton wrote:thevoice wrote:You'd reckon this'll test the ATCA social media policy with what's being said online. The brothers might have a holiday coming up.
It wasn't an ATCA competition was it?
by Lightning McQueen » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:51 pm
thevoice wrote:
Representing ATCA so I'd imagine it's relevant.
by Booney » Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:35 pm
by caleb777 » Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:49 pm
Booney wrote:The law relating to penalty runs, doesn't it need a warning to be given before a 5 run penalty is awarded?
by Booney » Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:58 pm
caleb777 wrote:Booney wrote:The law relating to penalty runs, doesn't it need a warning to be given before a 5 run penalty is awarded?
There were a number of close run outs given not out which were all safe. A caught behind appeal was adjudged not out and a para hills bowler allegedly kicked the stumps down. You dont deserve a warning when you kick the stumps down IMO.
by The_Observant_One » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:16 pm
by Dutchy » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:17 pm
Booney wrote:caleb777 wrote:Booney wrote:The law relating to penalty runs, doesn't it need a warning to be given before a 5 run penalty is awarded?
There were a number of close run outs given not out which were all safe. A caught behind appeal was adjudged not out and a para hills bowler allegedly kicked the stumps down. You dont deserve a warning when you kick the stumps down IMO.
If that's what occurred then I have no problem with the penalty.
by The Bedge » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:46 pm
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by caleb777 » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:59 pm
The_Observant_One wrote:Take Caleb's comments with a grain of salt, he's originally from the Ramblers and is about as one eyed as they come.
Not saying what he has said is incorrect but generally speaking if a Ramblers player had kicked the stumps, he'd find a way to blame it on the oppositions scorer
by Booney » Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:03 pm
caleb777 wrote:The_Observant_One wrote:Take Caleb's comments with a grain of salt, he's originally from the Ramblers and is about as one eyed as they come.
Not saying what he has said is incorrect but generally speaking if a Ramblers player had kicked the stumps, he'd find a way to blame it on the oppositions scorer
Lol. All this hate towards the Ramblers is hilarious. Im just going on what i was told and if you do read the comment I do say "allegedly", hardly one eyed champ.
by Dutchy » Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:09 pm
The Bedge wrote:Isn’t there a row called “penalty runs” in the sundries area below no balls?
by Harry49 » Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:13 pm
by Tony Clifton » Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:05 pm
Harry49 wrote:No stumps were kicked down. The 5 run penalty was for swearing at the umpire
by Senor Moto Gadili » Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:25 pm
Tony Clifton wrote:Harry49 wrote:No stumps were kicked down. The 5 run penalty was for swearing at the umpire
Is that a rule?
How do umpires determine what is a runs penalty and what is a report? Would seem dangerously subjective.
by Keefy » Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:13 pm
Took the umpires a moment to work out what happened tooDutchy wrote:The Bedge wrote:Isn’t there a row called “penalty runs” in the sundries area below no balls?
Not in the scorebook I was using, we made our own anyway.
Another irony is it was Coro Ramblers u16's that received the 5 runs
by The Old Fellow » Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:06 pm
Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Tony Clifton wrote:Harry49 wrote:No stumps were kicked down. The 5 run penalty was for swearing at the umpire
Is that a rule?
How do umpires determine what is a runs penalty and what is a report? Would seem dangerously subjective.
Yes, it's a rule in ATCA, but not sure if it applies to SAMCA games. Obviously the umpire thoight it did. In ATCA, the use of the 5 run penalty should be preceded by a first and final warning, which could involve a player being put on report. Any furtber indiscretions would incur a 5 run penalty.
by Senor Moto Gadili » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:20 am
The Old Fellow wrote:Senor Moto Gadili wrote:Tony Clifton wrote:Harry49 wrote:No stumps were kicked down. The 5 run penalty was for swearing at the umpire
Is that a rule?
How do umpires determine what is a runs penalty and what is a report? Would seem dangerously subjective.
Yes, it's a rule in ATCA, but not sure if it applies to SAMCA games. Obviously the umpire thoight it did. In ATCA, the use of the 5 run penalty should be preceded by a first and final warning, which could involve a player being put on report. Any furtber indiscretions would incur a 5 run penalty.
It is a law of cricket, law 42. There are 4 levels, the first is warning for minor unacceptable conduct and any further minor infringement is 5 penalty runs. Level are slightly more serious unacceptable conduct and penalty runs are awarded without any warning. The third is that a player is sent off for a period of time and level 4 is goodbye, no more involvement in the match. Any level can be a report.
by Booney » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:51 am
by Senor Moto Gadili » Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:23 am
Booney wrote:"Get ****** ******* hell ****"
"Easy, settle down, enough"
"Get ****** ******* shit **** ****"
"-5 runs"
That a fair assessment?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |