Talk:Dismissal (cricket)

Anatomy vs body

This is posted to test a linguistic theory. What is the nationality of the person who used the abstract word "anatomy", instead of a concrete word like "body", in the article on dismissal? I hope someone comes along to answer. Axel 16:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

This was moved here from the article on cricket. The very first version [1] of this article contains two uses of the word. This was done by Larry Sanger who being an American could not have known much about the game and should have got it from elsewhere. So there is no way to answer your question. Tintin (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Timed out/forfeit

Should the forfeit of the 4th test by Pakistan v England 2006 be in the section - ISTR they were deemed to have forfeited the game by not appearing on the field in time.

Apepper 15:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

No, because that was the outcome of a match rather than the dismissal of an individual batsman. Jmorrison230582 08:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought the part of the forfeit section

In the case of extremely long delays, the umpires may forfeit the match to either team. This method of taking a wicket has never been employed in the history of Test cricket. However how long a delay is allowed before calling the game a forfeit, is still not known.

particularly the first sentence would make this a relavant example; ISTR that it was the delay of the Pakistan team appearing that caused the game to be forfeited to England - if not, what law gave the game to England?

Apepper 21:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Commonness

Would it be possible to give a list of the methods in order of commonness (presumably for test and 1-day seperately if needed)? 128.232.228.174 (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Keeping the Runs

The article does not say if a batsman is run out on the third run - does he get to keep the first two on his score - or does the loss of the wicket void all runs made from that ball? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatdoctor (talk • contribs) 04:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Role

Sorry... removed rubbish. should learn to read!!!

195.38.93.206 (talk) 15:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Double play?

Forgive the ignorance of a yank who has become interested in cricket, but is it possible to retire both the batsmen on one play? Admitted, this might be rather difficult, bit I have seen situations on YouTube clips were both batsmen were confused and in the middle of the pitch, not knowing what to do and it might be possible to get a run out at one end and then quickly throw down to the other end. But perhaps the play is considered dead once one wicket is taken. 162.104.164.234 (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

No double plays in cricket. The instance a batsman has been dismissed, the ball is dead. Once the ball is dead, a batsman cannot be dismissed. Therefore, until the ball becomes ‘live’ again (the next delivery) The not out batsman cannot be dismissed, hence no double play..... Weststigersbob (talk) 11:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dismissal (cricket). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100220005023/http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket to http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Batsman vs Batter

Shouldn’t the laws of cricket now refer to the gender neutral term ‘batter’ rather than ‘batsman’? It might not sound right to some people, but women also play the game! 86.129.12.243 (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Obstructing the Field

There has now been a second Test dismissal for Obstructing the Field: Mushfiqur Rahim for Bangladesh against New Zealand earlier this month - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/67634277 86.30.0.209 (talk) 11:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)