gotcha, becuase i've seen pics of players with helmets and some without. I didn't know if it was like hockey and every player from a certain year on had to wear a helmet and if you played before the rule was made you didn't have to wear one.
Helmets are optional. As BFC says, generally batsmen wear them when they're facing pace bowlers, and don't bother with them for spinners.
Has a team ever been held scoreless? "Shutouts" happen quite often in baseball, but it doesn't seem like it would be possible in cricket.
No first class team has ever been all out for 0 to my knowledge. I am sure it has happened in games at lower levels, but the teams would have to be ridiculously mismatched. On the helmets issue, Viv Richards never wore a helmet, he didn't need one.
Mark Waugh used to wear a helmet no matter what type of bowling he was facing, but it's up to each individual batsman.
My school team was bowled out for 1 on one occasion about nine years back. Fun times. First class lowest score is about 14 off the top of my head, by a Victorian XI in the prehistoric times (ie: 1800s ). SA came close last season - bundled out for a measly 29 against New South Wales.
It's all a matter of choice and comfort. Some batsmen where them all the time (like SC stated with Waugh). Others wear them only when facing pace and not spin. A lot of the times in Tests such as being hosted in India, Sri Lanka and Sharjah (very hot places), most players don't wear helmets no matter who they are facing. Gets very hot under the sun.
I would have thought it would be impossible to have a game with a side bowled out for 0, even at the lowest level - because at that level the bowling would be cack and the batting side would score from a wide or something at least once, even if they never managed to hit a ball for a run.
what happens to the ball when someone hits a six? if it goes in the stands do the fans get to keep it or is it returned to the bowler so they can use the same ball?
if someone gets a milestone with a certain ball, like 500 wickets or 7,000 runs to they get to keep the ball during the match or do they wait until its over?
They get it at the end of the match. A ball can't be changed during an innings, unless: * it has been used for 85 overs, in which case a new ball is offered; *it becomes damaged, or lost, in either of which cases it is replaced with a ball of similar wear & tear.
To elaborate more on this: I think there have been times when a ball is hit so hard out of the park, that there is hope of retrieving it. (Went in some body of water outside the stadium, lost in a parking lot, whatever.) In such cases, umpires call for a substitute "new" ball, and try to achieve the same level of shine on it as the lost ball. This is done by rubbing the ball on a piece of cloth e.g. trousers, etc. It is a trial-and-error art, but the best it can be done. The big deal about wanting to use the same ball as much as practically possible is that, unlike baseball, a cricket ball has its life during the match. Since the ball bounces on a surface, depending on the shine of the ball, a bowler can get radically different performance (swing, seam, spin) depending on if the ball is old or new. It would be unfair to the batsmen or bowlers to arbitrarily substitute balls the way they do it in baseball.
At the first class and test levels the umpires have a box of balls of various wears (20 over sold, 30 overs old etc) that they can choose a replacement from.
thanks for the info on the balls being retreived. i figured they would want to use the same one for the whole game, but has anyone ever hit one out of a ground, like in a Test match or First class match and it took them a while to find it?
i read that part, but i was just wondering if like they actually spend time trying to look for the ball, like in the parking lot, and then decide to use the new ball. or if they just say screw it and use the new ball without even looking kind of a stuipd question
They'll try to find the ball, but the umpires will not waste too much time in doing so. If that's the case, then they'll replace the ball with one as near to the lost one in quality/age/shape/colour as they can. Their box of replacement balls has a variety of such aged balls. The umpires ("umps") have some idea of how many "overs" each replacement ball has been used for previously.
are the replacement balls made to be "game used" for 20, 30, 40 overs, etc?? or are they balls from real games that weren't used anymore so are therefore used as replacements?
In club cricket if the fielding side is on the wrong end of a hiding in a 'timed' game they may pretend that they can't find the ball or they may kick it into a bush to waste a little time, I did this once and I lost the bugger which was pretty embarrasing because some kids saw me do it and they grassed me up, we had to use a replacement.
Hehehe, that's hilarious. That's why we need security cameras all over the place, even more so than the threat of terrorists.
I know some people have problem understanding LBW's (Leg Before Wicket). Computer generated graphics in the clip below should make them more clear. Needless to say umpire got the (non)call wrong. http://www.megaupload.com/?d=28P8PU73 (788 kb)
I know in soccer the national coach picks the team. In cricket, it seems there is this board that picks the team. Is there any particular reason why this is? I ask because of the U.S. team getting kicked out of some ICC tournament because they couldn't agree on a team.