How many runs can you get off one over?

wolf

International Cricketer
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Location
Wolverhampton
Online Cricket Games Owned
If anyone doubts that it is possible to concede more than 36 runs in an over, The Times Diary notes the unusual performance of one 'Cogg', whose first name was not preserved in the annals of cricket history.

It happened in Western Australia in 1894 and legend has it that Cogg aproached the visiting in a slow, loping jog. He sent off a ball which filled the batman with no fear whatsoever, as this gentleman dispatched it with such force that it cleared the boundary still sufficently airborne to land in a nearby tree. There it it was caught very firmly and held in the fork between three branches.

The umpire, being a man who knew his rules and was obviously blessed with better eyesight than some of his modern day contemporaries, noted that the ball was still visible and had not reached the ground. Therefore, he ruled, the batsmen should carry on running.

Two fielders attempted to retrieve the ball by climbing the tree, but the lower branches could not handle their weight and collapsed. As staring at the ball did not help, a team decision was taken to chop the tree down. This resulted in a lengthy search for an axe, complicated by the nervous tension caused by seeing the other teams batsmen still running, albiet at a more leisurely pace.

Eventually consenus was reached that the search for an axe was not entirely in vain, however, as it did produce a rifle. This being the best available instrument of retrieval, the afternoon calm was disturbed by the angry sound of rifle shots as the fielding team attempted to shoot the ball down.

They finally gave up when they realised the visitors had declared after completing 286 runs. The two batsmen were no longer running and the entire team had retired to the stands, from where they were showing their appreciation for the extravagant fielding of the home side.
 

Zaibatsu22

School Cricketer
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Online Cricket Games Owned
sounds weird, anything touching the boundary is deemed to be the boundary, therefore it should be 6 and thats the end of it obviously, how dumb was the umpire? i suppose if it was hit into a grandstand he'd say keep running because its in the grandstand not on the ground! haha! or perhaps he could argue that a batsman can be caught off the bounce, afterall the ball would only hit the grass, not the ground underneath it!
 

Kev

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jun 19, 2004
Online Cricket Games Owned
Zaibatsu22 said:
sounds weird, anything touching the boundary is deemed to be the boundary, therefore it should be 6 and thats the end of it obviously, how dumb was the umpire? i suppose if it was hit into a grandstand he'd say keep running because its in the grandstand not on the ground! haha! or perhaps he could argue that a batsman can be caught off the bounce, afterall the ball would only hit the grass, not the ground underneath it!
The rules were quite different back then.

Seen this story here before too.
 

MUFC1987

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
I once saw an over go for 37 runs at my local club. Ironically, the no-ball was the only one that wasn't hit for six.
 

cricketmad09

International Coach
Joined
Nov 26, 2004
Online Cricket Games Owned
MUFC1987 said:
I once saw an over go for 37 runs at my local club. Ironically, the no-ball was the only one that wasn't hit for six.
How is that ironic?
 

MUFC1987

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
cricketmad09 said:
How is that ironic?
Would you not imagine that when he heard the 'no-ball' call then he would have swung at it and got something off of it? Yet, he swung at all the others clearing the boundary, yet defended the no-ball. Strange don't you think?
 

plympilgrim

International Coach
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Online Cricket Games Owned
i suppose so, but if it was a yorker say then he would have defended it
 

cricketmad09

International Coach
Joined
Nov 26, 2004
Online Cricket Games Owned
MUFC1987 said:
Would you not imagine that when he heard the 'no-ball' call then he would have swung at it and got something off of it? Yet, he swung at all the others clearing the boundary, yet defended the no-ball. Strange don't you think?
How often do batsmen react to a call of no-ball and go the slog? Never because by the time they realise the umpire has called, its already in the wickies hands.
 

dezzagod

Club Cricketer
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Location
Perth, WA
Online Cricket Games Owned
you can score more than 36 anyway.

1) Heaps of no balls + 6 6's
2) Heaps of wides + 6 6's
3) Running more than 6 or overthrows

lots of ways to score more than 36
 

wolf

International Cricketer
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Location
Wolverhampton
Online Cricket Games Owned
dezzagod said:
you can score more than 36 anyway.

1) Heaps of no balls + 6 6's
2) Heaps of wides + 6 6's
3) Running more than 6 or overthrows

lots of ways to score more than 36

Really? How amazing.

Have you actually read the story?
 

dezzagod

Club Cricketer
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Location
Perth, WA
Online Cricket Games Owned
yeah i have. just confirming you can score mare than 36. or do you just have fun pulling the crap out of other people's posts
 

wolf

International Cricketer
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Location
Wolverhampton
Online Cricket Games Owned
Well seeing how the story involved someone scoring 286 runs off one ball, I think everyone who has read it already knows it is possible to score more than 36 in an over.

Just a thought.
 

mattfb

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Location
Australia, Sydney
Online Cricket Games Owned
Adarsh said:
Well, if the rules were different in those days, it doesn't really count does it?
Well the name of the game was still cricket wasn't it? They played cricket we play cricket now as well.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top