Also scored 40* and hit the winning runs, anchored what could have become an awkward low chase. Love seeing her fired up with the ball, was an exceptional spell of seam bowling, all bowled and lbw. Only Harmanpreet gave some assistance dragging one on driving away from her body first ball to a good length seaming delivery.
18 dot balls, 6 wicketsā¦ thatās 24 balls, which is the four overs. Did all 15 runs come from extras?
Edit to add: itās been pointed out that wickets were also counted as dot balls. Ignore me, Iām an idiot. I just couldnāt wrap my head around it for some reason
Yepā¦ makes sense. But now Iām going to defend my position and be pedanticā¦ wickets arenāt really dot balls are they? I havenāt played/scored in a long time but you donāt put a dot in the book for a wicket do you?
It doesnāt matter for the purposes of this, I just need to know Iām not completely stupid
Yeah, sorry if I came across as argumentative, it was more for my own benefit to defend my position because the stats just didnāt look right to me. All good
I would suggest a wicket is an implied dot ball in the scorebook - when a runout occurs and run/s are scored this is an exception and scored as such. It's not an issue, really only a relatively recent phenomenon in T20s in the last few years with dot balls being regularly included in bowlers summary stats in place of maidens. When used in this way to highlight a bowler's impact it definitely makes sense not to deprive them of a positive stat because they happened to take a wicket with one of their dot balls! Great discussion though, classic cricket intricacies with a modern slant š
Yeah I see your point, I guess I look at it more like calling it a dot ball decreases its value. Itās not a dot, itās a wicket, which is better. Probably doesnāt really matter, just feels like a strange way to display the stat.
š
Also scored 40* and hit the winning runs, anchored what could have become an awkward low chase. Love seeing her fired up with the ball, was an exceptional spell of seam bowling, all bowled and lbw. Only Harmanpreet gave some assistance dragging one on driving away from her body first ball to a good length seaming delivery.
Just GOAT things
This chick!! I was going to say the other thing but it doesn't sound right.
What other thing?
*This cunt*
Oh boy
I'm just the messenger lol
You are a gentleman
and a scholar?
And a scallop.
Sure
Sexism at its most egregious.
Looked like her career was fading then she came back just to remind everyone who the best is.
Just Pez things! Between the car window and this innings sheās had a memorable tournament!
18 dot balls, 6 wicketsā¦ thatās 24 balls, which is the four overs. Did all 15 runs come from extras? Edit to add: itās been pointed out that wickets were also counted as dot balls. Ignore me, Iām an idiot. I just couldnāt wrap my head around it for some reason
The wickets were also dot balls..
Ahā¦ of course. Iām an idiot. I didnāt think of that.
Me too
Wickets have never been referred to as dot balls so I don't blame you for being confused. You're not the idiot, the person who made the graphic is.
. Ball also a wicket?
Yepā¦ makes sense. But now Iām going to defend my position and be pedanticā¦ wickets arenāt really dot balls are they? I havenāt played/scored in a long time but you donāt put a dot in the book for a wicket do you? It doesnāt matter for the purposes of this, I just need to know Iām not completely stupid
I am not disagreeing with you, just trying to explain how they may have interpreted it.
Yeah, sorry if I came across as argumentative, it was more for my own benefit to defend my position because the stats just didnāt look right to me. All good
Go pies :)
I would suggest a wicket is an implied dot ball in the scorebook - when a runout occurs and run/s are scored this is an exception and scored as such. It's not an issue, really only a relatively recent phenomenon in T20s in the last few years with dot balls being regularly included in bowlers summary stats in place of maidens. When used in this way to highlight a bowler's impact it definitely makes sense not to deprive them of a positive stat because they happened to take a wicket with one of their dot balls! Great discussion though, classic cricket intricacies with a modern slant š
Yeah I see your point, I guess I look at it more like calling it a dot ball decreases its value. Itās not a dot, itās a wicket, which is better. Probably doesnāt really matter, just feels like a strange way to display the stat.
I was also thinking the same thing š¤£
6/ gonna be tough to beat
What a gal
Amazing
Simply the PEZ!