Page 1 of 1
NewZealand Just SMACKED 400 runs off 44 overs
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:09
by DEeRaY
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:14
by Sojourn
he he he
I might be laughing about this, but I think they should intro something similar to a relegation strategy to keep cannon fodder teams from playing against the big teams.
Lou Vincent bliksemd 16 fours and 9 sixes for a total of 172 runs from only 120 balls. Brilliant.
S
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:32
by DEeRaY
must be some kind of world record... last i head the highest ODI score was like 370 or somehting
Sojourn wrote:I think they should intro something similar to a relegation strategy to keep cannon fodder teams from playing against the big teams.
S
Agreed, Although i dont think Mr Vincent would agree
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:44
by Mystical_Titan
Was the match rain affected? Why did they only bat 44 overs?
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:47
by DEeRaY
i think the start was delayed becuase of rain, Can you imagine if they played the full 50 overs...
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:49
by Mystical_Titan
DEeRaY wrote:i think the start was delayed becuase of rain, Can you imagine if they played the full 50 overs...
That's why I asked! Scary thought! :crazy:
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:49
by Sojourn
Mystical_Titan wrote:Was the match rain affected? Why did they only bat 44 overs?
They decided to to stop the farce during lunch time. You could say NZ declared. Cocky bastards !!
Edit - I see now it was because of rain... my bad.
S
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:50
by Mystical_Titan
Sojourn wrote:Mystical_Titan wrote:Was the match rain affected? Why did they only bat 44 overs?
They decided to to stop the farce during lunch time. You could say NZ declared. Cocky bastards !!
Do declarations even apply to ODI matches?
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:55
by DEeRaY
only against zimbabwe...
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:57
by Mystical_Titan
No, seriously. A team can not declare in an ODI.
I'm sure the umpires started suffering cramp from signalling all the 4s and 6s.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:58
by Sojourn
Mystical_Titan wrote:Sojourn wrote:Mystical_Titan wrote:Was the match rain affected? Why did they only bat 44 overs?
They decided to to stop the farce during lunch time. You could say NZ declared. Cocky bastards !!
Do declarations even apply to ODI matches?
You can declare in any game, in ODI's they generally dont in order to get the highest possible score seeing that the overs is limited anyway. Its very uncommon. Lancelot to confirm.
S
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:01
by Mystical_Titan
I guess it is possible. I've just never heard of it happening.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:34
by Sojourn
Mystical_Titan wrote:I guess it is possible. I've just never heard of it happening.
My bad again. That rule was changed pre the 1999 world cup. You have to stay the full time on the field. Only the weather and a riot or other acts of God can allow you not to complete your full limit of 50 overs according to the
ICC ODI Rules.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:37
by Mystical_Titan
I guess Zimbabwe can be thankful that New Zealand didn't bat the full 50 overs. Not that it will make much difference to the end result, I don't think.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:45
by Moses
Previous record was 398, I think. Can't remeber which teams were involved but I think Sri Lanka was one of them.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:46
by Mystical_Titan
It's a pity New Zealand couldn't get to 400.
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:57
by DEeRaY
yup 397! but thats still pretty HUGE!
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 16:26
by Mystical_Titan
DEeRaY wrote:yup 397! but thats still pretty HUGE!
Gee, ya think?
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 19:36
by someidiotsa
ahh come on guys Give Zim a break after all check all the crap is happening in their squad! I mena like half their team is under 22!
So yeah, they suck right now of course but maybe when the politics there change then there play will be better...
Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 20:33
by DEeRaY
DUDE 397!!!
and Andy Blingnuaght(sp?) got the most punishment over 9 runs an over
Still it must have been some display...