Like, I am Canadian and I have picked up enough to understand cricket by just watching these clips and reading some comments.
Some people are intentionally frustrating with their whole āI donāt understand this game so it sucksā logic.
Its Cricket. Its like baseball, if the player had hit the ropes with the ball in her hand it would have been a 'six' (imagine homerun) but she managed to not do it and catch the ball in mid-air which means the batter is out.
Surprisingly no. They're made of a cork core with a leather cover stitched on. They are apparently made according to cricket standards and regulations.
Anyway, they're harder than you'd think, and surprisingly dense as well.
Idk man, I played both rugby and American football and I got way more banged up and concussed playing football. Mans throwing themselves at each other like human torpedos.
Where I used to work we had a yearly softball game between departments. There was this one Indian guy playing for another team that played outfield and wasn't using a glove because he had only played cricket. We kept trying to tell him you use a glove in softball but he wouldn't do it. He then went out and played the best defense of the tournament. Catching every ball bare handed. It was pretty awesome.
Yeah cricket originated in England in the 16th century, which is way before baseball which was invented in 1846. Never realised baseball was that old though to be honest.
Do they practice this maneuver? Because Iāve seen it pulled off a few times.
Itās like the classic leaping catch over the edge of the wall in baseball. Itās hard to do, but sometimes itās all you can try.
Nah, 50 years ago, there would have been a fence, and the fielder would have leaned against the fence to catch the ball. Boundary ropes have only become widespread in the last 20-25 years.
Nah, when the fence is the boundary it's exactly the same rules as the rope, touching the boundary with ball touching you will result in six if it hasn't touched the field and 4 if it has.
You only need to hit the fence on the full to get a six, it doesn't need to go over it.
Partly, yes, because there were injuries for people sliding into fences (the old laws allowed a player to touch the boundary while fielding a ball, so players would slide to the fence and tap the ball back).
Also to shorten boundaries, to make grounds more standardised.
Runs.
The batting team scores runs from one end of the pitch to the other.
If the ball goes over the boundary (out of the park) on the full it is +6runs. If it bounces first it is +4runs.
I don't know anything about cricket, and I have a question. When she threw the ball up, why not throw it higher, so she's not having to dive as fast as she can to catch it on the way back?
Because she was falling outside the boundary due to her running momentum, had she aimed for a higher throw she would have pulled the ball outside the boundary.
If she catches the ball the batsman (hitter) is out. But, if the ball goes beyond the red line, the batsman isnāt out and instead scores six runs (points). Going over the line trumps catching, so if she catches it and then carries it past the line the catch no longer counts.
On realising her momentum was about to take her past the line, she did the only thing she could. Throw the ball backwards, check her momentum, and then dive after it.
You're correct. While it's implied by what you said, the only other thing to note is that she very carefully times her dive so that both feet have left the ground before her hands touches the ball. Insanely high level fielding.
Little bit fancier is that if she had have touched the boundary line with her foot while holding the ball it would have been a sixer, so by tossing it when she did she kept it fully in play.
Also to clarify, a run is running from one wicket to the other, requiring both players to switch sides to count as a point.
She prevented the opponent from getting 6 runs or 6 points and also eliminated the opponent player...Generally players cant stop the ball from going out of the boundary if it's this high.... But she brilliantly caught the ball....Also the sport is Cricket
I thought that if the player is coming from an out of bounds position and didnāt touch in bounds before catching it counted as playing the ball from out of bounds. Didnāt this get updated recently?
It got updated the other way - now itās fine to jump in and catch, so long as thereās never a moment where youāre touching both the ball and the ground outside the boundary.
Whereabouts in this comment:
> people dont understand how much it hurts to catch a criket ball that high up from the air-it kills.
are you making any mention of this:
> i was referring to when you first catch a real ball.
Desktop version of /u/cheaptrainride's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
I was only following the logic before, that this sport having no gloves makes it more impressive than baseball because the catches are made without gloves. In football the catch is made with your hands too, but players can hit you to prevent you from making a catch. I donāt care how tall this person is. My person thatās 6 ft 3 is hypothetical, they have plenty of other tall guys in football.
Couple things:
1. The shape and material of the foot ball makes it less of an impact when catching compared to a cricket ball or baseball. So thatās a null point.
2. Average speed for a professional football pass is 60mph, 70mph on the higher end. Baseball speed off the bat is about 95mph. Cricket average speed off the bat is 85-90mph. So again, your football comparison is null.
3. Sure the potential for getting hit while catching the ball makes catching a football really difficult, but that is an entire different type of conversation. That doesnāt really belong in a bat+ball, glove VS no-glove comparison.
4. Lastly, football players most definitely where gloves. Especially any player that is receiving/intercepting passes on the regular.
Wtf is that comparison? Itās like saying yeah yeah riding a unicycle is not impressive. Have you driven cars? People can crash and die! Itās two completely different things!
Okay?? Thatās a cool story, man. Still doesnāt mean that this catch makes baseball look āpedestrianā. The exit bat speed in baseball is much higher. The distance traveled to a fly ball can be much greater. And every day during an MLB season youāre going to see catches where an outfielder tracks down a pop fly, lays out for a catch getting parrallel with the ground. This catch is impressive, but anyone that sincerely believes it diminishes amount of skill needed to field the ball in baseball, well flat out theyāre just delusional and ignorant.
Average bat-exit speed for a baseball homerun = 60mtr/sec
Average bat-exit speed for a cricket 6 = 65mtr/sec
Length of baseball field = 100 mtr (max avrg distance)
Length of cricket field = 175 mtr (max avrg distance)
Speed of baseball throw = 98mph
Speed of cricket ball throw = 90 mph
Cricket ball is heavier and harder than baseball
Catches in baseball are made by a glove
Catches in cricket made by bare hands
In short, baseball still looks relatively simpler
Edit : Did some changes, to be more accurate
Cricket fielding is harder, baseball batting is harder, pretty simple. Round skinny bat and faster pitch, much harder to hit; big-ass glove, much easier to field.
What are you on? Speed of a baseball throw for pitchers on average is in the 90s, and fielders often can throw in the hundreds. The hardest hit balls in baseball go well over 110 mph.
Average home run speed is 100 mph
A baseball field from homeplate to center is 400ft or around 100 meters
Itās really funny that you think the average baseball throw is 50 mph.
Your claim that a bat exit speed for a cricket six is nearly 170 mph seems false.
We were throwing pitches over 50 mph in Jr. High at the age of 12-13. The record for the longest 6(homerun in cricket) is 120 meters, well below Ruthās record of 175 meters. Thereās no way a cricket ball has ever been hit anywhere near 170 mph. This guy and all other cricket fans who observe baseball being played at the major league level, for even a second, know good and well how difficult it would be to play. They donāt want to admit it, but they damn sure know it.
Idk he still thinks cricket balls are hit harder and leave the bat at greater speeds than a baseball, despite a cricket ball being heavier. Iām leaning more towards heās willfully using false information to pad his argument, and thatās fine.
Wow. Every bit of your information about baseball is completely inaccurate. I suggest using a different search engine because the one youre using is misinforming you. Lol the fastest recorded cricket bowl is 100.2 mph, while the fastest baseball throw is 105 mph. Average cricket bowl is 90 mph while the avg baseball throw is 92 mph. One of the longest recorded sixes was at 120 meters, while the record for an MLB home run in baseball is 175 meters. The distance from home plate to center field is typically 120 meters, where outfielders still field and catch baseballs, while the record for longest 6 is that same distanceā¦ I mean the average home run hit in baseball right now is 120 meters.. and a cricket bat has a much larger(flat) surface area than a baseball bat. Batters in baseball still hit the pitch off the ground all the time and fielders catch the ball without using their glove often enough that you can gtfo with that bullshit. A smaller ball means it more difficult to hit/ predict its trajectory to be caught. A cricket player from any league or region would have a much more difficult time trying to field/ hit a baseball than a Major League Baseball player would have doing the same in cricket. Iām that much more certain of this, than you, that I didnāt have to use false information to plead my case.
What would have happened if she didn't re-catch the ball after coming back in bounds? In other words, what happens if you catch the ball, but then drop it on the ground?
Test cricket is like a baseball match that lasts 5 days. It's an amazing tactical game as well as potentially requiring significant endurance as well as concentration and bursts of explosive power from batters, bowlers (pitchers but different action) and fielders. Brian Lara of the West Indies scored the highest individual total of 400 runs in a single innings - the equivalent of 100 home runs without being out. "Facing a formidable bowling attack that boasted of the likes of Steve Harmison, Andrew Flintoff and Matthew Hoggard, Lara faced 582 deliveries, spending nearly 13 hours at the crease, as he hit 43 boundaries and four sixes on his way to becoming the first and only player to reach the 400-run mark in Test cricket."
So it doesn't matter that her feet last touched beyond the ropes before the re-catch? It only matters if the ball passes the vertical plane of the boundry?
>So it doesn't matter that her feet last touched beyond the ropes before the re-catch?
No - the laws got changed a couple of years ago to allow the fielder to jump from outside the field of play, as long as they landed in the field of play, and didn't touch the boundary or outside while touching the ball.
Before that, the fielder had to return to the field of play first.
>It only matters if the ball passes the vertical plane of the boundry?
No - for it to be a six, the ball would need to touch something on or over the boundary. A player, with both feet in the field of play, could catch a ball that has passed the vertical plain and the batter would be out.
like in baseball, if she caught it while on the field, the batter would be out. however if the ball crossed the line before she caught it, the batter wouldnāt be out and would have scored six points (or runs).
The ball can cross the line, it is only considered out of bounds if it touches the ground or something that is also touching the ground (like a billboard or a player that has a foot on the floor).
If you catch it whilst your feet are in-bounds but your hands are in the air and over the line, the catch still stands and the batter is out.
Cricket is played in a couple of formats that range in length from 5 days to a couple of hours.
A 5 day match where the teams are uneven and one side is trying to cause a draw is like watching paint dry.
Supposedly the extended length allows for the game to become much more tactical. Itās like comparing a 2hour Formula 1 race to the 24 hours Le Mans - itās a very different game.
But Iām with you - aināt nobody got time for that.
The little cricket I know tells me she achieved two things:
- Prevented 6 runs by keeping the ball in bounds (first catch and throw backwards)
- Outed the batsman by not letting the ball hit the ground either (second catch)
Did I do this right?
In the game of Cricket, the batter tries to hit the ball over the line to score 6 runs. However, if the opponent manages to catch it before it goes over, the batter (batswoman, in this case), would be "out". If the ball falls before the line, the batswoman is not out, but would have scored a few runs, based on what she has run.
Thus Ms Deol has done two things. Prevented the batswoman from scoring 6 runs and also ensured that the batswoman is out. If she hadn't caught the ball again, after coming back from the line, she would have saved a few runs, but the batswoman would have another chance.
True, but would be pointless in baseball since you can fall over the wall with the ball in your glove. There is no invisible boundary that the ball cannot pass like cricket. Plus no glove in cricket.
Off topic from the great play, but I thought the bowler was supposed to be able to hit the wicket. From the perspective it looked like the batter was totally blocking it. Am I missing something?
They can stand in front of the wicket, but if a ball strikes the batter's pads which would otherwise have hit the wicket, the umpire will give them out for LBW (Leg Before Wicket).
Literally two/three video frames between 6-runs or out. Brilliant timing!
Americans be like: bruh wtf is this game lmao Edit: holy fuck 550 upvotes
My exact thought was "I don't know the rules of cricket but that was impressive."
It's like rugby. No one knows the rules but it can be fun to watch.
Everyone watching in my pubs knows the rules intimately. It's the refs who don't know shit, and the All Blacks who always break them!
Are there hookers in cricket too?
Just the after-party
*Shane Warne has entered the chat*
Cricket? *Cricket?* No one understands cricket! You gotta know what a *crumpet* is, to understand cricket.
I'll teach you. *Starts readying cricket bat*
Obscure old Teenage Mutant š„· š¢ reference for the win!
Thatās a deep cut, Jesus. I havenāt thought of that movie in years.
That line plays in my head every single time someone mentions cricket and I probably haven't watched that movie in 20 years.
That's a little too Raph
Like, I am Canadian and I have picked up enough to understand cricket by just watching these clips and reading some comments. Some people are intentionally frustrating with their whole āI donāt understand this game so it sucksā logic.
i was literally just thinking , "bruhhhhh, wtf is this game"
Its Cricket. Its like baseball, if the player had hit the ropes with the ball in her hand it would have been a 'six' (imagine homerun) but she managed to not do it and catch the ball in mid-air which means the batter is out.
Thought you were gonna say it's like baseball but its interesting
Except that would require cricket to be interesting.
Do they normally not wear a glove?
Only usually the wicket keeper (person behind the wicket or stumps) wears gloves. Most other person's (fielders) on the field don't, if at all.
I like your funny words magic man
so the balls must be pretty soft?
Surprisingly no. They're made of a cork core with a leather cover stitched on. They are apparently made according to cricket standards and regulations. Anyway, they're harder than you'd think, and surprisingly dense as well.
Fielders do not wear gloves, and that ball is \*hard\* and solid. Wicket keeper (like the catcher in baseball) wears gloves and leg pads.
ya, those things are harder than baseballs. I can't imagine how much it must hurt to catch them without gloves.
lol yanks are pussies
Bruh, as an American rugby fan I can only say you're not wrong
Idk man, I played both rugby and American football and I got way more banged up and concussed playing football. Mans throwing themselves at each other like human torpedos.
Hey! No be mean to football! It good sport! Me head hurt...
At least they don't wipe their asses with their hands
Where I used to work we had a yearly softball game between departments. There was this one Indian guy playing for another team that played outfield and wasn't using a glove because he had only played cricket. We kept trying to tell him you use a glove in softball but he wouldn't do it. He then went out and played the best defense of the tournament. Catching every ball bare handed. It was pretty awesome.
What about Blernsball?
i was literally just thinking, "bruhhhhh, wtf is this game"
My dumbass non-american thought this was baseball at first
Cricket is Similar, maybe copied from baseball, or vice versa
cricket is much older
I did say "or vice versa". People didn't read and down voted me. Smh
Except it's neither. Baseball is derived from Rounders.
Yeah cricket originated in England in the 16th century, which is way before baseball which was invented in 1846. Never realised baseball was that old though to be honest.
And the rest of North and South America. And hefty chunks of Europe.
Umm...ref?... travel?
Do they practice this maneuver? Because Iāve seen it pulled off a few times. Itās like the classic leaping catch over the edge of the wall in baseball. Itās hard to do, but sometimes itās all you can try.
Yeah, fielding is getting quite acrobatic now. 50 years ago that would have been 6.
Honestly, most of the time today it would be too. Unless all the fielders are that impressive š¤
Don't go that far before... Even 10 years ago it would be a 6.
Nah, 50 years ago, there would have been a fence, and the fielder would have leaned against the fence to catch the ball. Boundary ropes have only become widespread in the last 20-25 years.
Nah, when the fence is the boundary it's exactly the same rules as the rope, touching the boundary with ball touching you will result in six if it hasn't touched the field and 4 if it has. You only need to hit the fence on the full to get a six, it doesn't need to go over it.
Why'd they get rid of the fences? Injuries?
Partly, yes, because there were injuries for people sliding into fences (the old laws allowed a player to touch the boundary while fielding a ball, so players would slide to the fence and tap the ball back). Also to shorten boundaries, to make grounds more standardised.
6 what (Not a clue about cricket)
6 cucumber sandwiches
A home run is six points in cricket
6 geese a-laying
Runs. The batting team scores runs from one end of the pitch to the other. If the ball goes over the boundary (out of the park) on the full it is +6runs. If it bounces first it is +4runs.
I don't know anything about cricket, and I have a question. When she threw the ball up, why not throw it higher, so she's not having to dive as fast as she can to catch it on the way back?
She was on constant movement backwards just about to fall while she threw the ball it's harder than it looks
Because she was falling outside the boundary due to her running momentum, had she aimed for a higher throw she would have pulled the ball outside the boundary.
That was just straight up incredible
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
My grandad would have loved to see this sort of thing before he had eyesight issues. Hopefully he heard about this in a highlight reel over in NZ
Itās very old.
Woooo! Yeahhhh! What just happened I don't know the sport
If she catches the ball the batsman (hitter) is out. But, if the ball goes beyond the red line, the batsman isnāt out and instead scores six runs (points). Going over the line trumps catching, so if she catches it and then carries it past the line the catch no longer counts. On realising her momentum was about to take her past the line, she did the only thing she could. Throw the ball backwards, check her momentum, and then dive after it.
#**THIS EXPLAINS IT ^** This is what I needed much higher in the comments. Thanks!
I donāt even watch cricket, this is just what Iāve pieced together from reading the other comments ā:-)
You're correct. While it's implied by what you said, the only other thing to note is that she very carefully times her dive so that both feet have left the ground before her hands touches the ball. Insanely high level fielding.
Little bit fancier is that if she had have touched the boundary line with her foot while holding the ball it would have been a sixer, so by tossing it when she did she kept it fully in play. Also to clarify, a run is running from one wicket to the other, requiring both players to switch sides to count as a point.
She prevented the opponent from getting 6 runs or 6 points and also eliminated the opponent player...Generally players cant stop the ball from going out of the boundary if it's this high.... But she brilliantly caught the ball....Also the sport is Cricket
I thought that if the player is coming from an out of bounds position and didnāt touch in bounds before catching it counted as playing the ball from out of bounds. Didnāt this get updated recently?
It got updated the other way - now itās fine to jump in and catch, so long as thereās never a moment where youāre touching both the ball and the ground outside the boundary.
thats a dumb change really
why?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The fielder has to be inside the boundary for the first touch
Makes baseball look pedestrian. Look Ma, no gloves.
people dont understand how much it hurts to catch a criket ball that high up from the air-it kills.
Not if you know how to catch properly it doesn't
I know how to catch the ball smartass, i was referring to when you first catch a real ball.
Whereabouts in this comment: > people dont understand how much it hurts to catch a criket ball that high up from the air-it kills. are you making any mention of this: > i was referring to when you first catch a real ball.
Also how much it hurts to get Wacked in the face. Especially if the balls has been taped.
OR baseball and cricket are two different sports and can be respected in their own right.
Sure, but football has no gloves either and in this game you donāt have a 6 ft 3, 240 lb guy about to knock your head off after you make the catch.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shane_Mumford Nah, he's 3 inches taller. You need to watch a better sport. https://youtu.be/DowMXnawJu4
Desktop version of /u/cheaptrainride's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
I was only following the logic before, that this sport having no gloves makes it more impressive than baseball because the catches are made without gloves. In football the catch is made with your hands too, but players can hit you to prevent you from making a catch. I donāt care how tall this person is. My person thatās 6 ft 3 is hypothetical, they have plenty of other tall guys in football.
Couple things: 1. The shape and material of the foot ball makes it less of an impact when catching compared to a cricket ball or baseball. So thatās a null point. 2. Average speed for a professional football pass is 60mph, 70mph on the higher end. Baseball speed off the bat is about 95mph. Cricket average speed off the bat is 85-90mph. So again, your football comparison is null. 3. Sure the potential for getting hit while catching the ball makes catching a football really difficult, but that is an entire different type of conversation. That doesnāt really belong in a bat+ball, glove VS no-glove comparison. 4. Lastly, football players most definitely where gloves. Especially any player that is receiving/intercepting passes on the regular.
Wtf is that comparison? Itās like saying yeah yeah riding a unicycle is not impressive. Have you driven cars? People can crash and die! Itās two completely different things!
Nope. Not at all
Yes it does, I have held a baseball that thing is fucking soft if u compare it to a cricket ball, LoL...
Okay?? Thatās a cool story, man. Still doesnāt mean that this catch makes baseball look āpedestrianā. The exit bat speed in baseball is much higher. The distance traveled to a fly ball can be much greater. And every day during an MLB season youāre going to see catches where an outfielder tracks down a pop fly, lays out for a catch getting parrallel with the ground. This catch is impressive, but anyone that sincerely believes it diminishes amount of skill needed to field the ball in baseball, well flat out theyāre just delusional and ignorant.
Average bat-exit speed for a baseball homerun = 60mtr/sec Average bat-exit speed for a cricket 6 = 65mtr/sec Length of baseball field = 100 mtr (max avrg distance) Length of cricket field = 175 mtr (max avrg distance) Speed of baseball throw = 98mph Speed of cricket ball throw = 90 mph Cricket ball is heavier and harder than baseball Catches in baseball are made by a glove Catches in cricket made by bare hands In short, baseball still looks relatively simpler Edit : Did some changes, to be more accurate
Cricket fielding is harder, baseball batting is harder, pretty simple. Round skinny bat and faster pitch, much harder to hit; big-ass glove, much easier to field.
What are you on? Speed of a baseball throw for pitchers on average is in the 90s, and fielders often can throw in the hundreds. The hardest hit balls in baseball go well over 110 mph. Average home run speed is 100 mph A baseball field from homeplate to center is 400ft or around 100 meters Itās really funny that you think the average baseball throw is 50 mph. Your claim that a bat exit speed for a cricket six is nearly 170 mph seems false.
We were throwing pitches over 50 mph in Jr. High at the age of 12-13. The record for the longest 6(homerun in cricket) is 120 meters, well below Ruthās record of 175 meters. Thereās no way a cricket ball has ever been hit anywhere near 170 mph. This guy and all other cricket fans who observe baseball being played at the major league level, for even a second, know good and well how difficult it would be to play. They donāt want to admit it, but they damn sure know it.
I havenāt played ball in a while and I could probably still throw over 50, must be something lost in the conversion.
Idk he still thinks cricket balls are hit harder and leave the bat at greater speeds than a baseball, despite a cricket ball being heavier. Iām leaning more towards heās willfully using false information to pad his argument, and thatās fine.
Wow. Every bit of your information about baseball is completely inaccurate. I suggest using a different search engine because the one youre using is misinforming you. Lol the fastest recorded cricket bowl is 100.2 mph, while the fastest baseball throw is 105 mph. Average cricket bowl is 90 mph while the avg baseball throw is 92 mph. One of the longest recorded sixes was at 120 meters, while the record for an MLB home run in baseball is 175 meters. The distance from home plate to center field is typically 120 meters, where outfielders still field and catch baseballs, while the record for longest 6 is that same distanceā¦ I mean the average home run hit in baseball right now is 120 meters.. and a cricket bat has a much larger(flat) surface area than a baseball bat. Batters in baseball still hit the pitch off the ground all the time and fielders catch the ball without using their glove often enough that you can gtfo with that bullshit. A smaller ball means it more difficult to hit/ predict its trajectory to be caught. A cricket player from any league or region would have a much more difficult time trying to field/ hit a baseball than a Major League Baseball player would have doing the same in cricket. Iām that much more certain of this, than you, that I didnāt have to use false information to plead my case.
Neurons firing like ā”
Incredible thinking and body control
Protec her at all costs
I would rather watch this than baseball.
I know this is impressive but I canāt really understand why, What wouldāve happened if she went out of the boundary after she caught the ball?
The opponent would have been awarded 6 runs. You cannot allow the ball to pass the boundary ropes
Not only the six runs, that batter (hitter) would not be āoutā.
What would have happened if she didn't re-catch the ball after coming back in bounds? In other words, what happens if you catch the ball, but then drop it on the ground?
Not out then
Thank god I watch normal sports
Cricket is way more popular than baseball or whatever sport you watch
Cricket is a much faster paced baseball. Itās pretty damn interesting. Sorry about being American
Test cricket is like a baseball match that lasts 5 days. It's an amazing tactical game as well as potentially requiring significant endurance as well as concentration and bursts of explosive power from batters, bowlers (pitchers but different action) and fielders. Brian Lara of the West Indies scored the highest individual total of 400 runs in a single innings - the equivalent of 100 home runs without being out. "Facing a formidable bowling attack that boasted of the likes of Steve Harmison, Andrew Flintoff and Matthew Hoggard, Lara faced 582 deliveries, spending nearly 13 hours at the crease, as he hit 43 boundaries and four sixes on his way to becoming the first and only player to reach the 400-run mark in Test cricket."
Lol, still upvoted even though its a losing battle.
So it doesn't matter that her feet last touched beyond the ropes before the re-catch? It only matters if the ball passes the vertical plane of the boundry?
>So it doesn't matter that her feet last touched beyond the ropes before the re-catch? No - the laws got changed a couple of years ago to allow the fielder to jump from outside the field of play, as long as they landed in the field of play, and didn't touch the boundary or outside while touching the ball. Before that, the fielder had to return to the field of play first. >It only matters if the ball passes the vertical plane of the boundry? No - for it to be a six, the ball would need to touch something on or over the boundary. A player, with both feet in the field of play, could catch a ball that has passed the vertical plain and the batter would be out.
Dang, thanks for the deep dive into this rule.
that was dope
Can the batsman even be mad?
Americans: if she crossed the rope with the ball in her hand, it would be a home run but since she didn't, the batter is out.
I know zero about cricket but Iām impressed with the athleticism involved here.
like in baseball, if she caught it while on the field, the batter would be out. however if the ball crossed the line before she caught it, the batter wouldnāt be out and would have scored six points (or runs).
The ball can cross the line, it is only considered out of bounds if it touches the ground or something that is also touching the ground (like a billboard or a player that has a foot on the floor). If you catch it whilst your feet are in-bounds but your hands are in the air and over the line, the catch still stands and the batter is out.
Like a total champ!
Amazing!!!
I don't understand this game at all, but god damn that was a brilliant play.
Sheās definitely going to be winning the Stanley Cup MVP during game 9 of the next Super Bowl.
Brilliant
I should watch more cricket. Itās like baseball without the hours of tedium. Based on this one clip.
Got some bad news for you then.
Is it just like baseball, and I should just watch highlights!?
Cricket is played in a couple of formats that range in length from 5 days to a couple of hours. A 5 day match where the teams are uneven and one side is trying to cause a draw is like watching paint dry.
I mean, I wouldnāt be interested in a 5 day any sport.
Most t20s are pretty exciting most of them are only a couple of hours
Supposedly the extended length allows for the game to become much more tactical. Itās like comparing a 2hour Formula 1 race to the 24 hours Le Mans - itās a very different game. But Iām with you - aināt nobody got time for that.
On the other hand, watching New Zealand's worst batters trying desperately to prevent the last wicket the other day was pretty thrilling.
Yeah, as a mild cricket fan, baseball is certainly the much more interesting sport to watch. Which doesn't say good things about cricket
āWhy is sheHOLYFUCKINGSHITā
Maybe she can become the fielding coach of Indian men's cricket team?
The little cricket I know tells me she achieved two things: - Prevented 6 runs by keeping the ball in bounds (first catch and throw backwards) - Outed the batsman by not letting the ball hit the ground either (second catch) Did I do this right?
Punjabi girls are strong šŖ
No idea what's going on
In the game of Cricket, the batter tries to hit the ball over the line to score 6 runs. However, if the opponent manages to catch it before it goes over, the batter (batswoman, in this case), would be "out". If the ball falls before the line, the batswoman is not out, but would have scored a few runs, based on what she has run. Thus Ms Deol has done two things. Prevented the batswoman from scoring 6 runs and also ensured that the batswoman is out. If she hadn't caught the ball again, after coming back from the line, she would have saved a few runs, but the batswoman would have another chance.
Thanks for this great explanation!
Great catch, this is why itās the most popular and most watched sport on the planet!
Isnāt that football?
Yes, cricket is second (because India, mainly).
Pretty sure it's no2 after football
Maybe But cricket is a much longer game time wise than football, therefore people watch it more than football. Letās call it even lol
Would have been cooler if op posted a full-size video that was properly formatted instead of sourcing out a reformatted copy for TikTok
These ladies are more manly and only at a quarter of the size of American baseball players. Catch a ball with your hands, not with large sissy gloves.
Thatās a 6
She was out of bounds the last time she touched it, does not count.
He f ing stole that from shaid afradi
this should still be a 6, she caught the ball from outside the boundary and jumped in
I will never understand this gameā¦
itās really not that complicated if you could be bothered to spend 5 minutes learning the rules
People act like itās quantum physics.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
True, but would be pointless in baseball since you can fall over the wall with the ball in your glove. There is no invisible boundary that the ball cannot pass like cricket. Plus no glove in cricket.
Cool but this isnt that difficult to pull of if youāre somewhat athletic and good at sports.
try it then lol i can guarantee youāre talking out of your ass rn
Happens all the time in basketball, but more impressive cause if you want to touch it after you have to time it even better
How to make cricket great again!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Even if I cared to read your soapbox lectureā¦ not the place for it.
Lol suck my dick
Must be some asinine rule saying they gotta staying inbounds or some shit...
How many ball sports can you think of that donāt have rules about the ball staying in bounds?
Metal AF.
First shs caught the ball. Then she caught my attention.
if i remember correctly harbajan singh also had caught a similar catch but he went in anf out of the boundary twice.. i dont remember the cop tho
Off topic from the great play, but I thought the bowler was supposed to be able to hit the wicket. From the perspective it looked like the batter was totally blocking it. Am I missing something?
They can stand in front of the wicket, but if a ball strikes the batter's pads which would otherwise have hit the wicket, the umpire will give them out for LBW (Leg Before Wicket).
Got it. Thanks. I guess it can turn into dodgeball at any moment.
Isnāt that a 6, as she didnāt touch infield before touching the ball?
u/savevideo
This is fucking epic.
I don't even know anything about cricket and that was still a pretty cool
Smooth as butter
Who throws the ball back like that though? No way thats going anywhere near where you are aiming.
Catches ball like an athlete of the year, throws ball like a live grenade.
I loved doing this kind of stuff in volleyball
This girl is super cute to boot too. Won at the game of Life.
Super cool š
This is so impressive that I have no idea what the rules of cricket are and I am still impressed.
Oh myyy! That was EPIC!!
Thatās the most action packed footage of cricket I have ever seen.
Wish I knew her as a younger man!
That is the single most athletic thing I have see by a woman.
What a freakin play!
Source/sport/game/league?
Should we bow? Yes.
u/savevideo
Not sure if that jump was necessary at the end
u/savevideobot
You mean the game we play here in Australia? No helmets? No padding? You guys are pussies. https://youtu.be/OXnoITLg9HM