• 9-4

    From max.it@max@tea.time to uk.sport.cricket on Fri Apr 10 12:17:18 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket


    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo
    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From John Hall@john@jhall.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Fri Apr 10 16:46:26 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 10/04/2026 12:17, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo


    The disparity between the different associate nations seems to be even
    wider in the women's game than in the men's. Brazil made 202 in their 20
    overs and Lesotho were all out for 13 in 6.2 overs.
    --
    John Hall

    You can divide people into two categories:
    those who divide people into two categories and those who don't
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Daniel70@daniel47@nomail.afraid.org to uk.sport.cricket on Mon Jun 22 22:11:48 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty
    Overs per side.

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is
    either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.
    --
    Daniel70
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From John Hall@john@jhall.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Mon Jun 22 16:41:11 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.


    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty
    Overs per side.

    And again we were to "blame".

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is
    either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.

    It could happen. There is already a T10 tournament, held in the UAE
    IIRC.
    --
    John Hall

    "The covers of this book are too far apart."
    Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From max.it@max@tea.time to uk.sport.cricket on Mon Jun 22 19:04:14 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 16:41:11 +0100, John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk>
    wrote:

    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 ><daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the >blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.


    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty >>Overs per side.

    And again we were to "blame".

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is >>either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.

    It could happen. There is already a T10 tournament, held in the UAE
    IIRC.


    We're playing Sunday sixes. It doesn't seem short because it's an all
    day tournament and the teams mix and match to make games happen.
    The motto is 'you might get bowled out, but you won't be left out'.
    It's great for what it is - complete mayhem.
    At school we had the lunchtime test match,which was five days of
    standing watching the better players bat and bowl.

    max.it
    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David North@nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Tue Jun 23 06:44:33 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 22/06/2026 16:41, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.


    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty
    Overs per side.

    And again we were to "blame".

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is
    either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.

    It could happen. There is already a T10 tournament, held in the UAE
    IIRC.

    It's quite similar to the Hong Kong Sixes. That's 6 overs a side, but
    also 6 players a side. Originally I think each player had to bowl one
    over, but they have changed it so that one player can bowl two overs so
    that the wicket-keeper doesn't have to.
    --
    David North
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Daniel70@daniel47@nomail.afraid.org to uk.sport.cricket on Tue Jun 23 22:44:28 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 23/06/2026 1:41 am, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.

    Back in the 60's, they would have been Eight Ball Overs, wouldn't they??
    Or did you play six ball overs, even then??

    Two 65 over innings would have made for a very long day. V-E-R-Y long!!
    Even two 60 over innings!

    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty
    Overs per side.

    And again we were to "blame".

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is
    either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.

    It could happen. There is already a T10 tournament, held in the UAE
    IIRC.

    .... but my restriction of only one over per bowler might be taking it a
    bit to far. ;-)
    --
    Daniel70
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Daniel70@daniel47@nomail.afraid.org to uk.sport.cricket on Tue Jun 23 22:47:56 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 23/06/2026 3:44 pm, David North wrote:
    On 22/06/2026 16:41, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the
    blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.


    Then THAT became too long, so the move was made to T-20 Games. Twenty
    Overs per side.

    And again we were to "blame".

    The next move .... Super Sevens Cricket.
    Each side faces up to Seven Overs, each over Seven Balls long.
    Wickets fall as normal ... but Each Bowler can only Bowl ONE Over.
    However the Bats-person that faces the seventh ball of those overs is
    either OUT or MUST Retire ... and, if necessary, return towards the end
    of the innings after the other Bats-persons have had a go.

    It could happen. There is already a T10 tournament, held in the UAE
    IIRC.

    It's quite similar to the Hong Kong Sixes. That's 6 overs a side, but
    also 6 players a side. Originally I think each player had to bowl one
    over, but they have changed it so that one player can bowl two overs so
    that the wicket-keeper doesn't have to.

    WHAT?? My idea has been pinched (and modified) .... all over the place. ;-P
    --
    Daniel70
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From John Hall@john@jhall.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Tue Jun 23 21:57:26 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    In article <111dv3f$28pgk$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 23/06/2026 1:41 am, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the
    blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.

    Back in the 60's, they would have been Eight Ball Overs, wouldn't they?? Or did
    you play six ball overs, even then??

    Eight-ball overs were an Australian thing. It's always been 6-ball overs
    here (apart from in the Hundred), except that I have an idea they tried
    8-ball overs for one season just before WW2. (Ok, if you go back to
    before 1900 then 4-ball and then 5-ball overs were used, before six
    balls was finally adopted.)


    Two 65 over innings would have made for a very long day. V-E-R-Y long!! Even two
    60 over innings!

    It did. Of course over rates tended to be substantially better then. I
    could be a struggle to finish games towards the end of the season when
    the evenings were drawing in. And no floodlights back then, of course.
    --
    John Hall

    "The covers of this book are too far apart."
    Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David North@nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Wed Jun 24 07:07:49 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 23/06/2026 21:57, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111dv3f$28pgk$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 23/06/2026 1:41 am, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket.
    Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side.
    Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the
    blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.

    Back in the 60's, they would have been Eight Ball Overs, wouldn't they?? Or did
    you play six ball overs, even then??

    Eight-ball overs were an Australian thing.

    Mostly, although South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan also used them
    for shorter periods.

    It's always been 6-ball overs
    here (apart from in the Hundred), except that I have an idea they tried 8-ball overs for one season just before WW2.

    Yes, in both Tests and CC in 1939.

    (Ok, if you go back to
    before 1900 then 4-ball and then 5-ball overs were used, before six
    balls was finally adopted.)

    Yes, they changed from 4 balls to 5 in 1889, and to 6 in 1900.

    Two 65 over innings would have made for a very long day. V-E-R-Y long!! Even two
    60 over innings!

    It did. Of course over rates tended to be substantially better then.

    At the rate allowed now for ODIs (50 overs in 3.5 hours), 65 overs would
    take 4 hours 33 minutes, so over 9 hours in total, not including the interval(s).
    --
    David North
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From James Heaton@heatonandmoore@gmail.com to uk.sport.cricket on Thu Jun 25 10:54:49 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 24/06/2026 07:07, David North wrote:
    On 23/06/2026 21:57, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111dv3f$28pgk$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 23/06/2026 1:41 am, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket. >>>>> Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side. >>>>> Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his
    World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the >>>> blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.

    Back in the 60's, they would have been Eight Ball Overs, wouldn't
    they?? Or did
    you play six ball overs, even then??

    Eight-ball overs were an Australian thing.

    Mostly, although South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan also used them
    for shorter periods.

    It's always been 6-ball overs
    here (apart from in the Hundred), except that I have an idea they tried
    8-ball overs for one season just before WW2.

    Yes, in both Tests and CC in 1939.

    (Ok, if you go back to
    before 1900 then 4-ball and then 5-ball overs were used, before six
    balls was finally adopted.)

    Yes, they changed from 4 balls to 5 in 1889, and to 6 in 1900.

    Two 65 over innings would have made for a very long day. V-E-R-Y
    long!! Even two
    60 over innings!

    It did. Of course over rates tended to be substantially better then.

    At the rate allowed now for ODIs (50 overs in 3.5 hours), 65 overs would take 4 hours 33 minutes, so over 9 hours in total, not including the interval(s).


    I think the 65 overs was dropped after the first year, to 60 overs as mentioned elsewhere.

    I do recall in my childhood that the 10.30am start for the September
    final could make the toss key in the result; the team batting first
    usually started on a dog of a wicket.

    It was usually the Saturday before school resumed - the end of the
    August bank holiday week - so whilst I enjoyed it being on the telly,
    the school bell of doom was sounding in my head!

    James
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David North@nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk to uk.sport.cricket on Thu Jun 25 11:21:55 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

    On 25/06/2026 10:54, James Heaton wrote:
    On 24/06/2026 07:07, David North wrote:
    On 23/06/2026 21:57, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111dv3f$28pgk$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 23/06/2026 1:41 am, John Hall wrote:
    In article <111b8q7$1gjlj$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
    <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> writes
    On 10/04/2026 9:17 pm, max.it wrote:

    That's one way to make a short game even shorter.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cly7dgp8x7jo

    Back in the good old days, 'we' used to play a good game of Cricket. >>>>>> Five or Four Days, no worries.

    Then, when we lost our attention span, someone (Australia's Kerry
    Packer, maybe) came up with One Day Cricket. Up to 50 Overs per side. >>>>>> Job done.

    Not Kerry Packer. The first ODI was some years before he launched his >>>>> World Series Cricket. But this country should perhaps take most of the >>>>> blame/credit, as the Gillette Cup began for the counties in 1963.
    Initially it was 65 overs a side, back when over rates were less
    sluggish, soon reduced to 60 overs.

    Back in the 60's, they would have been Eight Ball Overs, wouldn't
    they?? Or did
    you play six ball overs, even then??

    Eight-ball overs were an Australian thing.

    Mostly, although South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan also used them
    for shorter periods.

    It's always been 6-ball overs
    here (apart from in the Hundred), except that I have an idea they tried
    8-ball overs for one season just before WW2.

    Yes, in both Tests and CC in 1939.

    (Ok, if you go back to
    before 1900 then 4-ball and then 5-ball overs were used, before six
    balls was finally adopted.)

    Yes, they changed from 4 balls to 5 in 1889, and to 6 in 1900.

    Two 65 over innings would have made for a very long day. V-E-R-Y
    long!! Even two
    60 over innings!

    It did. Of course over rates tended to be substantially better then.

    At the rate allowed now for ODIs (50 overs in 3.5 hours), 65 overs
    would take 4 hours 33 minutes, so over 9 hours in total, not including
    the interval(s).


    I think the 65 overs was dropped after the first year, to 60 overs as mentioned elsewhere.

    Correct. 60 overs would still be 4 hours 12 minutes per innings.
    --
    David North
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2