Loophole

[Notell]

When batsmen complete what they think is 2 runs, but the umpire signals "one short", they still get credited with one run right? Which is strange, because, whereas one batsman has completed two runs, in effect the other batsmen has done nothing more than leave his crease and return to it, because he has not grounded his bat over the popping crease at the other end. Why then get credited with one run at all?
Maybe it is because the batsmen have crossed.
That being the case, imagine this scenario:

A number 3 batsman is batting with the number eleven batsman. In these situations, unless it is the last or second last ball of the over, the number 3 will usually only take runs off a six, four, or two. Easy singles are ignored. How about the number 3 hits the easy single, the batsmen cross at halfway, and then run back to where they started? The same distance of ground is covered as if running a single, the specialist batsman retains strike, and a run is scored. Even better, the non-striking number 11 batsman backs up big time as the ball is released, charges down 3/4 of the pitch, where he crosses with the specialist batsman who has stroked the ball into the outfield for the easy single on offer, they then run back to where they started from. The umpire signals one short, one run is scored and the number 3 is still on strike.

 

[Roosters_187]

Hey mate I see where your coming from but obviously your incorrect. I think you'll find that at least one of the batsmen have to cross the crease for any runs to count when going for a two. So if one batsmen crosses the crease and one doesn't they are awrded one run instead of the two as that batsmen is penalised for going short

 

[Azkatro]

If both batsmen venture out for a run, then stupidly turn back, it's not a run. What planet are you on?

 

[Notell]

Hey mate I see where your coming from but obviously your incorrect. I think you'll find that at least one of the batsmen have to cross the crease for any runs to count when going for a two. So if one batsmen crosses the crease and one doesn't they are awrded one run instead of the two as that batsmen is penalised for going short

Good point thanks. I wonder if the rules state that one of the batsmen must ground his foot or bat in the crease at the other end. If it does say that, you got it. Ta.

 

[Notell]

If both batsmen venture out for a run, then stupidly turn back, it's not a run. What planet are you on?

I am on Earth, where even with the high illiteracy rates at least most people can comprehend what is presented. Just because you can't, did you know that there is no requirement to take your deficiencies out by trying to attack others? What syndrome, preceded by "short" do you suffer from?

 

[Marshall_magic]

think about it this way, for every 2 times a player goes from one crease to the other, its one run, if one player goes up and back again its 2 complete and 1 run, if each just go one way, 2 complete 1 run.

 

[Pensacola Q.C]

Notell, that is simply a deliberate short run and no runs will be awarded in such a circumstance. Furthermore the batsmen will be warned for unfair play.
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-18-scoring-runs,44,AR.html

 

[Notell]

Notell, that is simply a deliberate short run and no runs will be awarded in such a circumstance. Furthermore the batsmen will be warned for unfair play.
http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-18-scoring-runs,44,AR.html

Thanks for that. Well, there is no loophople after all.
Thanks again.

 

[Notell]

think about it this way, for every 2 times a player goes from one crease to the other, its one run, if one player goes up and back again its 2 complete and 1 run, if each just go one way, 2 complete 1 run.

Gotcha.