Cricket
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
15 Sep 12
20:10
Joined:
Date Joined:
28 May 07
LAW 21 - THE RESULT (i.e. official result)
21.2 When there is no interruption after play has commenced
and when both sides have had the opportunity of batting
for the same agreed number of overs, the team scoring
the higher number of runs shall be the winner. In the
event of the scores being tied (note - not the match being tied) the following shall apply:
21.2.1 In the event of a tie in a Group Stage match, no account
shall be taken of wickets lost, the match is tied and each
team shall be awarded one point. (not relevant for the final)
21.2.2 In a semi-final or final, the team losing the lesser number
of wickets shall be the winner.
21.2.3 In a semi-final or final, if the result cannot be decided by
21.2.2, the winner shall be the team with the higher
score after 8 overs, or if still equal after 7 overs, or if still
equal after 6 overs etc
---
So the official result is clearly a win for Hampshire.
Just saying.
21.2 When there is no interruption after play has commenced
and when both sides have had the opportunity of batting
for the same agreed number of overs, the team scoring
the higher number of runs shall be the winner. In the
event of the scores being tied (note - not the match being tied) the following shall apply:
21.2.1 In the event of a tie in a Group Stage match, no account
shall be taken of wickets lost, the match is tied and each
team shall be awarded one point. (not relevant for the final)
21.2.2 In a semi-final or final, the team losing the lesser number
of wickets shall be the winner.
21.2.3 In a semi-final or final, if the result cannot be decided by
21.2.2, the winner shall be the team with the higher
score after 8 overs, or if still equal after 7 overs, or if still
equal after 6 overs etc
---
So the official result is clearly a win for Hampshire.
Just saying.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 71
|
By:
This is official pro 40 rules for 2012
|
|
By:
Agree completely, Betfair have made an arse of this and need to correct it pronto
|
|
By:
They won't correct it because they have voided before, albeit in a different competition, when the wickets lost rule has been used.
Apparently their justification is they class the wickets lost rule as being covered in their rules as "super over, bowl-out or similar" Does anyone think it's similar? I don't, and I don't see how anyone can say otherwise, but I am genuinely interested as to whether others believe it is similar. |
|
By:
No I don't - will be asking them to explain why formally as well via a letter
|
|
By:
The match could only be a tie if both teams lost 7 wickets. In the High Jump eg if 2 athletes record the same height it is only a tie if they are level on countback. Betfair need to grow a pair and admit they are wrong. Im sick of hearing about their customer service yet they continue to act as judge and jury. They have made an error and should correct it and not hide behind spurious rules. It should not be compared to super over etc as no additional cricket was played because Hants had WON !!
|
|
By:
The 'or similar' seems to be the key.
It could mean anything. I've no idea why they don't make it crystal clear. |
|
By:
Unless they adhere to their own rules, it is time to bring them in front of said judge.
|
|
By:
If anyone is writing a formal letter to Betfair then is it worth posting it so others can use it to 'petition'?
|
|
By:
Won't make any difference. They have to pander to the Indian market. Which is an illegal market. Which is nice.
|
|
By:
The whole thing rather stinks!
|
|
By:
UK Registered Customers
Betting Disputes - IBAS If you have a betting or account transaction dispute, which you believe that Betfair has not satisfactorily resolved, you can approach IBAS (The Independent Betting Adjudication Service). IBAS is a third party organisation offering independent adjudication in relation to betting and gaming disputes. You may submit an IBAS adjudication form here or contact IBAS at adjudication@ibas-uk.co.uk |
|
By:
Are you contacting IBAS Nigel?
|
|
By:
I want betfair to clarify that second line in the tie rules - it makes no sense to me how they've decided that something else has taken place - it appears to me that "nothing else took place"
|
|
By:
be better off voicing your complaints to the bookies of bombay, dubai and lahore than betfair/IBAS.
|
|
By:
that bad is it?
|
|
By:
Lix, you're a reasonable sounding chap who knows his cricket.
Regardless of what betfair have done in the past, regardless of the rules in India: Under betfair rules as they are written, combined with the official competition rules as they are written - how should they settle in this situation. |
|
By:
HANTS WON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
By:
it was a tie. thats why there is a tie market.
stop moaning. we get great prices on here cos of the indian market. could still lay the no tie at 1.06-1.10 going into the last two overs.... |
|
By:
None of that makes sense Lix!
A tie occurs only occurs in this market when the same number of run are scored and wickets are lost. What has the indian market got to do with anything? |
|
By:
Betfair liquidity would be considerably poorer if it was different rules to the Indian market.
Must say, I've never seen the rules of any illegal Indian bookies advertised... |
|
By:
liquidity of betfair has got absolutely nothing to do with a market being settled correctly.
|
|
By:
nigel- a tie has nothing to do with wkts.
|
|
By:
Will this match be Tied?
If the official result of this match is a Tie then this market will be settled as Yes. Any other official result other than Match Abandoned or No Result and the market will be settled as No. For the avoidance of doubt, if a match finishes in a Tie, then any Bowl Outs, Super Overs or similar which may take place do not count for the purposes of this market. At the scheduled start all unmatched bets will be cancelled and this market turned IP. This market will not be actively managed therefore, it is the responsibility of all users to manage their own positions |
|
By:
Betfair told me that it states in their rules that 'wickets lost' does not count. It is NOT in their rules.
|
|
By:
Tie: "the finish of a contest in which the score is tied and the winner is undecided"
Well, that doesn't work here. And you can't just assume a tie is as being match finishing when scores are level, as it contravenes the test match tie law. |
|
By:
How many people who watch cricket but don't bet on cricket would call this match a tie?
|
|
By:
Essentially, people who just casually state "of course this was a tie today", are just doing so because they are used to betfair settling matches as ties in certain situations.
|
|
By:
I'm not even bothered about them voiding but I seem to be seething!
|
|
By:
scores were level but it was not a tie - sounds simple enough to me
There should not even be a tie market as it was an impossible result - in group games you can get ties I backed hants to win on the match winner market and they won the match ! |
|
By:
No it wasnt an impossible result. If the match was rained off it could have been tied.
|
|
By:
Scores level, no tie, like can happen in test matches toffee. Just in a two runner market instead of a three (two teams + draw).
|
|
By:
how ? It would have been match abandoned and they would have had a bowl out which would have had a different market
|
|
By:
S&A. Tie possible if D/l was required, as super over could then come into play as wickets rule doesn't play.
|
|
By:
i may be wrong but i dont think you can get a tie in d/l as if your d/l target is 185, you lose if you get 184 as 185 is your winning target
|
|
By:
I think that they closed the market within 2 minutes of the match finishing without even thinking about the fact that is was not tied, and now they don't want to reverse the payouts.
|
|
By:
Anyone know how purple settled?
|
|
By:
the problem is that on the draw market betfair ask "will the match be tied" to which the answer must be no in this case
Maybe they should ask "will the scores be level" which is a totally different thing and i will be taking it up with them in the morning and then taking it to IBAS because it seems very black and white in this instance |
|
By:
Yes, but even that would be wrong because in cricket the scores are determined by both runs and wickets.
|
|
By:
I shall be doing the same, when I have received a reply to my email.
|