easy puzzle

0.0 - 0 - 3 - 3 including a hat-trick; how? Not all dismissals were the same.

3 no balls, each conceding one run.

1 x hit wicket

1 x run out "mankad" dismissal from a legal run-up - but although not bowled, dismissal stands

head scratching now ...... will have a thunk....

You cannot be out hit wicket from a no ball.

A run out dismissal does not go to the bowler's analysis.

Ghosts?

Nope.

Oh, I thought you said goats.

Still no.

3 no balls, one out hit the ball twice, one out handled the ball, one out obstructed the field.

I actually said 'stumpings off wides?' then felt like a silly billy..

skully wrote:3 no balls, one out hit the ball twice, one out handled the ball, one out obstructed the field.

Hit the ball twice does not go to the bowler's analysis

Handled the ball does not go to the bowler's analysis

obstructing the field does not go to the bowler's analysis

So no.

Brass Monkey wrote:I actually said 'stumpings off wides?' then felt like a silly billy..

What's so silly about that? Had one of those on the weekend just gone.

So you've got 0.0-0-1-1 or even (with two such dismissals) 0.0-0-2-2; in which case you're now on your hat trick (and looking for another mode of dismissal).

OK, time to fly:

wide - stumped

wide - stumped

wide - hit wicket

all 3 wickets are credited to the bowler

not a single legitimate ball has been bowled

three runs (the 3 wides) are debited against the bowler's analysis

0.0 - 0 - 3 - 3

Now, my only concern: if none of the deliveries are legitimate, i.e. it's 3 wickets off 'zero balls' 's it still really a hat-trick?

It's a "fluke trick", more like.

I've thought of another one. The umpire has miscounted in all the confusion, his colleague has taken a bribe on a hat-trick being achieved off wides, and the scorers are pissed. So the third dismissal should have been off 0.1 ... by the time the umpire has insisted on six more balls, and over called, it's too late to do very much except sack the lot of them.

leg side wides in ODI cricket (and 40 over leagues cricket) are so strict these days that stumpings off a wide are not that rare

I once watched a 'hit wicket off a wide' dismissal from the incredulous safety of other end, in a school 'inter-house' match years ago ... it was a very wide leg side wide; the young batsman tried to smash it over square leg, lost his balance, and fell on his stumps. I still remind him of it when I see him. That match ended in a tie!

On that subject - if the batsman chases a wide, and chops it onto the stumps off the toe-end of his bat ...... is he considered to be bowled out ? If so, there's a third (different) hat-trick dismissal.

I was beaten to the post, but having seen your reply to my first answer, I thought about dismissals off wides when out walking with the small white bitey growler .

great puzzle...

Indeed. We need more of these.

Growler wrote:On that subject - if the batsman chases a wide, and chops it onto the stumps off the toe-end of his bat ...... is he considered to be bowled out ? If so, there's a third (different) hat-trick dismissal.

no matter how wide the ball as soon as it touches the bat (or the batsman) it isn't a wide

Thanks MB, I've learned something from you here.

Thought it was a different sort of quiz/puzzle.

Thanks for holding back while others thought about it embee, wally

Didn't catch it until solution was up!

(As I know from (occ arduous) experience, this is a dilemma for FB problem setters:

How long do you leave a quiz/puzzle/question up before providing a solution? Leave it long, and you yourself get tired of waiting, and/or you find one or two people impatiently prodding you for an answer. Don't hang around, give an answer sooner, and you feel you may have wasted your time that way too: one or two prods max, there wasn't that wide a response to make you sure the effort was merited! ~ ~

I suppose the answer is to keep questions/quizzes short and simple. Because what the setter apologises for as ridiculously easy, rarely appears that way to solvers (unless they are called Wally or Marty, if they are around). And at the very worst - zero response - you don't get the feeling of too much wasted effort.)

lardbucket wrote:OK, time to fly:

wide - stumped

wide - stumped

wide - hit wicket

all 3 wickets are credited to the bowler

not a single legitimate ball has been bowled

three runs (the 3 wides) are debited against the bowler's analysis

0.0 - 0 - 3 - 3

Now, my only concern: if none of the deliveries are legitimate, i.e. it's 3 wickets off 'zero balls' 's it still really a hat-trick?

I'm confused Lard. Did you say at the top that each dismissal had to be different? If so, how do the two instances of 'wide - stumped' consitute being different? Perhaps you or someone else who gets it and can make it simple for a simpleton like me can enlighten me (and I mean that genuinely rather than with any sarkiness).

If I may presume to answer for the pieman LN2, he didn't specifically say they were all different - merely that they weren't all the same ...... a very subtle difference, my friend.

Lindsay no.2 wrote:

lardbucket wrote:OK, time to fly:

wide - stumped

wide - stumped

wide - hit wicket

all 3 wickets are credited to the bowler

not a single legitimate ball has been bowled

three runs (the 3 wides) are debited against the bowler's analysis

0.0 - 0 - 3 - 3

Now, my only concern: if none of the deliveries are legitimate, i.e. it's 3 wickets off 'zero balls' 's it still really a hat-trick?

I'm confused Lard. Did you say at the top that each dismissal had to be different? If so, how do the two instances of 'wide - stumped' consitute being different? Perhaps you or someone else who gets it and can make it simple for a simpleton like me can enlighten me (and I mean that genuinely rather than with any sarkiness).

No, I didn't say each dismissal had to be different.

Growler wrote:If I may presume to answer for the pieman LN2, he didn't specifically say they were all different - merely that they weren't all the same ...... a very subtle difference, my friend.

Blimey - that is a subtle difference. Too cute for me - I bet you guys are good at cryptic crosswords.

Anyway, to help me get a handle on it - would the 2 wide stumpings differ (or be not the same) as one could be an offside wide and the other a legside wide?