![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is not a page about Results in general, it's a page about results in Cricket. No-one looking for this information is likely to find it under its present title. Surely it should be renamed, or else merged with the main Cricket entry. rossb 07:45, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've done a major copyedit and tidy of this article. It was unnecessarily verbose, had some convoluted language, and had a lot of extraneous detail about how to score runs which is best left on the linked-to run page. I've made each of the results begin with a similar introductory sentence for consistency and ease of reading. I also removed the wordy and redundant paragraph about deciding which team wins in various game configurations - it's sufficient to say that whichever team scores more runs when all the innings are completed is the winner. - dmmaus 22:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I stumbled upon this article - cricket is the last thing I have expected - I will start writing an article about "results". Allthough it is so universial it might be doomed to be a stub. Iancarter 08:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I think something should be added about how the side batting second can actually win by a margin of runs, if play is stopped and they are above a D/L par score. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.195.110.73 ( talk) 01:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Nope, still don't understand how England drew with Australia yesterday..... 80.193.130.5 ( talk) 06:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The present wording is rather convoluted and I feel it is not suitable for the general reader. I propose replacing it with a slightly amended version of an earlier wording. Here is what I suggest:
If I get no reaction in the next few days, I shall implement this change. LynwoodF ( talk) 07:09, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
This is only about results, but what explaining scores that our not results, i.e. the scores after one day of an international test match? In other words, does it mean when the BBC announcer says something like "115 not out"? -- 180.190.67.236 ( talk) 05:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
My understanding is that in many (most?) limited-overs matches, the overs is a tighter constraint than the wickets. If the team batting second passes their target, would the score be reported as "won by x wickets", or "won by y overs"? If "wickets", is this just an carryover from five-day matches? It seems like the less informative (that is, wrong) way to describe the result. 06:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rks13 ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is not a page about Results in general, it's a page about results in Cricket. No-one looking for this information is likely to find it under its present title. Surely it should be renamed, or else merged with the main Cricket entry. rossb 07:45, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've done a major copyedit and tidy of this article. It was unnecessarily verbose, had some convoluted language, and had a lot of extraneous detail about how to score runs which is best left on the linked-to run page. I've made each of the results begin with a similar introductory sentence for consistency and ease of reading. I also removed the wordy and redundant paragraph about deciding which team wins in various game configurations - it's sufficient to say that whichever team scores more runs when all the innings are completed is the winner. - dmmaus 22:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I stumbled upon this article - cricket is the last thing I have expected - I will start writing an article about "results". Allthough it is so universial it might be doomed to be a stub. Iancarter 08:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I think something should be added about how the side batting second can actually win by a margin of runs, if play is stopped and they are above a D/L par score. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.195.110.73 ( talk) 01:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Nope, still don't understand how England drew with Australia yesterday..... 80.193.130.5 ( talk) 06:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The present wording is rather convoluted and I feel it is not suitable for the general reader. I propose replacing it with a slightly amended version of an earlier wording. Here is what I suggest:
If I get no reaction in the next few days, I shall implement this change. LynwoodF ( talk) 07:09, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
This is only about results, but what explaining scores that our not results, i.e. the scores after one day of an international test match? In other words, does it mean when the BBC announcer says something like "115 not out"? -- 180.190.67.236 ( talk) 05:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
My understanding is that in many (most?) limited-overs matches, the overs is a tighter constraint than the wickets. If the team batting second passes their target, would the score be reported as "won by x wickets", or "won by y overs"? If "wickets", is this just an carryover from five-day matches? It seems like the less informative (that is, wrong) way to describe the result. 06:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rks13 ( talk • contribs)