so, cricketing geniuses, a hat-trick ponderer for you...

domhatch · 2013-01-07T14:54:58+00:00

was wondering about this unique situation. if a bowler is on a hat-trick, having taken the last two wickets against a particular side in a game, does he comp...

so, cricketing geniuses, a hat-trick ponderer for you...

ezietsman

I remember a riddle where someone asked what is the most amount of overs over which a hat-trick can be bowled. The answer was 3, bowl second to last batsmen in over 1, end of over, bowl last batsmen in next over, game over, get wicket on first ball bowled on next game. I guess it may boil down to what is considered a hat-trick but the fans and players. Its not really something bound in a rule I think.

refuogee

A hat trick in cricket just has to be 3 wickets in succession so against any side.
It could be 1 ball in 3 different matches against 3 different sides and it would still be a hat trick.

I think I'm right ?

Bob-Dubery

Hat tricks have to be in the same match. They can be across innings, but not across matches. So you can take two wickets off your last two balls of your first innings in the field, and then when you come on again to bowl IN THAT MATCH you are on a hat-trick. But all the counters get zeroed when a new match starts.

Which is fair. If a batsman is 99 not out at the end of a match, we don't call it a ton when he scores a single in his next match.

domhatch

X-rated Bob wrote: Hat tricks have to be in the same match. They can be across innings, but not across matches. So you can take two wickets off your last two balls of your first innings in the field, and then when you come on again to bowl IN THAT MATCH you are on a hat-trick. But all the counters get zeroed when a new match starts.

Which is fair. If a batsman is 99 not out at the end of a match, we don't call it a ton when he scores a single in his next match.

i think i would agree with you bob. it might be considered a 'hat-trick' if you take three consecutive wickets with three consecutive balls in three different matches, but is it fair and sporting to claim the hat-trick for your record? that should really be the deciding factor.

spanks
dh

Bob-Dubery

domhatch wrote:
X-rated Bob wrote: Hat tricks have to be in the same match. They can be across innings, but not across matches. So you can take two wickets off your last two balls of your first innings in the field, and then when you come on again to bowl IN THAT MATCH you are on a hat-trick. But all the counters get zeroed when a new match starts.

Which is fair. If a batsman is 99 not out at the end of a match, we don't call it a ton when he scores a single in his next match.
i think i would agree with you bob. it might be considered a 'hat-trick' if you take three consecutive wickets with three consecutive balls in three different matches, but is it fair and sporting to claim the hat-trick for your record? that should really be the deciding factor.

Feats based on three of some event and given the name "hat trick" are always within the context of a single match. In soccer it's three goals in one match and outside of a penalty shoot out. In rugby union it's three tries in a game. In darts it's three consecutive bulls eyes in a single match. Etc.

In cricket at hat trick may span innings, but must occur within a match. If it spans matches it's remarkable but it's not a hat trick for statistical purposes, and I'd expect anybody claiming it to be a hat trick would meet some stiff counter arguments.

Bob-Dubery

Thinking about it, it's called a "hat trick" because originally on the third wicket a collection would be held amongst the spectators and a hat bought with the collected money. That doesn't seem appropriate across matches and across different crowds.

domhatch

X-rated Bob wrote: Thinking about it, it's called a "hat trick" because originally on the third wicket a collection would be held amongst the spectators and a hat bought with the collected money. That doesn't see appropriate across matches and across different crowds.

quite. we're agreed then. across innings' is fine, but within the same match. i've since looked it up on wikipedia (guess i shoulda just done that in the first place), and there are some interesting stats there.

tks
dh

Sean

Thinking about it now, it's also possible for a bowler to claim a hat trick by taking each wicket on a different day in the same match. I'm wondering if it's ever been done?

aubs1

Interesting topic.

Slightly off topic.....(apologies).... In football, (soccer), I always understood that a hat-trick are three consecutive goals in the same match. But if a player scored three goals in the same match, but they were not consecutive, it was not a hat-trick, but nowadays, it IS considered a hat-trick! ??? ??? ?

domhatch

Sean wrote: Thinking about it now, it's also possible for a bowler to claim a hat trick by taking each wicket on a different day in the same match. I'm wondering if it's ever been done?

have a look at hat trick on wikipedia, there's quite a bit of interesting trivia to be found there...

aubs1

domhatch wrote: have a look at hat trick on wikipedia, there's quite a bit of interesting trivia to be found there...

Interesting again.... so now I know there's such a thing as a NATURAL HAT-TRICK ...... ?

Cricket ..... when a bowler takes two-in-two, and he's about to bowl the next ball, the commentators (and they would know), says he's "ON A HAT-TRICK", however, if it's a few balls later .... no such comment .....!