Posted by luvsanro
2 batsman r on 94.two balls remaining & 7 runs to win & both d batsman make their century & win match.
Find it if u r genius.
This ques. was asked by infosys during recruitment tests.......
Posted by fatreg
1st batsman gets a 6, followed by 5 leg byes, next over, batsmen hits a 6.
both make 100 and win the match!
Whos the genius?
fatreg
Posted by mutleyboy
only 7 is needed to win though, so after the first 6, the first leg bye would win them the match, and there is only 2 balls remaining not 2 overs
Posted by fatreg
i didnt think a leg bye counted as a ball? i know a wide does. didnt think a leg bye did??
if so i win
hehe
fatreg
Posted by mutleyboy
lol, yeah a leg bye counts as a ball, just the runs go onto the extras total rather than the batsmans.
a wide and a no ball both concede a run plus an extra ball for it.
but if legbyes didnt count, then the 7 runs needed to win would have been got before the other batsman had his chance to hit a six anyway
Posted by jenbones
Easy, overthrows...
Posted by mutleyboy
i tried working it out using overthrows but i couldnt,
as the first batsman needs 6 to get to his 100, and the other batsman needs to face a ball too, therefore they have to swap ends, which means an odd score is needed, cant be 7 as the game would be over
i'll admit this one is puzzling me a little
Posted by fatreg
maybe were just not genii?
fatreg
Posted by mutleyboy
i think i may have figured it out!! Dont need to be a genius at all, just need to know the rules of cricket and then a bit of lateral thinking. took a while, as i was thinking of what ways a run could be cancelled, but the ball still count, then i remembered about short runs, and also using overthows is the answer too
the first batsman hits the ball and they run 3 runs before the fielder throws the ball back, when he does it results in overthrows and they run another 4 runs. This means that 7 has been scored, first batsman has made century and the other one is now on strike.
The umpires call one of the runs short, thus meaning 1 more run is still needed to win. the other batsman then hits a 6 off the last ball and all is well *thumbs up*
_________________
[ This Message was edited by: mutleyboy on 2006-04-01 21:17 ]
Posted by luvsanro
cant digest wat u just said !
Posted by shyam335
| Quote: |
|
Correct,only short runs can make it possible i think.
Posted by shivam007
Yeah this requires knowledge of cricket and not logic....
Posted by mutleyboy
exactly, which is why i think its a bit of a funny question to be asked at a recruitment thing, as it does not show if you are very clever or not, as it can only be solved if you know the rules of cricket well, unless of course it was for a job involved in cricket
Posted by fatreg
A welsh person knowing about cricket?? :S
since when did you play cricket in wales?
fatreg
Posted by mutleyboy
i used to play for south wales when i was younger,
and of course right now we have simon jones in the england side(when he is fit) who i played against in local club cricket when we were growing up. Also duncan fletcher the coach and his assisstant matthew maynard were both involved with glamorgan before
Posted by fatreg
ill let you off then!
heehee
fatreg
Posted by JK
I dont think its possible!
Posted by niranjan007
my cousin found the answer
1st ball-batsman A hits a four
2nd ball-batsman scores two runs and gets out on the 3rd
3rd ball-batsman B whos on strike now hits a six
no overthrows, no short runs
Posted by JK
| Quote: |
|
Thats way wrong guy!! read the question!
Posted by Syrus_20
Pretty simple really...
On the 1st ball, the 1st batsman takes 3 runs. On the second ball, the second batsman hits a four. So they both make 101 runs in a partnership..so they make their century & win the match obviously.
Job done.
Posted by niranjan007
oops two balls eh? Thot it was 3.
My bad..
[ This Message was edited by: niranjan007 on 2006-04-06 18:54 ]
Posted by mutleyboy
| Quote: |
|
both batsmen make a century, not a century partnership between them, as if they are both already on 94, then they passed a century partnership way earlier in the innings.
I think you'll find that the answer i posted is correct
Posted by Syrus_20
hmm lol, well urs is right no doubt, but i cant help but think that the answer isnt that complicated...plus its not exactly worded brilliantly imo
Well the poster better put up the answer to this or its just a waste of my mental energy...which is quite hard to muster up these days lol. And..well i need to know the answers to stuff...like magic...i need to know how its done or i get pissed off lol.
Posted by JK
| Quote: |
|
I think this is the most correct but only hardcore cricket lovers would know this so it cant be the answer...
also if one ball was the last ball of an over... and another bowler had to finish an over with one ball coz of an injury after bowling only 5 balls...
Posted by mutleyboy
if a bowler had an injury after 5 balls of an over, then another bowler comes on to bowl the last ball to complete the over straight away.
it isnt left uncompleted until the end, so it is not possible for an over to finish, and then 1 ball from a previous uncompleted over to be bowled after