Quote:
Originally Posted by zsayeed
You made me look up anaphora. 
Yes, I see. Tie broken - take DG out of tie.
C and B still equal in HH, then resort to NRR. But they are not equal in HH as per table, unless table is wrong at http://digicricket.marssil.com/match...op=5&match=192.
Then why the 1st announcement with BB out? the first glimpse makes the case that tie break amogst all three, in which case the HH of 321 still holds,
If you break the 3 way at the same time, BB is out. If you break the tie in steps, then CK out.
The law states that after placing the team that is highest, after that if there are teams still equal, (note the bold part), then use NRR. BB and CK are NOT equal in HH, CK > BB as per table attached. Then BB is out, because you cannot continue to the next statement, they are not equal in HH.
|
Good analysis ZSayeed.
The law states:
"When three (3) or more teams finish with equal points and equal wins in the league, then the team
(s) which was
(were) the winner of the most number of matches played between those equal teams in the league will be placed in higher position
(s). If after applying this criterion there are any teams which are still equal, then such equal teams shall be ranked according to their net run rate in the league."
Note the bolded parts. As far as i am concerned, it definitely talks about a multiway tie break using the criterion H2H between all the parties involved. If that criterion solves the problem and ranks the teams accordingly, then no need to go to the second criterion which is the NRR. From the stated law, I don't know how one can take one party out using the 1st criterion and apply the 2nd criterion on the rest of the parties when the 1st criterion clearly solves the problem. The law says the winner of the most number of matches played between those equal teams in the league will be placed in higher positions. Note, the use of the word positions, instead of position.