English Chess Forum

I cannot think of an instance in first class cricket where this has been achieved in less than 11 balls. Yuvrav Singh hit a 12 ball fifty for India against England in 2007.

In earlier years the half centuries were accounted for in minutes rather than balls, and CIJ (Jim) Smith of Middlesex is regarded as having scored the quickest non-contrived 50 in first class cricket, when he reached the landmark in 11 minutes against Gloucestershire in 1938, scoring six 6's and two 4's in the process.

Paul McKeown wrote:50 off 11 balls in the Surrey T20

Very fine. But a tad harsh on Yuvraj, don't you think. I've no idea where Old Hamptonians bowling attack features in the global pecking order. But it surely can't be higher than England's

David Robertson wrote:But a tad harsh on Yuvraj, don't you think.

Absolutely, and it was actually the second part of his century, rather than nought to fifty. Still an achievement, though. I wonder how long it will be, what with all this 20-20 madness, that someone will bash out fifty in nine balls, all sixes. I would hate to see the bowling and/or fielding if someone ever managed it in less than nine balls!

Paul McKeown wrote:

David Robertson wrote:But a tad harsh on Yuvraj, don't you think.

Absolutely, and it was actually the second part of his century, rather than nought to fifty. Still an achievement, though. I wonder how long it will be, what with all this 20-20 madness, that someone will bash out fifty in nine balls, all sixes. I would hate to see the bowling and/or fielding if someone ever managed it in less than nine balls!

That would be overthrown fours plus 3 (or 4) runs run between the wickets? 7 runs times 7, or something? Technically you can run 50 runs off one ball, right?

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:

Paul McKeown wrote:

David Robertson wrote:But a tad harsh on Yuvraj, don't you think.

Absolutely, and it was actually the second part of his century, rather than nought to fifty. Still an achievement, though. I wonder how long it will be, what with all this 20-20 madness, that someone will bash out fifty in nine balls, all sixes. I would hate to see the bowling and/or fielding if someone ever managed it in less than nine balls!

That would be overthrown fours plus 3 (or 4) runs run between the wickets? 7 runs times 7, or something?

Runs from a no ball, for instance. Fifty of no balls (at all) would be spectacularly awful.

My bowling record for the ECF stands at 0.1-0-6-1, which is quite impressive. Although maybe not as impressive as my celebration of the wicket.

IM Jack Rudd wrote:My bowling record for the ECF stands at 0.1-0-6-1, which is quite impressive. Although maybe not as impressive as my celebration of the wicket.

I have tried to work out how one can bowl one ball, concede six runs and take a wicket, as for most forms of dismissal you cannot take a wicket and concede runs on the same delivery. Run outs do not come into this category, but they do not count as a wicket to the bowler.

My guess is that at least one wide or no ball had been bowled and these contributed 6 runs, with a wicket taken on the first delivery that was neither a wide or a no ball.

Took me a moment to work out young Rudd's stats there. Might be a quiz question one day.

OK, since posting, I see Malcolm Clarke has lumbered to the same point

On Fastest 50s, we need some rules. First 50s only in my opinion. Cracking 50 off 12 when 'cold' is several orders of magnitude better than a second 50 once 'warmed up', no matter how impressive (off 11) the latter. And Yuvraj's 36 off 6 against Broad tops Sobers' 36 off 6 from Malcolm Nash in 1968 (an event I recall watching as a kid live on TV), mainly because Sobers was 'set' with 30 at the time (and Nash was throwing them up). But I'm prepared to give way on that assessment. Don't have a view on Ravi Shastri's version.

I can help Malcolm out here in his search for explanation of the curious bowling stats. Stumpings can occur off wides and they count to the bowler. Hence the figures might derive from something like: no ball, hit boundary and a stumping off a wide.

Although not terribly knowledgeable about cricket I do draw most of my knowledge of the game from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khqxEFH90IU which seems to have been played in a sporting manner

Possibly six consecutive no balls, followed by a legal delivery which took a wicket; we had been talking about terrible bowling. This might explain Jack's subsequent exaggerated celebration. Anyone got a video? This is my guess, although there are a large number of other possibilities.

I'd assumed Jack had opened with a 'no-ball', a ball so vile in its execution and delivery that it had been smote violently from the ground. The following ball, no less vile in execution perhaps, but containing within its delivery the germ of genius, took the wicket.

David Robertson wrote:I'd assumed Jack had opened with a 'no-ball', a ball so vile in its execution and delivery that it had been smote violently from the ground. The following ball, no less vile in execution perhaps, but containing within its delivery the germ of genius, took the wicket.

Showing your age there. The scenario outlined would give figures of 0.1-0-7-1.