Hubbry Logo
Result (cricket)Result (cricket)Main
Open search
Result (cricket)
Community hub
Result (cricket)
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Result (cricket)
Result (cricket)
Result (cricket)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The result in a game of cricket may be a "win" for one of the two teams playing, or a "tie". In the case of a limited overs game, the game can also end with "no result" if the game cannot be finished on time (usually due to weather or bad light), and in other forms of cricket, a "draw" may be possible. Which of these results applies, and how the result is expressed, is governed by Law 16 of the laws of cricket.[1]

Win and loss

[edit]

The result of a match is a "win" when one side scores more runs than the opposing side and all the innings of the team that has fewer runs have been completed.[1] The side scoring more runs has "won" the game, and the side scoring fewer has "lost". If the match ends without all the innings being completed, the result may be a draw or no result.

Results where neither team wins

[edit]

Tie

[edit]
Main article: List of tied first-class cricket matches

The result of a match is a "tie" when the scores are equal at the conclusion of play, but only if the side batting last has completed its innings (i.e. all innings are completed, or, in limited-overs cricket, the set number of overs has been played or play is terminally stopped by weather or bad light).[1]

This is unusual in Test cricket: only two tied Tests have ever occurred.

Tiebreakers

[edit]

In some forms of Limited overs cricket, such as Twenty20, a Super Over or a bowl-out is sometimes used as a tiebreaker to decide a result that would otherwise be a tie. The result of the match is recorded in official statistics as Tie+W or Tie+L to indicate matches initially tied and then won or lost in the tiebreaker. In such cases, the results carry the same points as a regular win or loss in competition tables.

Draw

[edit]

The result of a match is a "draw" if a match is concluded, as defined in Law 16, without being a win or a tie.[1] A draw therefore occurs when one or both of the teams have not completed their innings by the scheduled end of play. In matches where the number of overs is not limited, therefore, a team unable to win may be able to "save the draw" by either avoiding being all-out if they are batting (i.e. by having two or more batsmen left at the end of play who are "not out"), or, if bowling, by slowing down the scoring of the batting team. The match is then drawn regardless of the total of runs accumulated by either side.[2] Some league competitions allow for a "winning draw" (and therefore also a "losing draw"),[3] allocating more points to one of the teams based on factors such as run rates or overall runs scored. The official result is still a draw.

No result

[edit]

A "no result" is recorded if a limited over match which has been started cannot be completed, which usually occurs if weather or light interrupts play.[4] In the case of rain playing a factor, this is often known as the match being "washed out".[5] The result is effectively the same as a draw.

Limited overs cricket formats require that each team has to have the opportunity bat for a minimum number of overs in order for a result to be possible: 20 overs in One Day International cricket and five overs in Twenty20 cricket.

If each team is able to face at least this number of overs, a result is possible and can be calculated using the Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method or other competition rules.

Abandoned

[edit]

A match can be "abandoned" or "cancelled" if weather or other conditions prevent any play from occurring at all. If the bowler of the first over of play has not started their runup when the officials decide to abandon play then the result is termed "abandoned without a ball being bowled". Such a game is not included in official statistical records.

Before July 2004, the same result occurred if the toss had been taken but the match was abandoned before a ball was bowled. Since 2004, the International Cricket Council for International matches has decreed that a match where the toss takes place but which is abandoned without a ball being bowled is either a draw or (for a limited-overs match) a no result. Such games are now included in statistical records, counting, for example, as a game played by the teams and nominated players.[6]

Rare results

[edit]

Awarded

[edit]

The umpires also have the power to "award" a match to one side where the other side either concedes defeat or in the opinion of the umpires refuses to play, in which case the game can be deemed to have been forfeited by the side in question.[1] (Note that this is not the same as the (voluntary) forfeiture of an innings under Law 15.) This power is very rarely used. Before this rule was introduced there had been cases in the international arena where one team has refused to play, or deliberately stopped playing for a while. One notable incident was when Sri Lanka temporarily stopped play during a match in January 1999 against England when Muttiah Muralitharan was called for throwing by umpire Ross Emerson (Muralitharan having previously been called for throwing by another umpire Darrell Hair in previous fixtures).[7] A similar case occurred in the Sydney Test in 1971, when umpires came close to awarding the match to Australia after England players withdrew during crowd disturbances.[8]

The only time that a Test match has been won in this manner is when umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove awarded England the Fourth Test against Pakistan on 20 August 2006 after Pakistan refused to take the field at the scheduled time after tea on the fourth day. This was because Hair alleged that Pakistani bowlers tampered with the ball. He did not name a player involved in the incident. Later during the ICC general body meeting in 2008, the result was changed to "match drawn", and then in February 2009 changed back to an England win.[9]

In one-day international cricket, on 3 November 1978, Pakistan were awarded the third ODI against India when India conceded the match in protest against short-pitched bowling.[10]

On 13 March 1996, in a World Cup semi-final held in India, Sri Lanka were awarded the match against India by default when crowd disturbances made it impossible for the game to continue. Sri Lanka were well ahead of India at the time.[11]

Conceded

[edit]

Law 16 allows a team to concede a match. This seldom happens, but it covers the situation where the scoreboard has in good faith displayed an incorrect score which is accepted by the "losing" team, who leave the field, thereby conceding the match to the opposition.

Statement of result

[edit]
See also: Scoring (cricket)

The result of a cricket match is stated in several ways.

If the side batting last wins the match without losing all its wickets, the result shall be stated as a win by the number of wickets still then to fall. For example, in a single-innings match, if Team A bat first and make 200 runs, then Team B make 201 after losing four wickets out of ten, Team B is said to have "won by six wickets", regardless of how many batsmen Team A lost during their innings.

If the side fielding last wins the match, the result shall be stated as a win by runs. For instance, if Team A bat first and make 200 runs, but Team B make only 192, Team A is said to have "won by eight runs".

If the side batting last has lost all its wickets, but as the result of an award of five penalty runs at the end of the match has scored a total of runs in excess of the total scored by the opposing side, the result shall be stated as a win to that side by penalty runs.

In a two-innings match, if the number of runs scored in its first innings by the side due to bat last is greater than the total runs scored by the opposition in both its innings, the result is stated as a win by an innings and number of runs short. Here "due to bat last" includes a team who batted first, but forced their opponent to follow-on (bat consecutive innings). If Team A bat first and make 200 runs in their first innings, Team B make 300 runs in their first innings, and Team A only make 95 runs in their second innings, Team B is said to have "won by an innings and five runs".[12]

If the match is decided by one side conceding defeat or refusing to play, the result shall be stated as "match conceded" or "match awarded".

If a match is unfinished when time expires, the result is a "draw" (this does not apply to limited overs cricket, where this is considered to be "no result"). If all innings of both teams are completed (either because all batsmen have been dismissed or one/more innings are completed by way of a declaration) and the totals are exactly equal, the match is a "tie".

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Result (cricket)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In cricket, the result of a match refers to the official outcome determined by the relative scores and completion of , as outlined in Law 16 of the governed by the (). A match can conclude with a win for one team—typically by the margin of runs or wickets remaining—or result in a tie if scores are level after all required , while multi-day formats like may end in a draw if play concludes without a decisive result. These outcomes apply across formats, with modifications in limited-overs games for interruptions via the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern method, ensuring fairness under varying conditions. In , played over up to five days with two per , a win occurs if one side scores more runs overall than the opponent after both have batted twice, often expressed as a by an and runs or by runs alone; a tie is possible but extremely rare, occurring when the scores are equal after both s have completed their two , while draws predominate when time expires without a result. Umpires may award a if a concedes defeat or refuses to play, stating the result as "Match Awarded" to the opposing side. For limited-overs formats such as One Day Internationals (ODIs) and Twenty20 Internationals (T20Is), each team bats for a fixed number of overs—50 for ODIs and 20 for T20Is—and the team with the higher score wins, with the chasing side prevailing by the number of wickets remaining if it reaches the target. Ties, where scores are equal after both innings, may lead to a to determine a winner in international matches, while a "No Result" is declared if insufficient overs are bowled due to weather or other factors, often awarding shared points in tournaments. The winning run must be legally scored, including via boundaries, but extras like no-balls or wides contribute to the total without constituting the decisive hit.

Standard Match Outcomes

Win

In cricket, a team achieves a win by scoring a higher total than the opponent after both teams have completed their allotted , or when the team batting second reaches or surpasses the target set by the first team. This fundamental outcome applies across all formats, including Test matches, One Day Internationals (ODIs), and (T20) games, ensuring a clear victor based on runs accumulated through batting and extras. The (ICC) and the (MCC) govern these rules under the , emphasizing fair play and completion of innings where possible. A win by runs occurs when the team batting second fails to reach the target established by the first team's , with the margin calculated as the difference between the scores. For instance, if the first team scores 250 runs and the second team ends at 200, the first team wins by 50 runs. This margin highlights the and fielding team's effectiveness in restricting the opposition, and it is the standard declaration for victories in all formats when the chasing team is out or cannot continue. Penalty runs, such as those awarded for no-balls or wides, are included in the total score and can influence the final margin, potentially turning a close contest into a decisive win. Conversely, a win by wickets is recorded when the team batting second successfully reaches the target with some of its batsmen not out, meaning wickets remain in hand. For example, achieving a target of 251 with five wickets remaining signifies a win by five wickets, underscoring the batting team's efficiency in pacing their . This type of is particularly celebrated in limited-overs formats like ODIs and T20s, where preserving wickets allows for aggressive scoring without the risk of all-out dismissal. In , a win by provides a more emphatic result, occurring when the leading team enforces the —requiring the opponent to bat again immediately after their first —and the opponent fails to surpass the leading team's first total in their second , provided the lead is at least 200 runs. This rule, outlined in Law 14 of the , accelerates matches that might otherwise extend unnecessarily and has been pivotal in historic victories. Wins in limited-overs cricket must also adhere to the overs limit, with the deemed complete only if the full allocation is bowled or the team is earlier.

Loss

In cricket, a team suffers a loss when it fails to achieve a higher total score than its opponent after both sides have completed their allotted , or when it concedes defeat under the . This outcome is the direct counterpart to a win, occurring symmetrically when the winning conditions outlined in Law 21 cannot be met by one side. A loss by runs happens in limited-overs formats or when the team batting second in a first-innings scenario falls short of the target score set by the opponent, with the margin of defeat calculated as the difference between the target and the final score achieved. For instance, if the target is 300 runs and the batting side scores 250, the result is a loss by 50 runs. Similarly, a loss by wickets occurs when the team batting first loses because the team batting second reaches the target before losing all its wickets, with the margin expressed as the number of wickets remaining for the second team at the point of victory. An example is a team being bowled out for 200 while chasing 250, resulting in a loss by 50 runs. In , a loss by is a distinctive and emphatic form of defeat, enforced under the follow-on rule in Law 14 of the when the team batting first leads by at least 200 runs after both sides have completed one in a five-or-more-day match. The trailing may then require the opponent to bat a second immediately; if this follow-on fails to surpass the leader's first- total, the match concludes as a loss by an , with the margin being the difference between the leader's first and the loser's combined totals from both . The lead threshold adjusts for shorter matches—150 runs for three-to-four-day games, 100 for two-day, and 75 for one-day—ensuring the rule promotes decisive outcomes while accounting for match duration. The implications of a loss in a single match are straightforward and absolute: the defeated team receives no official credit beyond the recorded result, and concepts like moral victories—such as chasing aggressively but falling short—are not formally recognized in scoring or standings. Such outcomes simply denote outright defeat, potentially affecting team morale or bilateral series momentum without altering the match's official verdict. Results are formally stated in the scorecard as, for example, "lost by 10 wickets," emphasizing the margin of the loss. Historically, the rarity of ties underscores the prevalence of losses in decisive Test matches; only two such ties have occurred in over 2,500 Tests—the 1960 Brisbane Test between and , and the 1986 Chennai Test between and —meaning the vast majority of non-draws result in a clear loss for one side. This binary nature highlights loss as a common endpoint in cricket's multi-day format when time allows for completion.

Inconclusive Match Outcomes

Tie

In cricket, a tie occurs when both teams have completed their allotted and end with identical scores, typically with the second batting side achieving equality on the final delivery or by being out level. This outcome requires the match to be fully played out under normal conditions, without interruptions that prevent completion, as such disruptions could lead to a no result declaration instead. Ties are exceptionally rare in Test cricket, with only two instances recorded in over 2,500 matches since 1877: the first between and at in December 1960, where both sides scored 387, and the second between and at in September 1986, ending at 574 apiece. In limited-overs formats like One Day Internationals (ODIs), ties are more frequent but remain infrequent, occurring in about 1% of matches, with notable clusters such as one per year from 1991 to 1997 and 19 more between 1999 and 2014. A prominent example is the 2011 ICC Cricket World Cup final between and at , where both teams scored 277 runs in their 50 overs, marking the first tied final in World Cup history before a resolved the outcome. Ties highlight the razor-thin margins in the sport and are often viewed as equitable yet frustrating results for players and fans, emphasizing cricket's unpredictability without providing a decisive victor.

Draw

In cricket, a draw occurs when a match concludes without either team achieving a victory, typically due to the expiration of the allocated playing time or overs without a definitive result. This outcome is most relevant in multi-day formats such as matches, where the game spans up to five days and allows for incomplete if the scheduled time elapses before a team can be dismissed twice or force a win. A draw is declared when the match concludes without a win under Law 16.5.2 of the , regardless of the number of innings completed. Draws have been a prevalent outcome in Test cricket throughout its history, accounting for approximately 32% of all matches played since the format's inception in 1877 (as of 2024), though the rate has declined in recent decades. This statistic underscores the strategic depth of the game, as draws are impossible in limited-overs formats like One Day Internationals or T20s, where a fixed number of overs guarantees a result unless insufficient play occurs. The high incidence in Tests reflects the format's emphasis on endurance over rapid conclusions. Tactically, teams often employ defensive strategies to engineer draws, such as adopting a slow scoring rate or prioritizing survival over aggressive play to exhaust the available time. Captains may instruct batsmen to block deliveries meticulously, effectively when a win seems unattainable, thereby securing a share of the points in series competitions. This approach has evolved with modern pitches and rules but remains a hallmark of Test cricket's chess-like quality. A notable example is the first Test of the at Sophia Gardens in , where , trailing by 182 runs after Australia's first innings, batted resiliently through the final day to finish at 3 for 365 in their second innings, securing a draw despite earlier disadvantages compounded by rain delays. This match highlighted how draws can maintain competitive balance in high-stakes series.

No Result

In limited-overs , a match is declared a "No Result" when insufficient overs are bowled, preventing a valid outcome from being determined under the (ICC) playing conditions. Specifically, for One Day Internationals (ODIs), this occurs if the team batting second has not had the opportunity to face at least 20 overs, unless a result is achieved earlier through or reaching the target. In Internationals (T20Is), the threshold is lower, requiring each team to have the opportunity to bat for at least 5 overs; failure to meet this minimum, even if play begins, results in no outcome. These rules ensure that matches cannot conclude without meaningful competition, distinguishing no result from interruptions where the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern method can adjust targets if the minimum overs are met. The primary cause of a no result declaration is adverse weather, such as persistent rain, which delays or halts play beyond recoverable time, as determined by umpires and match referees based on available extra time and over rates (typically 14.28 overs per hour for ODIs and 14.11 for T20Is). Other factors include ground or pitch conditions deemed unsafe or unplayable, like poor drainage or issues, though both teams are not required to have faced a delivery for the declaration—play may not commence at all. Umpires assess these conditions under clauses governing interruptions, prioritizing player and fairness. The implications of a no result are significant in tournament contexts, where no points are awarded to either team, effectively abandoning the match without a winner or loser and sharing one point each in league formats like World Cups. This outcome disrupts standings and schedules, often leading to reserve days or replays if feasible, but in bilateral series, it may simply void the fixture. Under ICC regulations effective from 2023 to 2025, hybrid hosting models for multi-nation tours—such as neutral venues for specific bilateral encounters—have been introduced to mitigate risks of no results due to logistical or security-related interruptions in high-stakes events. Representative examples include the 2023 ICC Men's World Cup qualifier ODI between and , abandoned without a ball bowled due to rain in , resulting in a no result that finalized South Africa's automatic qualification. Similarly, warm-up matches for the same tournament, like versus , were entirely washed out by persistent rain, underscoring weather's impact on preparatory fixtures.

Handling Interruptions and Adjustments

Duckworth-Lewis-Stern Method

The Duckworth-Lewis-Stern (DLS) method is a mathematical approach used in limited-overs cricket to adjust targets and determine outcomes in matches interrupted by rain or other delays, ensuring fairness by accounting for the remaining resources available to each team. It considers two primary resources for a batting side: the number of overs left and the number of wickets in hand, which together represent the potential for scoring runs. The method calculates a "par score" or revised target based on statistical models derived from historical match data, recognizing that run-scoring accelerates in later overs and diminishes with wickets lost. This prevents simplistic prorating of scores (e.g., by average run rate) and instead reflects the non-linear nature of batting resources. Developed by English statisticians and in 1997, the original Duckworth-Lewis method was first trialed in and adopted by the (ICC) for international matches in 1999, debuting during the . Following the retirement of Duckworth and Lewis, Australian statistician Steven Stern revised the model in 2014 to better accommodate rising scoring rates in modern limited-overs , renaming it the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern method; this Stern Edition became the standard. The ICC further updated the method in 2018 based on analysis of recent scoring patterns in 700 ODIs and 428 T20Is. At its core, the DLS method uses pre-computed resource percentage tables (or equivalent formulas) to quantify remaining batting potential, where full resources (50 overs and 10 wickets in ODIs) equal 100%. For instance, after 30 overs with 3 wickets lost, resources might be approximately 60-70%, depending on the edition. If the first is interrupted, the par score is calculated as the first team's score multiplied by the of remaining resources to total resources at the interruption point. For the second with reduced overs (R2 < R1, where R1 is the first innings resources), the target T is given by: T=(S×R2R1)+1T = \left( S \times \frac{R2}{R1} \right) + 1 rounded down to the nearest integer, where S is the first team's score. If the second innings has more resources than available in the first (R2 > R1), an adjustment using a constant G50 (typically 245 for elite matches) is applied: T = S + ((R2 - R1) × G50 / 100) + 1, again rounded down. These calculations are performed using official ICC software or tables to ensure precision. The method applies to One-Day Internationals (ODIs) and T20Is when at least a minimum number of overs is bowled—20 in ODIs and 5 in T20Is for the second —to constitute a valid result. Umpires or officials input the overs remaining, wickets lost, and scores into the DLS calculator at each interruption, recalculating targets dynamically if delays occur during the second . For example, if the first team scores 250 for 7 in 40 overs (resources around 52% in ODIs), and the second team faces 35 overs with 10 wickets, the adjusted target might be approximately 228, reflecting the second team's slightly higher resource percentage. In T20s, the tables are scaled to 20 overs, emphasizing early wickets' impact due to the format's aggression. The DLS enables results in partially played games that would otherwise be inconclusive, provided the minimum overs threshold is met; if not, the may be abandoned with no result. Despite its widespread adoption, the DLS method has faced criticisms for perceived biases in high-pressure scenarios, such as favoring the team batting first or second depending on interruption timing, or struggling with extreme scoring in T20s where power-hitting alters traditional patterns. Notable controversies include the 2003 World Cup match between and , where a misapplication of the then-Duckworth-Lewis tables led to erroneous decisions, sparking debates on human error in implementation. More recent critiques highlight cases like rain-affected 2023 World Cup games, where adjusted targets were questioned for not fully capturing match context, though the ICC maintains the method's statistical robustness based on large datasets. Ongoing research proposes refinements, but DLS remains the ICC's preferred standard for equitable resolutions.

Abandoned Matches

In , an abandoned match refers to a fixture that is entirely called off without any play occurring, typically due to adverse weather conditions such as persistent , or other factors like concerns or unfit playing surfaces. This status is distinct from a "no result," which applies when a minimal amount of play has taken place but insufficient for a definitive outcome. Umpires, in consultation with the , make the decision to abandon after conducting inspections of the pitch and , determining that conditions render play impossible for the entire scheduled duration. The procedures for abandonment are outlined in the International Cricket Council's (ICC) playing conditions, which vary slightly by format but emphasize safety and fairness. For international matches, umpires must assess conditions at regular intervals, and if no play is feasible after the toss or scheduled start, the match is declared abandoned. In multi-match tours, ICC protocols allow for potential rescheduling if the tour itinerary permits, though single isolated fixtures are not replayed, and the result is recorded as abandoned. For instance, in limited-overs tournaments, abandonment requires confirmation that the minimum overs (e.g., 20 per side in ODIs) cannot be completed. Historical examples illustrate the application of these rules. In the 2004 Videocon Cup ODI between and at , , torrential rain flooded the outfield, leading to abandonment without a . Similarly, the 2006 fourth Test at between and incorporated abandonment elements on the final day due to a dispute over , though it was ultimately classified as a forfeiture by rather than a pure abandonment. In modern , post-2020 developments include the adoption of hybrid hosting models for certain events, such as the , where matches involving teams like are shifted to neutral venues (e.g., UAE) to mitigate risks from weather or other disruptions in primary host countries. Consequences of abandonment include no points awarded to either team in competitive tournaments, such as the World Test Championship, where only matches with results contribute to standings. Spectators are typically eligible for full refunds if no play occurs, as seen in ICC T20 World Cup policies and recent instances like the 2025 Champions Trophy washed-out matches in .

Resolving Ties

Super Over

The Super Over is a tie-breaking method used in limited-overs formats such as One Day Internationals (ODIs) and Twenty20 Internationals (T20Is), where each team faces one over of six legal deliveries to score the highest possible runs, with the team achieving the higher score declared the winner. If the Super Over ends in a tie, additional Super Overs are played until a decisive result is obtained. The innings in a Super Over concludes if the batting team loses two wickets, treating it as all out, and the team that batted second in the original match bats first in the Super Over. The International Cricket Council (ICC) standardized the Super Over rules in 2008, applying the same fielding restrictions as the final over of the regular innings—meaning no powerplay restrictions in T20 formats, where the last over typically allows fielders inside the circle freely. Only players nominated for the main match can participate, and a single bowler delivers the over for each team, with the same player unable to bowl consecutive Super Overs if multiples are needed. Prior to the 2020 rule change, ties in a were resolved using boundary countback, but following controversy in the 2019 final, the ICC amended the rules to require multiple Super Overs instead. The was introduced by the ICC in 2008 as a replacement for the less popular method, shortly after the inaugural T20 in 2007 highlighted the need for exciting tie resolutions in the fast-paced format. Its first international use occurred in a T20I between and on December 26, 2008, where scored 25/1 to win. The format has since been adopted in major tournaments, including ODIs from the 2011 onward, and a similar "Super 5" variant—consisting of five-ball sets—was implemented in England's The Hundred competition starting in 2021 to align with its 100-ball structure. A prominent example is the 2019 ICC Cricket World Cup final between and at , where both teams tied at 241 runs after 50 overs each, and the subsequent [Super Over](/page/Super Over) also ended tied at 15 runs apiece (England 15/0, New Zealand 15/1). was awarded the victory via boundary countback, having hit 26 boundaries to New Zealand's 17 across the match, marking the first time the method decided a final. This outcome prompted debate and led the ICC to amend rules in 2020, mandating multiple Super Overs instead of boundary countback for future ties, though the original method applied in 2019. In domestic leagues, the Super Over generally follows ICC guidelines but includes minor variations, such as explicit limits on repeating bowlers across multiple Super Overs in the (IPL) to prevent fatigue. The IPL has seen 15 Super Overs since 2009, starting with the 2009 match between and .

Other Tiebreakers

In limited-overs cricket tournaments, such as the ICC Cricket World Cup or T20 World Cup, ties in group stage standings are resolved using a hierarchical system of tiebreakers when teams finish with equal points. The primary criterion is the number of wins achieved by each team across the tournament. If this does not distinguish the teams, the result of head-to-head matches between the tied teams is considered, with the team having more wins in those encounters ranked higher. Should a tie persist, (NRR)—calculated as the difference between a team's average scoring rate and its average conceding rate across completed matches—serves as the decisive factor. These rules were applied in the 2023 ICC Men's Cricket World Cup, where NRR played a pivotal role in final group rankings after points and wins failed to separate teams like and , prioritizing overall performance over direct confrontations in some scenarios. In multi-team ties involving more than two sides, head-to-head results among all tied teams may be aggregated before resorting to NRR. In , a rare format where ties occur when scores are level after both teams have completed two , no tiebreakers are applied; the match result stands as a tie, with each team awarded 6 points in competitions like the World Test Championship if applicable. Similarly, in multi-day domestic first-class matches that end in ties, points are typically shared equally between the teams, without further resolution mechanisms. Historically, before the widespread adoption of the Super Over as the primary on-field tiebreaker in limited-overs internationals since 2008, alternative methods were employed. Bowl-outs, introduced by the ICC in 2005, required nominated players from each team to bowl at an unguarded set of stumps from a distance of 22 yards, with the team hitting the stumps more times in a set number of attempts declared the winner; this was used in events like the 2007 T20 World Cup group match between India and Pakistan. Earlier instances, such as a 1983 Benson and Hedges Cup quarter-final between Middlesex and Gloucestershire, resorted to a coin toss when replays were impractical. These methods, including a brief experiment with boundary countback in Super Over ties (notably in the 2019 World Cup final), have since been phased out in favor of repeated Super Overs or the aforementioned tournament criteria.

Exceptional and Rare Results

Awarded Matches

In cricket, an awarded match occurs when umpires or a governing body, such as the (ICC), declare one team the winner due to the opposing team's serious rules violations or misconduct, including acts like or deliberate time-wasting that undermine the game's integrity. This outcome ensures the sport's fairness when standard play cannot continue, distinguishing it from typical results based on scores or play completion. The procedures for awarding a match are outlined in Law 16.3 of the (MCC) , which empowers umpires to forfeit the to the opposing side if a team refuses to resume play or engages in conduct warranting such action, such as persistent unfair play. Complementing this, the ICC for Players and Player Support Personnel addresses broader misconduct, allowing match referees or the ICC to impose forfeitures for Level 4 offences like altering the ball's condition. In such cases, umpires are required to report incidents to the relevant authority for further review. A prominent example is the fourth Test between England and Pakistan at The Oval in 2006, where umpires Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove awarded five penalty runs to England for suspected ball tampering and, after Pakistan's prolonged protest and refusal to return to the field, declared the match forfeited to England. Initially changed to a draw by the ICC in 2008 amid diplomatic pressure, the decision was reversed in 2009, officially awarding the win to England to uphold the Laws. In a related but non-awarded instance, the 2018 third Test between South Africa and Australia saw Australian players penalized for ball tampering with the sandpaper scandal, resulting in bans and fines under the ICC Code but no change to South Africa's on-field victory. Awarded matches remain exceedingly rare in international cricket, with fewer than 10 documented cases since 1900, owing to the high threshold for intervention and cricket's emphasis on completing play where possible. Beyond the match award, penalties often include points deductions in tournaments; for instance, teams breaching the ICC Code may forfeit competition points to deter misconduct and maintain competitive balance.

Conceded Matches

In cricket, a conceded match occurs when one team voluntarily refuses to continue playing during an ongoing game, typically in response to disputes over umpiring decisions, playing conditions, or other on-field issues, thereby accepting defeat. This action is governed by Law 16 of the , which states that a match is lost if a side "concedes defeat" or, in the umpires' opinion, "refuses to play," leading the umpires to award the match to the opposing team. The result is formally recorded as "Match Conceded" for voluntary concessions, distinguishing it from externally imposed "Match Awarded" outcomes in similar dispute scenarios. Such instances are exceedingly rare in cricket history, often arising from heated protests that escalate to the point of abandonment. A notable example took place on November 3, 1978, during the third ODI between and in , where Indian captain instructed his team to leave the field in the 46th over, protesting what he viewed as biased umpiring and excessive short-pitched bowling that injured key batsmen and . were awarded the match, with having reached 183/2 (37.4 overs) needing 23 runs to reach the target of 206. Another occurred on June 17, 2001, in the NatWest Series ODI at between England and , when England captain conceded the match after a by spectators injured a steward and disrupted play with needing just 4 runs to win. secured the win by 6 wickets under the circumstances. Under (ICC) playing conditions, which incorporate the MCC Laws, a conceding team suffers a loss, and the opponent is awarded the match without further play, often with the scoreline reflecting the position at concession—such as remaining runs or wickets needed. Umpires must first investigate any suspected refusal to play, consulting captains to confirm intent before awarding the result. In , these provisions have rendered concessions nearly obsolete since the establishment of comprehensive ICC codes of conduct in the 2000s, which emphasize through match referees and penalties for misconduct rather than mid-match walkouts. However, the option remains available in club or domestic cricket where formal oversight is limited, though it is discouraged to maintain the game's spirit.

Forfeited Matches

In cricket, a forfeited match arises when one team fails to provide the required 11 players at the scheduled start time or abandons play after it has begun, typically due to the team's own actions such as refusal to continue, misconduct, or logistical failures attributable to them. While the MCC (Law 15) primarily address the forfeiture of an individual —allowing a captain to forgo batting in that without penalty—the forfeiture of an entire falls under Law 16 (The result), where umpires or the appointed have the authority to declare the awarded to the opposing side if a team is unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations. This provision ensures the game's integrity, distinguishing team-fault scenarios from external disruptions. The consequences of a forfeiture are straightforward and punitive: the non-offending team is awarded an outright victory, typically recorded as a "" with no runs scored or overs . In , this results in the full allocation of points for the winning team in tournaments, while the forfeiting side receives none and may face additional sanctions. For instance, in Test matches, the victory is simply awarded without a specific run margin, emphasizing the administrative nature of the outcome over competitive play. Such rulings prevent tactical manipulation and uphold fair play, with the (ICC) emphasizing that forfeits do not contribute to calculations in affected tournaments. Notable examples illustrate the rarity and gravity of forfeits in international cricket. During the 1996 World Cup in Colombo, both Australia and West Indies forfeited their quarter-final and super-six matches against Sri Lanka due to heightened security fears following a terrorist bombing at the Central Bank; Sri Lanka was awarded victories by default, advancing in the tournament. Similarly, in the 2003 World Cup, England forfeited their group match against Zimbabwe in Harare over political instability and safety concerns under Robert Mugabe's regime, costing them crucial points and contributing to their early elimination; New Zealand also conceded points in a related fixture against Kenya due to venue security issues in Nairobi. Another prominent case occurred in the 2006 Test series at The Oval, where Pakistan forfeited the fourth match against England after refusing to resume play in protest over a five-run penalty for alleged ball tampering, leading to an initial award of victory to England—later amended to a draw on appeal. In a domestic context like the Indian Premier League (IPL), while no major international forfeits tied directly to COVID-19 occurred in 2020, several lower-tier matches in affiliated leagues were forfeited amid pandemic-related player shortages and quarantine protocols. Under ICC regulations, forfeiting an international match constitutes a serious breach of the , often classified as a Level 3 or 4 offence, resulting in fines up to 100% of match fees, suspensions ranging from one to a full ban, and potential bans for the team or board involved. Post-2020 updates to the have intensified penalties, including automatic player bans and points deductions for repeat or egregious cases, to deter disruptions amid global challenges like the . In shorter formats like The Hundred, forfeits for no-shows—such as failing to field 11 players—are enforced strictly, with the opponent awarded a win and the defaulting team facing league sanctions like fines or exclusion from future events, as outlined in the ECB's playing conditions. Forfeits differ fundamentally from abandoned matches, which stem from uncontrollable external factors like weather or crowd violence and may result in no result or shared points, whereas forfeits imply deliberate team culpability and guarantee a decisive outcome favoring the innocent party.

Declaring and Recording Results

Statement of Result

The formal statement of a cricket match result follows standardized conventions outlined in the (MCC) and the (ICC) Playing Conditions, ensuring clarity in scorecards, match reports, and official records. These phrasings prioritize precision, specifying the margin of victory or the nature of inconclusive outcomes without ambiguity. For a win in a two-innings match, such as , the result is stated as "Team A won by an and Z runs" if one side dismisses the opposition twice while exceeding their combined total in a single , or "Team A won by X runs" if the side batting second falls short after both teams complete two . In one-innings matches, including limited-overs formats, a victory for the batting side is phrased as "Team A won by Y wickets" if they reach the target without losing all wickets, or "Team A won by X runs" if the fielding side restricts the opposition below the target. Ties occur when scores are level after all innings, stated simply as "Match tied," while draws—common in unfinished two-innings games—are recorded as "Match drawn" if no winner is determined by the scheduled close. Matches abandoned without a result due to weather or other factors are noted as "No result." In rain-affected limited-overs matches, the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern (DLS) method adjusts targets, with results phrased to indicate the revision, such as "Team A won by X runs (DLS method)" to reflect the recalculated par score based on remaining overs and wickets. For Twenty20 (T20) formats, statements incorporate Super Overs when ties are resolved this way, for example, "Team A won the Super Over" if the additional over decides the outcome. These conventions are consistently applied in scorecards by platforms like to maintain uniformity across formats.

Historical Examples

One of the most iconic ties in history occurred during the first Test of the 1960-61 series between and at in . scored 453 in their first , with Garry Sobers contributing 132, while replied with 505, led by an unbeaten 181 from Les Favell. In the second , made 284, setting a target of 232. appeared on course but collapsed dramatically, losing their last when Ian Meckiff was off the final ball, resulting in scores level at 232 all out and the match tied. The second tied Test match came 26 years later in the first Test of Australia's 1986-87 tour of India at Chennai's MA Chidambaram Stadium. Australia declared at 574 for 7 in their first innings, powered by centuries from and Dean Jones, who scored 210 amid extreme heat. India responded with 397, but were set 348 to win after Australia's second-innings declaration at 170 for 5. On the final day, India reached 347, with and Maninder Singh surviving a tense last over from to force a tie, marking only the second such result in Test history. A notable example of a famous draw arose in the second Test of Australia's 1938 tour of England at Lord's. England scored 494, highlighted by Wally Hammond's 240, while Australia replied with 422, featuring Stan McCabe's 38. In their second innings, Australia reached 204 for 6 when time ran out on the final day, with unbeaten on 102 in a defiant stand that prevented from forcing a victory despite their strong position. The 2002 NatWest Series final between and at exemplified a dramatic limited-overs result, though not directly involving rain interruptions. posted 325 for 5, with scoring 101, but chased the target in a tense finish, reaching 326 for 8 with three balls remaining thanks to an unbeaten 86 from and 45 from [Yuvraj Singh](/page/Yuvraj Singh), securing a two-wicket victory amid high controversy over on-field decisions. In the 1999 ICC World Cup, the group stage match between and at highlighted early controversies over team strategies and communications, later tied to broader match-fixing inquiries involving South African captain . scored 253 for 5, with making 97, but chased it down with 254 for 6 in 47.2 overs, winning by 4 wickets; the game featured unusual on-field discussions by Cronje, scrutinized in subsequent investigations but not resulting in an official award. A prominent instance of a near-forfeit occurred during India's 2007-08 tour of , where the team threatened to pull out following racism allegations against after the Sydney Test. The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) suspended the tour pending resolution, raising fears of series abandonment, but play resumed after Singh's ban was reduced to three ODIs, averting a full concession. In modern T20 cricket, the IPL has seen ties resolved via s, such as the 2020 match between and Kings XI Punjab, which went to a double after both teams scored 176; won the second by 5 runs, with the result stated as " won the ". Under ICC T20I Playing Conditions effective July 2025, multiple s may be used if earlier ones tie, with results phrased to specify the deciding over.

References

  1. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/d25dbgishkx0kijb4jeu.pdf
  2. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/lm8owaz03i86m1eneb7m.pdf
  3. https://www.lords.org/getmedia/db31df04-e6b0-446e-8fc0-34674fb16c71/Laws-Of-Cricket-3rd-Edition-2022_1.pdf
  4. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/qfnsie8fz6vhyl1pmcli.pdf
  5. https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket-2d35b4b95a4a67ae8f9c76f258a84aa8/the-result
  6. https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/mens-odi-match-clause-16-the-result
  7. https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/mens-test-match-clause-16-the-result
  8. https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket-2d35b4b95a4a67ae8f9c76f258a84aa8/the-follow-on
  9. https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/tied-matches-283891
  10. https://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/page/429548.html
  11. https://www.rulesofsport.com/faq/what-is-the-difference-between-a-tie-and-a-draw-in-cricket.html
  12. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/background-1960-61-tied-test-93288
  13. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/batting-for-the-tie-1220964
  14. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-cricket-world-cup-2010-11-381449/india-vs-sri-lanka-final-433606/full-scorecard
  15. https://documents.bcci.tv/bcci/documents/Mens_Standard_ODI_Playing_Conditions-Effective_December_2023.pdf
  16. https://documents.bcci.tv/bcci/documents/Mens_Twenty20_International_Playing_Conditions-Effective_December_2023.pdf
  17. https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/the-laws
  18. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/all-you-need-to-know-about-odi-world-cup-2023-new-rules-format-reserve-day-availability-101696485769960.html
  19. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/hybrid-model-for-champions-trophy-2025-icc-likely-to-take-call-on-november-26-1461157
  20. https://www.thehindu.com/sport/cricket/bangladesh-ireland-washed-out-south-africa-qualifies-for-2023-odi-world-cup/article66833424.ece
  21. https://www.wisden.com/series/icc-mens-cricket-world-cup-2023-24/cricket-news/cwc-2023-india-england-warm-up-match-abandoned-persistent-rain-world-cup
  22. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/orlbya4cqyhqaceje3b2.pdf
  23. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/how-the-duckworth-lewis-stern-method-works-1102000
  24. https://rss.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2019.01278.x
  25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301703591_The_Duckworth-Lewis-Stern_method_extending_the_Duckworth-Lewis_methodology_to_deal_with_modern_scoring_rates
  26. https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/cricket/rules-and-regulations/duckworth-lewis-stern
  27. https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/104290/icc-updates-dls-system-international-cricket-council-code-of-conduct-cricbuzzcom
  28. https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/articles/cn0g1xyex98o
  29. https://sportstar.thehindu.com/cricket/top-controversial-cricket-match-endings-duckworth-lewis-method-2003-world-cup-west-indies-john-dyson/article31240580.ece
  30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274142332_Review_of_Duckworth_Lewis_Method
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8575263/
  32. https://www.sportsadda.com/cricket/features/match-abandoned-meaning-cricket-term-explained/
  33. https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/cricket/rules-and-regulations/playing-conditions
  34. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/xgmt8r5r41onkqbb5nxv.pdf
  35. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/btcn6ickx3glywrdrmnl.pdf
  36. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/match-abandoned-without-a-ball-bowled-135407
  37. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/pakistan-tour-of-england-and-scotland-2006-211973/england-vs-pakistan-4th-test-225258/match-report
  38. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/slmsq8bcoa41z9k8myxs.pdf
  39. https://www.icc-cricket.com/news/t20-refund-policy
  40. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/pcb-confirms-ticket-refunds-for-pak-vs-ban-aus-vs-sa-washed-out-champions-trophy-matches-101740900790523.html
  41. https://faqs.thehundred.com/hc/en-us/articles/6572790287133-Is-there-a-super-over
  42. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-cricket-world-cup-2019-1144415/england-vs-new-zealand-final-1144530/full-scorecard
  43. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-15/controversial-cricket-world-cup-final-rule-changed-by-icc/11602820
  44. https://www.olympics.com/en/news/ipl-super-over-rule-match-list
  45. https://www.icc-cricket.com/tournaments/cricketworldcup/news/all-you-need-to-know-for-the-icc-mens-cricket-world-cup-2023
  46. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/faqs-what-happens-if-world-test-championship-final-ends-in-a-draw-or-tie-1195975
  47. https://www.wisden.com/series/icc-cricket-world-cup-2019/wisden-cricketers-almanack/a-history-of-tie-breakers-and-the-boundary-rider-almanack
  48. https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/match-law/the-result
  49. https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/cricket/rules-and-regulations/code-of-conduct
  50. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/rhatyfvzipulmdvbfzdz.pdf
  51. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/feb/01/england-pakistan-oval
  52. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/cricket-s-repository-of-ball-tampering-since-2000-1149835
  53. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/india-tour-of-pakistan-1978-79-62330/pakistan-vs-india-3rd-odi-64167/full-scorecard
  54. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/stewart-concedes-defeat-after-another-pitch-invasion-103301
  55. https://images.icc-cricket.com/image/upload/prd/my7lr35p9gfrvsafsow6.pdf
  56. https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/what-we-remember-the-oval-forfeit-2006-1139064
  57. https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/67240832
  58. https://resources.ecb.co.uk/ecb/document/2024/03/28/b7f508c8-6cff-4170-aa42-f8516a77c379/32-The-Hundred-2024.pdf
  59. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/west-indies-tour-of-australia-1960-61-61907/australia-vs-west-indies-1st-test-62888/full-scorecard
  60. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-25/australia-vs-west-indies-test-cricket-first-ever-tie-gabba-1960/103372834
  61. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/australia-tour-of-india-1986-87-61426/india-vs-australia-1st-test-63438/full-scorecard
  62. https://sportstar.thehindu.com/cricket/india-vs-australia-tied-test-madras-1986-top-moments-chepauk-dean-jones-kapil-dev-allan-border-september-22-on-this-day-cricket-news/article68654856.ece
  63. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/australia-tour-of-england-1938-61342/england-vs-australia-2nd-test-62650/full-scorecard
  64. https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/120361/
  65. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/natwest-series-2002-61110/england-vs-india-final-66292/full-scorecard
  66. https://www.lords.org/lords/our-history/father-time-wall/2002-india-beat-england-in-a-dramatic-natwest-seri
  67. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-world-cup-1999-61046/india-vs-south-africa-2nd-match-65194/full-scorecard
  68. https://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/icc-world-cup-1999-south-africa-coast-to-win-over-india-and-there-is-tumult-in-ear-piece-254169/
  69. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/08/cricket.india
  70. https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/sport/story/20080121-crickets-biggest-crisis-735072-2008-01-10
  71. https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/ipl-2020-21-1210595/mumbai-indians-vs-kings-xi-punjab-37th-match-1216532/full-scorecard
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.