AUS BEAT ENG BY 1 SIX TO 0

The women's edition of the World Twenty20 Championship kicked off on May 5. In just the second game between Australia and England, the tournament had its first tie... and the first Super Over.

But for the first time in international cricket (actually in all level of crickets that I know of), the Super Over also failed to deliver a result. After scoring 104 in their normal innings', both teams lost their 2 wickets for 6 runs in the Super Over. And so the 2 points were awarded to Australia by virtue of greater number of sixes hit (1 to England's 0).

The rules of Twenty20 cricket state that in case of a tie, a Super Over (also called a One Over Eliminator sometimes) will be played to break the deadlock. This is the commonly known part. What many people do not know is what happens if the Super Over also results in a tie.

In such a case, the team that hit higher number of 6s in their 21 overs (20 normal overs + 1 super over) will be declared the winner. In case of a tie here, the team with the higher number of 4s in their 21 overs. And in case this also results in a tie, then God help the teams because the match is awarded by way of a coin toss.

I know there are some rubbish rules in cricket, but this one takes the cake. The women from England fought just as hard as the ones from Down Under... but were not equally rewarded. Why? Because their method of scoring runs was different (less flamboyant) than that of their opponents. By this definition, Shahid Afridi is a better batsman than Rahul Dravid!

It's time ICC looks into this particular rule and changes it. Just last month, Sachin Tendulkar showed that runs can be scored in Twenty20s without hitting too many sixes... he hit just 3 out of the ground on his way to becoming the highest scorer in the IPL. If still the rules were to say that hitting sixes could eventually decide the match in your favour, it's a pity then!

Thank God that matches are not decided on the basis of the length of the sixes hit by the batsmen!