A static method can be 'sort of' overridden, however. You cannot use keyword override but you can create an new method of the same name ...
I think it is extremely confusing to use the term "overridden" in this situation, since in well-designed object-oriented code "override" has a clear and specific meaning, namely that this unique method name will be implemented differently in this descendant from how the identically-named method is implemented in its ancestor(s), and that the overridden method may, or may not, include inherited code.
Even the term "reintroduce" (which derives from Delphi) is somewhat misleading, since although it could be said that you are reintroducing the method name, what is more to the point is that you are re
defining the method, albeit confusingly re
using a name that means something different in the ancestral hierarchy.
I cannot conceive of a situation in which a programmer has no option but to redefine methods in a well-designed hierarchy in this way, particularly in an English-based language such as Object Pascal where the mother tongue has such a superfluity of synonyms for virtually every term in common use.
To deliberately reuse a method name to mean two things at the same time in the same code seems to me pointlessly confusing, and a mark of poor design.
Programmers are restricted by the syntax and grammar of the language they choose. Intelligent choice of method (and other) identifiers can make the code virtually self-explanatory, and sloppy naming can obfuscate it and give rise to all kinds of debugging difficulties.