Anyone here following the World Cup?
Any predictions for the final?
I hate to say it but Australia look set to win....:cry:
Im also willing to offer an explanation service to all those baffled by the game!
Printable View
Anyone here following the World Cup?
Any predictions for the final?
I hate to say it but Australia look set to win....:cry:
Im also willing to offer an explanation service to all those baffled by the game!
Aussie Aussie Aussie oy oy oy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge1
Shoot away ---
Justin
Cricket: As explained to a foreigner...Quote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.
John
Yeah --that's obvious but whose on first?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmw1
:gth
Justin
Whoever wins the toss and decides if they want to be out in the field or in.
John
John --- do you know this routine? One of the most famous comedy routines in American history:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjMtwOdmZ08Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmw1
This is what I was getting at (about as complicated as your description of cricket)
Justin
Count me in!
(...but, I've got an outey...does that matter?...)
-whatever
-Lou
and here's an update of the Abbot and Costello routine featuring Bush and Condoleeza Rice
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
Yes Justin,
That is exactly how it is, and that old routine explains it very well :)
Cheers
John
All you ever wanted to know about cricket.
Is Cricket like Baseball?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cricket is a team sport for two sides of eleven players each. It is a bat-and-ball sport with some similarities to baseball, softball, and rounders - though these three sports are much more similar to each other than any of them is to cricket.
It's like baseball, but with arcane, incomprehensible rules, isn't it?
No. Cricket is about as similar to baseball as soccer is to American football. There are some concepts that are similar in both sports, but really they are quite different. And no. The rules of cricket may be unfamiliar to you, but they are no more complicated than the rules of baseball. If you can understand baseball, you can understand cricket. In fact, I am familiar with both sports and I feel that the rules of cricket are, if anything, a bit simpler than the rules of baseball.
Most people who feel cricket is incomprehensible come to that conclusion because:
they are unfamiliar with the rules; and the jargon used by people talking about cricket is quite specialized and indeed incomprehensible if you don't know what it means. The same, however, can be said of most sports. Once you know the rules and the jargon has been explained in the context of the rules, it all falls into place. Really.
I understand baseball. Will that help me understand cricket?
Yes. You already have the concepts of:
one team batting while the other team fields;
scoring runs;
getting batters out;
runners being safe or out.
This is a big advantage over not understanding these concepts. However, cricket is not baseball. As Yoda would say: To really understand cricket, you must unlearn many things you have learnt. Some of the most important things to unlearn:
Runs are hard to score. In cricket, runs are much easier to score. The average score for one innings of a Test match is about 320 runs.
Batters are easy to get out. In cricket, batsmen are much harder to get out. In six hours of play, you would expect to see an average of about 8 batsmen get out.
Batters can strike out if they don't hit the ball. In cricket, you don't have to hit the ball if you don't want to. If you swing and miss, there is no penalty.
Batters who hit the ball must run. In cricket, the batsmen never have to run. They can choose when to run, and usually only do so when they are certain they can complete the run safely. This, and the previous difference, contribute a large portion of what makes the batsmen so hard to get out.
Batters can't hit the ball into foul territory. In cricket, there is no foul territory. You can hit the ball in any direction you like. This means the fielders have a much wider area to cover. Again, this makes it easier to score runs and harder to get batsmen out.
Pitchers must try to throw the ball in the strike zone, on the fly. In cricket, bowlers can bowl the ball pretty much as high and wide as they like, and usually bounce it on the pitch before it reaches the batsman. This gives them a lot more variety in attacking the batsman and trying to either stop him scoring runs or get him out. (OR KNOCKING HIS HEAD OFF)
The first two differences alone account for much of the difference in flavour between baseball and cricket:
In baseball, the batting team is the "offence". It struggles to score precious runs against the "defence" of the fielding team. Meanwhile, the defence inexorably accumulates outs.
In cricket, the fielding team is often termed the "attack". It struggles to get the batsmen out as they "defend" their wickets. Meanwhile, the defending batsmen inexorably accumulate runs.
There are, of course, many other differences, but these six go a long way to explaining the difference in philosophy between the two sports. If you think of cricket as "baseball with some funny rules" you'll never really understand why a lot of the rules are the way they are, or comprehend the strategies and nuances that make the game so intriguing. Keep them in mind as you read more on these pages.
So what are the major differences between baseball and cricket?
I call the following steps the Transmutational Method of deriving cricket from baseball.
Start with baseball and apply the following functions:
You can't strike out. Swing and miss as much as you like.
There's no foul territory. Hit the ball anywhere you like.
There are no balls. The pitcher is even allowed to bounce the ball on the ground before it reaches the batter.
There are no walks either. If you get hit by a pitch, tough.
If you hit the ball, you only have to run if you think it's safe to do so. Otherwise, stay where you are and take another pitch.
If you reach home plate and score a run, don't go back to the dugout. Stay there to face the next pitch. Or keep running on to first again if you wish.
When you get out, no matter what base you're on, the next batter comes in to replace you where you were.
The bases are always loaded.
So if you hit a home run, that's 4 runs. But don't bother actually running the bases, since that's pointless. Just stay where you are.
Take the gloves off the fielders.
Once you're out, you can't bat again in the same inning.
The team's inning is only over when 6 players are out, since this leaves only 3 players who aren't out to man the bases.
Let's increase a home run to scoring 6 runs, but still the batters don't move any bases when one is hit.
Reduce the number of bases from four to two.
Replace each base with three upright wooden poles in a row, 32 inches high, with the outermost two 9 inches apart.
When batting, you are out if the pitcher hits the poles with a pitch, or if you get in the way and he hits you. You better defend them with your bat!
If the ball hits the wall around the field, let's automatically score 4 runs and the ball is out of play, like if a home run is hit.
Increase the number of players from 9 to 11 per team. So now, the inning is over when 10 players are out, since that just leaves one player and two bases to man.
Reduce the number of innings from nine to two.
That's 99% of cricket right there. There are of course a few other details, but that's pretty much the gist of the entire game.
Note that most of these transformations are simplifications, or at least simple to describe. If I did this starting with cricket and the goal of ending with baseball, the steps would be rather longer and require significantly more explanation at each point. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: cricket is a fairly simple game, baseball is more complicated.
Hopefully that explains most of it. The traditional test match lasts for 5 days and it could end with a result or end in a draw. The new modern one day game is a cut down version with each side having 50 overs to amass their score, and the opponents trying to outscore them with their 50 overs. It is very colourful and spectacular and has helped in a big way to bring crowds back to cricket.
So endeth the lesson :)
Cheers
John
So what exactly are the ways to get an out?
Do pitchers try to hit the batters on purpose sometimes?
Do batters charge the mound and fight the pitcher with the benches being cleared and a big brawl occurs?
Do the players chew tobacco, spit, and eat sunflower seeds?
What role do the coaches play in the game?
What's the usual clothing?
Do you have cups to protect the kiwis and spiked shoes?
Is cricket considered a sport for the upper class?
Do you have a 200th inning stretch? (baseball has a seventh inning stetch)
Do people eat foods in the stands?
Do you have cricket hooligans?
Whats the ball made of?
thats all for now:
Justin
CHEERSQuote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
JOHN
I start a thread to explain cricket... and an Aussie does it for me!:D
Now thats team work!
John... could you now go and explain the rules to Vaughn et al...
they seem to be struggling somewhat...
A few questions.
How do you get an out other than the bowler hitting the wicket defended by the batsman?
How do you score a run? Is it a trip to the other wicket or a total round trip or something else entirely?
How long does a game usually last?
Here goes:
Hope this helps!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildtim
Tristan
PS:
for explanations of the ways of getting out see here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...nt/default.stm
Unless they're English. ;)Quote:
In cricket, batsmen are much harder to get out.
Unless they're English. ;) :)Quote:
In six hours of play, you would expect to see an average of about 8 batsmen get out.
When I was 9 and about to be sent to the UK having been born in Hong Kong, I'll never forget my Dad sitting me down and saying "Son, you're going to England. You need to support a football team and understand cricket."
Well, I've been one of those die-hard Man Utd fans since then (one who was only born 7500 miles away from Old Trafford, so a bona fide one ;) ), but I never properly understood cricket. It is without doubt the most obscure, mixed-up, bizarre game I've witnessed. Not only are the rules impenetrable, the scoring appears random and gargantuan, the equipment is bordering on sexual deviancy (willow bats that look like paddles for kinky bedroom games, red leather balls, all manner of padding with straps that, when put together, look like a gimp suit), and the terminology is just, well, bizarre.
As for England's performance.... I went to Lords to watch Day 2 of the Test match against South Africa about 3 years ago. The whole day nothing happened. Seriously. Nothing.
- What is a Googly?
- What is a Chinaman (a term I objected to even at the age of 9!)?
- Where on the field is 'silly mid-off' and 'silly mid-on'? (That's just plain silly!)
- Why is a position called slip? And if you stand there, will you?
- And why do you turn into a Duck if you're out without scoring. And did you know you could do worse by becoming a Golden Duck?
- And how the hell has bowling the ball evolved into a move that resembles Forrest Gump trying to fly?
- There are countless hours of debate over whether a particular bowling action is illegal or not. Some Indian spin bowlers appear to want to redefine the bizarre action into something a human body cannot feasibly implement.
- The umpires are old, doddering, octagenarian men with large waists and probably short-sighted as hell. Oh, and they have to carry the players' jumpers for them like a big clotheshorse.
- Some cricket grounds have a tree right bang in the middle (e.g. Canterbury). What happens if you hit the tree? Well, you score 5. Normally you score 4 if you smash it out of the boundary, 6 if it does so without touching the ground, so I guess 5 is a fudge? You also get 5 if it hits other obstacles like a jumper a player has taken off if hot (see 'Umpires carrying jumpers' above).
- The Australians are unbeatable usually. Boring!
- Endless days of rubbing linseed oil into the bat and tapping it with a ball. Just sitting there. Tapping. And. Tapping.
- The bats can be Scoops or Double Scoops or Jumbos which school children constantly argue over which is better.
- If you are a spectator you better take the better half of a whole week off work to watch it.
- And then you sit there from dawn to dusk, with some sandwiches, lots of beer, and all the papers to read and do the crossword, or just talk with your neighbours, in fact do anything except watch apparently.
- And don't EVER try to play it or you will break fingers and get knocked unconscious.
- Oh, and for those thinking it's a bat and ball game, just to really confuse you it is perfectly legal to kick the ball.
No-one one was even out until nearly 5.00 pm. The WHOLE day! Just some South African guy running up and down, endlessly, scoring some gargantuan number of runs. It was truly like watching paint dry.
The next day England were batting and SA took 8 wickets during play. I was at work.
I don't know why we bother. :shrug:
OK I'm freakin confused. Baseball anyone?
The idea of batters running if they want, hitting if they want, watching TV if they want, playing cards if they want, is really foreign to me (but I'm trying). You can hit the ball anywhere? So the batter is really trying to defend the - what do you call it ?-- the sticks thing ? ---right but at the same time is trying to score runs.
In baseball the whole offense is based on the concept of a fair ball that forces runners to run. But here, all balls are fair and the runners aren't forced to run?
Jiminy Cricket !!! It's tough but I'm getting there.
Is it considered a game of leisure? Nothing seems forced.
So the batter's out if he obstructs a good pitch?
A batter's out if a ball is caught in the air?
Can you throw batter's out at the bases(?)
By the way "the seventh inning stretch in baseball is just a customary routine of people in the stands getting up and stretching, getting the last food and beer, between the halves of the seventh inning, before the end of the game (9th inning).
Justin
Here's an excellant cricket summary for all those interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9STt...elated&search=
Cheers
John
Looks like a hell of a game John --- very exciting -- I'm starting to get the basics now.
Justin
Justin,
It can be a very exciting game especially the one dayers as there has to be a result one way or the other. The 5 day tests on the other hand can be just as enthralling and exciting with lots of different scenarios for how each team plays the game and whatever tactics are used, but every now and then the 5 day Test match will grind down into a very slow draw, and then it is like watching grass grow. :)
Cheers
John
I'm sure once you know the game in depth --- it becomes exciting on many different levels. That's the mark of a good sport --- many levels of appreciation. I was a fairly serious baseball player when I was younger ---wish I could of played this sport as well. The videos helped out a lot on the explanation I like how the batters run with their "bats" --- that's not done in baseball. I like the ability to throw "curve balls" and bounce them off the ground ---- very neat. With the amount of protection the batters wear, it must have a dangerous side to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmw1
Justin
Going back 20 odd years or so was when we started to see a lot more protective wear like helmets, and arm guards, and chest guards etc.
In times before that for the batsmen it was just leg pads and padded gloves to stop those fingers from being broken and of course the cricketers box to protect the goolies. They have all gone a bit soft these days, and going back to some great rivalry between England and Australia before WW2 there was a test series between the two known as the bodyline series.
Bodyline, also known as fast leg theory, was a cricketing tactic devised by the English cricket team for their 1932–33 Ashes tour of Australia, specifically to combat the extraordinary batting skill of Australia's Don Bradman. A Bodyline bowler deliberately aimed the cricket ball at the body of the opposing batsman, in the hope of creating legside deflections that could be caught by one of several fielders in the quadrant of the field behind square leg.
Although several batsmen were hit during the series, as would be expected, no one was hit while a leg-theory field was set, but still it led to ill feeling between the two national teams, with the controversy eventually spilling into the diplomatic arena. Over the next two decades, several of the Laws of Cricket were changed to prevent this tactic being repeated. It should be noted, however, that short pitched balls aimed at the batsmen are not and have never been illegal and are in widespread use today as a tactic.
More can be read here.........http://www.atmitchell.com/journeys/s...e/bodyline.cfm
Cheers
John
Thanks John ----but
whats: "cricketers box to protect the goolies" ?
Justin
Some of these bowlers are approaching 100 mph - I think Brett Lee (Australian fast bowler) was clocked around there a year or two ago. No mean feat considering the action these guys are forced to use (no elbow straightening during the rotation).Quote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
I've played both baseball and cricket. IMHO batting is more fun in cricket (unless you get out for a duck), and fielding and pitching is more fun in baseball. I wouldn't like to draw too many comparisons, but I think the throwing arms of pro. baseballers are in general superior to those of pro. cricketers (with exceptions, I'm sure). In fact, the Australian cricket team's throwing coach is an ex US baseballer, or so I'm told.
James.
Believe me if you got hit in the goolies you would know what they were. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
John
A plastic "cup" you put down your undies to hold the "boys" - like backstops wear (or should wear).Quote:
Originally Posted by jaegerhund
James.
Thanks James and John:
It's pretty amazing that they can't bend their elbows -- I guess that's why they have a running approach --that seems kind of intimidating.
It does look like (what do I know) that fielding and offense is a little bit more dynamic and varied in baseball than cricket: double plays, catchers throwing runners out, tagging plays at the bases, relay plays hitting cutoff men, butttt
I would be willing to say that the cricket batter has to deal with more ----and maybe more skilled ---but again what do I know --anything that resembles baseball (or the other way around) is a good sport to me.
Justin
My moneys on a Sri Lanka vs Australia final....
or can SA pull off a miracle?
Come on Sri Lanka!:D
Woooooo hoooooo!!!!:y :tu
James.
D'oh!!!
James.
Woooooo hoooooo!!!! :y :tu
James.
.....finally....
James.
Come on Aussie come on come on, Come on Aussie come on.....................:y :y
John
Awsome display by the Aussies!
you gotta appreciate talent....:D
:cry: :cry:
Why thank you :bowQuote:
Originally Posted by Agoge1
our cricket team did pretty well too
James.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
:roflmao :roflmao :roflmao
interesting...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cric...es/6541831.stm
does anyone reckon this could work? personaly I am against it. Hawkeye is still not fantasticly brilliant... especially for lbw.
Any thoughts?
I guess given the fact that the umpires have only a split second to make a decision one way or another, and for the fact that they don't have the benefit of TV replays, it would certainly rule out the less obvious mistakes which have and always will be made. But hey that's what cricket is all about isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge1
The game will lose a lot of the human side of it if we solely rely on the third umpire all the time for all but the most basic decisions. You can imagine how many appeals there would be.
Gees who needs umpires out there at all if this happened, they could umpire completely from their armchairs up in the umpires box.
In short NO I hope this does not happen, you have to stay with some human made decisions.
Cheers
John
john,
congrats on australia retaining the title. as someone born in the uk to indian parents, i think the endless defeats at australia's hands (eng and india) are getting somewhat wearisome. anyway, such is life - if the rest of world is not up to the task, it's hardly the aussies' fault!
as for your description of how the game works, i think this emoticon covered it... :roflmao