Cricket...

That's the job of the guy in the silly-mid-off position, I think.

Louis J makes the rules.

The first two players of the side that is in first go out, and the team not in first all go out to get the first team in out. etc.

there is a bord

There should be one called "I'd Love to Understand Cricket".

i tried to figure this shit out in australia last year. you throw the ball, you hit the ball, you catch the ball, sure. all the rest is made up.

louis splains it all Cricket-England win toss and bat first in third test

kinda

I "understood" it for a few minutes when I was in NZ once. But then I passed out from all the scotch I'd been drinking during the "explanation".

So is it true an entire match can go by without either team winning?

And once in the UK I thought I'd got is sorted, but then I had a few more pints of bitter.... Snooker made more sense.

xpost yep. Even after five full days of play. Therein lies the awesome majesty of the game.

indeed. Draws are much less common now (unless there's bad weather)

That's actually pretty cool. It must be unique in sport.

it only makes sense if someone explains it to you for an hour..

..and both of you are very drunk

It's easy really. I used to play cricket when I was 14/15 for my (then) local cricket club. Wasn't much use sadly, but I was always difficult to get out. I just didn't score many runs due to lack of strokeplaying ability!

Really strokeplaying hm that's interesting. Actually I tried it once and it is fun to play.

They totally make up the rules as they go, right?

-- HI DERE, Thursday, 30 August 2007 23:31 (Yesterday) Link

Like baseball...

... for adults

I mean, seriously guys, where to start?

England are currently kicking ass against India in the one-day series, which is nice. But I could probably answer -any- question you ask me about an aspect of the game, so I'm at a loss for what I could contribute. It's probably the one thing I love more than music.

The rules Laws, if you're interested, are neatly exhibited in something called Tom Smith's Guide to Umpiring and Scoring, which I have somewhere. But they're pretty easy to pick up.

dan it's like baseball except that there are only two bases that you run back and forth between - and if you don't feel like running, you DON'T HAVE TO! you just hit again (and again), and only run if you hit it really well

the rest of the rules constitute an attempt to make this interesting

Dietmar Hamann was on TMS last night! He's a cricket fan!

you can run if you hit it badly but are fortunate enough to place it far away enough from a fielder. you can even run if you don't hit it at all! (this depends upon the skill of the wicket-keeper, cricket's slightly more flexible version of the 'catcher')

dietmar hamann liking cricket = awes

by "well" i just meant "in a way that you could probably make it, if you ran"

Unless you're Inzamam ul-Haq, then you stroll

anyway, there's a really neat way to take the whole confusing 'running' issue out completely: hit it past the boundary-rope for an automatic four runs! (or six if it doesn't hit the ground first)

haha tom i'm currently writing a player profile for inzy, he didn't really stroll, he lumbered...

He's scored a hella lot o' lumbers in his career then

you don't average 50 in Test cricket without being bloody good at lumbering

I am mentally adding "amirite" to most of these posts

Inzy got so good at hitting fours and sixes purely to avoid having to actually run.

He's got a touch of the WG Grace about him

... "amirite"

Don't ask, Dan, just don't ask. The last time I asked, I got a very complicated explanation that involved getting all the balls of thread out of the sewing basket and putting them out in elaborate patterns on the blanket and obscure rules about legs and wickets and not starting matches on the first full moon following the Queen Mum's birthday.

I was born here, and I don't get it. You have no hope. Just sit in the sun and drink beer and lemonade and nod occasionally and shout "good show!" when everyone else claps.

It's Ambient Sport

I really isn't that difficult to get the basics, most people willfully decide that they will never know how it works so never try.

It's the subtleties that take the time, and make the game the greatest sport on Earth.

xpost, thats the joy it can be ambient, not much better than driving around your hols with TMS burbling away, or it can be mind blowingly nerve wracking like the 2005 Ashes.

It's Ambient Sport

::HEAD EXPLODES::

most people wilfully decide that they will never know how it works so never try

OTM, it really doesn't take much effort to understand, unless you're playing the comedy foreigner/stranger (which I suspect quite a few people here are doing). It's also a sport of ambience AND action; when you're wandering about in the covers waiting for the ball to come your way you can ponder exalted things like the meaning of life or how they make yoghurt, but then WHACK, the batsman's just nailed one to your left, ARE YOU GONNA BE A BRO AND DIVE??

Plus, it's such a logical game, such a balanced game. There's more pertinent risk and reward than in most sports. There's individual human error, there's intense tactical manipulation, there's the lot. It rules.

and it has more truly GREAT witticisms or moments of inspired chat than just about all the other sports combined.

eg "The Batsman's wanking the Coxman's Balls, and he's Willey".

if we succeed in grasping it do we automatically become condescending wankers like you? jesus, you people remind me of the guy who taught my perl course a few weeks ago - "so, do you get it, tracer? you look lost! it's really not that difficult"

It is sport. Ergo, I do not understand even the POINT of it, let alone the finer nuances of a game with rules so complex they're into their 37th edition since the Victorian age.

i think it's nice to watch people in white clothes stand around, run and leap in the sun

Go away, you're not taking this thread seriously enough

thank goodness

"in you're interested in this topic you could try reading the thread, which is a good one, rather than cracking jokes about how asian cricketers are all meek and subservient"

ya perl is easy

perl is basically about people in white clothes standing around, running and leaping in the sun

they dont even wear the white clothes anymore ;_;

it is like the polyphonic spree but with more balls

... and better songs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpsxaDvtOTw

ok everyone im gonna try. this is what i got from louis' explanation in the other thread and from watching it some:

11 guys on a team. everyone gets a turn to swing the stick at the ball once or twice (depending on the type of match).

when you hit the ball you run from the stump youre standing near to the other one (and maybe back again depending on how far you hit it).

you get to keep swinging the stick at the ball over and over again until the ball hits the stump or is caught by the opposing team in the air - at which point you are out!

the field is round.

That'll do for now

^^^ the basics, beautifully rendered

i'm just in a bad mood because the red sox got swept by the yankees

well, my mood will alter depending upon whether my beloved worcestershire can pull off an unlikely and heroic victory against durham this afternoon.

My mood was improved immeasurably on listening to Broad and Bopara bat last night - and noting that Stuart Broad looks like an elongated Ziggy (from Big Brother)

*sigh* The pitch is oval.

*sigh* The pitch is rectangular, the ground is oval

stone monkey, that is the worst piece of attempted pedantry i've ever seen

and there is only one Oval. (well, two if we're counting the one in barbados)

wait a minute we ARE condescending pricks.

:-D

let us now be welcoming and let the people taste cricket howsoever they wish

oh baseball fans also need to understand this point: the batter and pitcher are both in the CENTER of the playing field! there are no foul balls. so hitting it behind you is just as good as hitting it in front of you. mindbending.

*sigh* that's CENTRE not CENTER

hitting it behind you is liable to have you caught by the wicketkeeper or the slips, though.

(the slips stand in an arc around from the wicketkeeper to the side you're facing when you're in your batting stance)

haha tom

unless they are a leg slip.

mate, sometimes even I don't understand leg slip

(newbies, leg slip is a very archaic position and it's never used EVER. unless alastair cook is batting.)

cricket is sort of like if american football teams were allowed unlimited chances to advance 10 yards -- and you could score in either end zone

Now you've lost me

in the interests of transatlantic comity, here is an interesting page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_between_cricket_and_baseball

(the slips stand in an arc around from the wicketkeeper to the side you're facing when you're in your batting stance)

I prefer to face the bowler myself.

Cricket's bowlers are grouped into different categories based on their bowling style—pacemen, seamers, off-spinners (or finger-spinners), leg-spinners (or wrist-spinners)

Uhhhhhhh, where is SWING bowling? Oops, forgot to sigh... *sigh*

swing is just a feature of pace bowling

How do you define "pace bowling" tho? I mean, if you're going to separate seamers from pacemen? You don't have to be a pace bowler to swing the ball, any more than you have to be a pace bowler to seam the ball surely?

Tom it's wikipedia, just add "and so on" to that list

pacemen, seamers

does not compute, there are genuinely quick bowlers who also seam it about, e.g. makhaya ntini

Tom it's wikipedia

Yes, silly me

Well that list is kind of bollocks.

There are Fast Bowlers 80-9, Mediums and Slow bowlers (who are 99% spinners)

Fast and Medium pacers can exploit swing.

With some bowlers, swing is all they've got, hello Matthew Hoggard

Sorry, that was a but unfair on Hoggy

You leave Hoggy alone....

The Bowlers Holding The Batsmans Willey

This is the lamest sport in the world apart from that thing the US calls football that stops every five seconds.

amirite?

hoggard bowled beautifully on our last tour of india in non-swinging conditions; his length was superb, his line consistent, and he developed an ability to cut the ball (essentially, spin it at pace; it doesn't turn much but it can be very effective)

i wonder what heave ho makes of pakistan's many cricketing controversies, like the oval forfeiture last year, or the reprieves handed out to 'drug cheats' shoaib akhtar and mohammed asif (who's shaping up to be a bowling great). i wonder who his favourite players are, in fact. mohammed hafeez, perhaps? or possibly danish kaneria?

Mohammed Asif is brilliant

p.s. i'd never have kicked pakistan out of world cricket for any of their offences. some people have something against them, but i think they liven the sport up like you wouldn't believe. it's NEVER dull on or off the pitch with the green army around

there's something v. similar in baseball called a "cut fastball" or "cutter", which is almost as fast as a normal fastball but has movement on it

taking sides: chad bradford vs lasith malinga for wackiest ball release action in sport?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutter_(baseball)

haha steve also don't forget kent tekulve... or josh papelbon, seen here:

http://www.kieranchapman.net/images/weblog/joshpapelbon.jpg

In cricket, defeating the batsmen through ball deviations is achieved both through the air and off the pitch (sometimes both, if you're a top-quality spinner). How does baseball manage to have such a variety of different deliveries when the legal target is so small and the ball can't bounce?

It doesn't

argh ffs my beloved worcestershire have lost to durham, now we'll be relegated for sure ;_;

not sure i understand the question? pitching deliveries in baseball are actually pretty uniform except for a few weird outliers; the real differences come in the type of grip a pitcher will use, which affects how the ball spins in the air, and hence its flight. you're right that the strike zone a very small target compared to cricket, which makes high-quality pitching, well, very difficult. and because a baseball bat is smaller than a cricket bat - and cylindrical rather than flat - high-quality batting is also very difficult. and because you have to hit the ball in front of you rather than behind you or to the side, and because if you do hit it in front of you you have to run whether you want to or not, baseball is famously known as a game of failure (sort of like soccer), and very low-scoring. you don't have the luxury of pounding out run after run (like in basketball). one slip-up and you can screw the whole game.

Baseball = pitcher's sport
Cricket = batter's sport

... roughly speaking

I am baffled.

Cricket can also be a game of failure, although more for batsmen than for bowlers. If a bowler bowls three bad balls, he can always come back and take wickets, but if a pitcher does so, the stakes are higher for each individual error.

ok, i am baffled now too (i have no idea what "taking wickets" means, nor "bad balls" - explain!!)

what i mean about failure is, in baseball you don't see a batter reaching base, say, 100 times per game

the very best batters in baseball make an "out" on more than half of their chances

Taking a wicket means getting a batsman out! I mean, a bowler getting a batsman out... by bowling him out... not by running him out or any other method. A bad ball is just a poorly delivered ball, e.g. a full toss or a long hop (sorry, that's going to confuse matters moe)

But then I don't know what "the very best batters in baseball make an "out" on more than half of their chances" means either

Taking a wicket means getting a batsman out! I mean, a bowler getting a batsman out... by bowling him out... not by running him out or any other method. A bad ball is just a poorly delivered ball, e.g. a full toss or a long hop (sorry, that's going to confuse matters moe)

... that's better

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Playing-Hard-Ball-Cricket-Baseball/dp/0349116660/

^^^ good book

Cricket is pretty damn tedious, I think.

I hated it when I was at school. The football, eh, soccer coach wanted no-one on the pitch who wasn't interested in the game, so he sent us "bad at sports" kids(which was like 5 of us) to the school swimming pool, with the girls in the class. Somewhere in his fucked up brain he thought this was some kind of emasculating punishment, LOL. It wasn't. It was fucking great. Later on, they sussed out what was (cough) going on and the girls got sent off to play netball or some such thing, we football hataz still went to the pool, but they let us play with the canoes! It was fucking awesome! (not as good as the girls though, obv)

The cricket coach was "inclusive", the bastard. This meant that if you had the good sense not to give (1) fuck about this tedious ritual, you'd get to stand somewhere in the distance as a "fielder", and once about every four weeks, a ball would land nearby, and you'd try to catch it, this fucking rock-hard leather thing would belt into yr hand @ 78mph or something and you'd be like YAAAARGH FUKCER and you'd drop it, and the coach would yell at you. Or you'd catch it, and the batsman would fuck you over in playtime.

Fuck crix0ret, srsly.

There hasn't been enough drinking on this thread for any of it to make sense yet.

Watching Test Match cricket ws a big part of my summer, but ever since what happened in the Ashes last winter I've lost a bit of the love I had. Couldn't even bother to start a thread for the series against India. And it isn't bcz we were 'winners'. I watched betting collapse after batting collapse all through the 90s. Losing the TV rights might be another factor.

Tom, what makes a ball "poorly delivered"? The batsman hits it? It sails into the stands, causing patrons to fear for their lives? It has incorrect postage?

What i mean by baseball batters making an out on over half their chances is this: the batter arrives with a bat in his hand, ready to try to hit the ball. There are two options: he reaches base safely, or he makes an out. In baseball, more than half the time, he makes an out, even if he is among the very finest specimens of hitter today. In cricket, the guy can sit there all day, whacking the ball, running if he wants, not running if he doesn't. See?

We need more stories like Pashmina's though, TBH

Stick Cricket is an absolute joy.

Wish we had got cricket at school, but sadly that could never happen in Scotland(unless you went to a private school).

My cricket anecdotes:

I currently have a bruise on my left hip the size of an orange from getting hit by my team's 80mph bowler in nets (batting+bowling practice). On Wednesday night we lost a very entertaining 20/20 game by 9 runs. I came in the last over needing to score 20. I hit 3 : (

When I played at school (state school in Sheffield) I was the only white kid on a team of Pakistanis. This wasn't unusual in Sheffield. The fact that none of these kids even considered looking to go on to club (or even county) cricket is a real shame. I get the impression things are slightly better now, 10-15 years later.

This is my stock ball: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-arm_orthodox_spin

This is my variation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-arm_unorthodox_spin

Twice in my life I have been on a hat trick, and both times I have gotten excited and bowled a wide (a ball so innacurate the batsman couldn't hit it so gets a run and another ball to compensate).

Also, it is difficult not to laugh at the first recording here, even if you don't like cricket or very posh people: http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/sport/bestcommentary/index.shtml

On the comparison between baseball pitchers and cricket batsman, it's made well in Ed Smith's book about baseball. It is assumed that when a baseball pitcher and cricket batsman play they will do well (not concede runs and score runs respectively). Anything else is failure. If a baseball pitcher or cricket bowler hits a run or takes a wicket it's kind of a surprise.

Cricket bowlers have a reputation for being more eccentric/introverted than batsmen, who generally give pretty bland interviews, even if they are captain.

yes - i was always surprised how fricking OVERJOYED a cricket team would get when one of them, say, caught the ball, or the bowler managed to knock the bails off the stumps - like, "isn't that what you're supposed to do anyway?"

still am, i suppose, but it makes more sense now

hated it when I was at school. The football, eh, soccer coach wanted no-one on the pitch who wasn't interested in the game, so he sent us "bad at sports" kids(which was like 5 of us) to the school swimming pool, with the girls in the class. Somewhere in his fucked up brain he thought this was some kind of emasculating punishment, LOL. It wasn't. It was fucking great. Later on, they sussed out what was (cough) going on and the girls got sent off to play netball or some such thing, we football hataz still went to the pool, but they let us play with the canoes! It was fucking awesome! (not as good as the girls though, obv)

The cricket coach was "inclusive", the bastard. This meant that if you had the good sense not to give (1) fuck about this tedious ritual, you'd get to stand somewhere in the distance as a "fielder", and once about every four weeks, a ball would land nearby, and you'd try to catch it, this fucking rock-hard leather thing would belt into yr hand @ 78mph or something and you'd be like YAAAARGH FUKCER and you'd drop it, and the coach would yell at you. Or you'd catch it, and the batsman would fuck you over in playtime.

Fuck crix0ret, srsly.

I think I understand cricket now!

The best thing about cricket to me isn't the rules they make up as they go along, it's the scorecards they make up afterwards! In other sports you have results like "Roger Federer def. Amer Delic 6-2 6-3" or "Chelsea - Manchester City 2-2" or "Tyson Gay WINNAR". In cricket there is a big box explaining that "Worthamptonfield 6/2 for against 43 wickets, Everhamshire 23 all in. 32 unbowled legs, no outs and overs, runs for 57 minutes. 342 & 14. Mild drizzle at the Dogger Bank. Durham won."

I was terrified of being hit with a cricket ball (theyre hard as rocks!) in school so I always refused to play.

I once bowled a hat trick in schoolboy cricket. That, sadly, is the highlight of my sporting career.

Also, Americans should know that Cricket was directly responsible for the greatest drinking feat in the history of mankind (David Boon, Sydney-to-London flight, 52 cans of beer).

yes - i was always surprised how fricking OVERJOYED a cricket team would get when one of them, say, caught the ball, or the bowler managed to knock the bails off the stumps - like, "isn't that what you're supposed to do anyway?"

Yes, that's what you're supposed to do, but the very best bowlers in the world will concede an average of 20 runs (and 50-60 balls) per out.

The other things is that yes, the batsman CAN score 200 runs in an innings, but if he does get out he doesn't have another 8+ goes like in baseball (if it's a 4 or 5 day match he will get one more go, but in one-day games, it's all or nothing).

My cricketing past features an absolute litany of embarrassing, hilarious, or otherwise humiliating screw-ups. This mostly stems from my style of bowling, which is called 'leg-spin'. I won't go into the specifics, but suffice to say that when it goes right, the ball's practically impossible to play, but it has a far higher risk of going wrong than any other sort of bowling, with the consequence that I'll always get hit around a bit (or a lot) depending on how well it's coming out of the hand. I've always been able to spin it a mile (one coach, who'd played county second XI cricket, said I turned it as much as anyone he'd seen), but I've also always been able to bowl the most unbelievable dross (mostly in the form of full-tosses, balls which don't bounce before reaching the batsman).

I can't go into all the shockers right now, but I'll briefly hang my head and confess to having a) bowled a spell of 3-1-41-0, b) been the second dismissed batsman of a hat-trick TWICE, c) effected a 15-yard run-out with my left boot (okay, that was a highlight, and one that will never be topped), d) bowled a spell of 4-0-65-0, after my opening attack had reduced a frankly woeful line-up to 22-5, e) deliberately thrown the ball for four after dropping a catch (my nadir), f) run out my partner, who was innings top-scorer, and holed out to square-leg next ball, g) come out to face the last ball of a match we'd just lost, against an absolute joke-bowler, played a sweep to a donkey-dropper, missed, and been given lbw amidst riotous celebrations, and h) bowled the last over with 10 runs needed against tail-enders, and conceded all 10 after just three balls.

At least I'm a good fielder! :D

you ARE just making up all those words at this point, right?

okay louis:

i'm led to understand that there are essentially two types of bowlers: the kind that try to throw it past you and the kind that try to spin it so you'll miss or fuck up.

1. explain the difference between the day matches and the (potentially) five-day matches. when i was in oz around the holidays during the ashes really all i gathered was that the mongrels are better than the limeys!

11 guys on a team. everyone gets a turn to swing the stick at the ball once or twice (depending on the type of match): i understand there's a bit about the bowler hitting the wicket, but how often can the swinger swing and miss (if at all)? and what if the bowler isn't throwing anywhere near the batter?

when you hit the ball you run from the stump you're standing near to the other one (and maybe back again depending on how far you hit it). explain plz--sometimes you run, sometimes not, what's the decisive factor? and how many of these running back-and-forths equal one of the hundreds of runs that are tallied?

you get to keep swinging the stick at the ball over and over again until the ball hits the stump or is caught by the opposing team in the air - at which point you are out! so each batter gets one out, thus the team gets eleven? yet there seems to be a bit of back-and-forth beyond this, at least in the week-long games...

how many times at bat do the sides get? what ends the match? ps i know it was a publicity thing by sir richard but seriously the ashes should stay with whomever wins.

ok mookieproof:

when each bowler bowls, they have to bowl six balls before someone else has to bowl from the other end. each period of six balls is called 'an over'.

one-day cricket consists of two innings, one for each team. each innings is generally composed of 50 overs a side. one team scores, the other team chases down that score. the winner is whoever finishes with more runs.

5-day 'Test' cricket is much more freeform; there are about 90 overs in each day, and the sides can bat as long as they want. you can only win this by bowling out the opposition twice and then scoring more runs than them; if a team isn't all out but hasn't chased down its target, the match is drawn.

the swinger can miss as much as they want, but they don't generally miss unless the ball is a good one; with the stumps behind you, there's more of a need to hit the ball.

if the bowler is throwing nowhere near the batter, the umpire signals a 'wide', and the batting side score a run, whilst the bowler has to bowl that ball again in order to complete his over.

you only run if you can reach the white line a yard away from the stumps before the fielders can get the ball to hit that set of stumps. it's a careful balance of risk and reward. if you don't get there in time, you're run-out. in order to complete a run, both you and your batting partner (there are always two batsmen on the field at any one time) have to reach the opposite end.

the team has eleven batsmen, but only ten wickets fall until the side is all out; this is because, as i just said, two batsmen need to be on the field at the same time. the batsman left high and dry when the last wicket falls is 'not-out'. this is common to all cricket.

the match is ended when a team either overhauls their target, is bowled out (loses all 10 wickets) short of their target, or reaches the end of all 5 days and all the overs with neither target acquired nor batsmen dismissed.

hope that helped!

"What I call pleasure, you may call pain/ I'm talking five day tests"

Cricket is class war, as written by L P Hartley in the Go-Between.

Textbook explanation above, JGO...

Cricket is the greatest sport of all time.

I enjoy boo-ing the members stand at Lords.

I can't go into all the shockers right now, but I'll briefly hang my head and confess to having a) bowled a spell of 3-1-41-0, b) been the second dismissed batsman of a hat-trick TWICE, c) effected a 15-yard run-out with my left boot (okay, that was a highlight, and one that will never be topped), d) bowled a spell of 4-0-65-0, after my opening attack had reduced a frankly woeful line-up to 22-5, e) deliberately thrown the ball for four after dropping a catch (my nadir), f) run out my partner, who was innings top-scorer, and holed out to square-leg next ball, g) come out to face the last ball of a match we'd just lost, against an absolute joke-bowler, played a sweep to a donkey-dropper, missed, and been given lbw amidst riotous celebrations, and h) bowled the last over with 10 runs needed against tail-enders, and conceded all 10 after just three balls.

This is one of the funniest fucking things I've ever read. I feel like it's in Esperanto.

"Once I threw a wobbly for 5/0/i/2220 for after my first chugger caused a Pollyanna; imagine my face when the three tits went up on scoreboard! Lawks, what a shocker!"

OK even though that's taking the piss outta me I am dying here

I didn't think it was taking the piss, he's just described precisely what happened to me last time I played

"Once I threw a wobbly for 5/0/i/2220 for after my first chugger caused a Pollyanna; imagine my face when the three tits went up on scoreboard! Lawks, what a shocker!"

Dan, you are a genuis!

That is a direct quote from Blowers on TMS, I'm sure of it.

I can hear him saying it in my head, for sure

50th over - 316-6: Unbelievable scenes! Mascarenhas has just smashed five consecutive sixes from the final over of the innings from Yuvraj Singh. This after a dot ball from the first delivery of the over. The first six was actually caught by Chawla at long leg, but the leg spinner tumbled over the boundary rope, much to his despair after taking a great catch. The next four were slightly less dubious, all launched high into the leg-side boundary.

Amazing.

I know, bastard, and I missed it. Deffo must watch highlights tonight.

I saw it.

Was this even on TV last night??!?!?

It only really worked as a spectacle when you didn't know the result. More twists than the proverbial corkscrew. Anderson bowling like a muppet. Edges. Heroism. An utterly predictable final stroke (yeah, like bringing mid-off up was ever a good idea...)

What a great game! I watched Sky's 2-hour highlights. India looked devastating for a long time. Lots of great individual performances - I reckon Uthappa was unlucky not to get MOTM for his matchwinning runs and fielding genius.

Shame! Touch o' the Bradmans about that. Also, no more Inzy... *sob*

Bye bye Sag Aloo! Good series win for SA...

England, shite as usual

What happened to the great young test side of 2 years ago?

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

i repeat: loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

And given how poorly Sri Lanka played on their recent tour of Australia, the current series really speaks volumes about the state of English cricket...

Australia's still thrashing everyone though. It's just boring now.

kerry o'keefe on the concept of englnd suffering 'stage fright' during the last ashes series: "Nervous? I once went to a nightclub to pick up a supermodel. I wasn't nervous, I just wasn't good enough."

haha, kerry o'keefe is like shane warne with the cheeky rollercoaster lifestyle maxed out and the actual cricketing ability removed...love him

jim maxwell is the best though. super, super commentator.

They're both fantastic.

In Australia we get Mark Taylor on the telly and he's SHIT. Oh god he's so bad. He has no personality whatever, and rambles on and on and on and on and on and on about absolutely nothing. We watch it with the sound down and ABC radio cut in instead.

Also Ian Healy - fucking moron.

Results of Australia-wide vote:

Australia's best commentator   

Place  	Commentator  	Votes

1 	Richie Benaud 	3022

2 	Kerry O'Keeffe 	2171

3 	Bill Lawry 	1441

4 	Jim Maxwell 	1215

5 	Mark Nicholas 	1036

6 	Damien Fleming 	829

7 	Michael Slater 	725

8 	Tony Greig 	625

9 	Mark Waugh 	521

10 	Peter Roebuck 	520

11 	Ian Healy 	483

12 	Ian Chappell 	463

13 	Allan Border 	386

14 	Brendon Julian 	369

15 	Mark Taylor 	336

16 	Geoff Lawson 	324

17 	Glenn Mitchell 	267

18 	Greg Blewett 	174

19 	Keith Stackpole 126

20 	Terry Alderman 	111

21 	Simon O'Donnell 108

22 	Ryan Campbell 	93

23 	Jamie Cox 	81

24 	Danny Morrison 	77

25 	Kim Hughes 	73

26 	Darren Berry 	65

Where's Billy Birmingham?

McNicholas what the fuck. Slimy arrogant hyperbolic choad of the highest order who needs to get over his crush on Michael Clarke ASAP.

I like Mark Nicholas!

He often adds excitement to a passage of play and he isn't boring (often coming out with a decent line or two) but c'mon, the sweat and grease drips off his every last syllable. I find him nauseating more often than not.

Plus, I've heard from an insider on the Hampshire dressing-room (2nd team player in 90's) and by his account he was an absolutely appalling human being.

a right wicket fiddler, he is.

Let's just say that his passion for the game is more pronounced when a young blond player is at the centre of things.

"Once I threw a wobbly for 5/0/i/2220 for after my first chugger caused a Pollyanna; imagine my face when the three tits went up on scoreboard! Lawks, what a shocker!"

-- HI DERE, Sunday, 2 September 2007 16:47 (3 months ago) Bookmark Link

still funny

Wow, that's pretty fucked re Nicholas. He seemed like a nice-ish dude. Well, better than Fucking Shit Heals anyway.

Nicholas was all about the public-school snobbery, the 'cutting' of players from less privileged backgrounds. You had to know the right people to get his respect. He would terrorise the younger players. In the showers he was without mercy in his commenting. Probably very well-endowed, the bastard.

Kerry, Jim and Vic Marks is pretty much my ideal commentary line-up, TV or radio.

Brett Lee supports the back end, again

You never reduce Australia to 134-6 on the opening day of a Test without expecting severe repercussions. Bloody umpires helping 'em on their way too. India to fall short of the follow-on target again.

i remember loving cricket when i was a kid but i think i just hit the thing around...

Well, that's better than not hitting it around!

it is, right?? =P

Any game with Australia is boring because of this. Yawn we win again etc.

If you hit the thing around without getting out, then you were better than I was! Maybe you should take it up again! I'm sure there are a few clubs near where you live.

Kerry O'Keefe on Hogg being hit over the MCG fence by Tendulkar during India's 1st innings last week : "The last time I saw a chinaman hit like that was in a Bruce Lee film!"

#1 commentator. FACT.

Had he been watching south park?

Jesus! How's he get away with that stuff??

Harbhajan banned for racist jibe

Not like a South African dude to make a ludicrous decision on racism.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/its-not-cricket-furious-kumble-points-finger/2008/01/07/1199554493907.html

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/329440.html

MV Sridhar, the assistant manager, who spoke to the media before the decision was announced, said there was no video or audio evidence involving Harbhajan. "We felt there was no substantial evidence," he said.

The Perth Test looks like it could be an interesting one.

I want on-field fighting.

OH THERE WILL BE VIOLENCE

Some dopey pro-Aussie umpires need a bit of a slapping too

Harbl Jam Singh

India suspends tour :

http://www.theage.com.au/news/cricket/india-suspends-tour/2008/01/07/1199554559797.html

: which makes them big crybabies in my book, since I'm not sure what the Australian team has to do with two incompetent, ICC appointed, neutral umpires.

I'm on India's side. It's about the 'monkey' comment, not the umpiring.

If the BCCI wasn't sure Singh did nothing wrong, it wouldn't be doing this. Surely.

Indians can't be racist? That's some prett-ay racist theory right there!

LOL @ the media going off like this is a NATIONAL CRISIS.

Indians can't be racist? That's some prett-ay racist theory right there!

-- King Boy Pato, Monday, 7 January 2008 20:41 (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

wtf I didn't say that

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/07/2133556.htm

Posted 32 minutes ago
Updated 24 minutes ago

The Indian Cricket Board says it is not yet considering stopping its team's tour of Australia over the suspension of spinner Harbhajan Singh.

wtf I didn't say that

You DIDN'T?

So you think Indians can be racist?

Racist! Racist! Argh!

Sorry, I've had like four Freddo frogs tonight.

I'm surprised anyone would accept Ricky Pontings word over anything after they appealed for a catch that clearly the batsman hadn't even got near.

The Indian Cricket Board says it is not yet considering stopping its team's tour of Australia over the suspension of spinner Harbhajan Singh

Oh yes they are!

Perhaps "sledging" will have to be banned as that seems to be the root problem.

India cricket board statement
The following is the full statement from the Board of Control for Cricket in India into the decision to ban Harbhajan Singh for three matches for making a racist remark

The Board of Control for Cricket in India has viewed the happenings during the second cricket Test between India and Australia in Sydney with great concern as some of these can have a far-reaching impact on international cricket.

Some of incidents are highly regrettable considering the warm and friendly relations between the Indian and Australian cricket boards.

The incident involving Indian off-spinner Harbhajan Singh and Australian all-rounder Andrew Symonds and the subsequent hearing by the ICC match referee and his conclusions are, to say the least, distressing.

The Indian Board does not accept the findings of the match referee and has decided to challenge the unfair decision to suspend Harbhajan Singh as it deems it patently unfair.

The Board will appeal to the International Cricket Council to review the decision of the match referee and suspend its operation till the appeal is disposed of.

The Indian Board realizes the game of cricket is paramount but so too is the honour of the Indian team and for that matter every Indian.

To vindicate its position, the Board will fight the blatantly false and unfair slur on an Indian player.

The Board also questions the very conduct of the hearing as the match referee before reaching his decision disregarded the essential point of any inquiry, that it should be based on facts, rational, detached and objective.

The Board, in particular, is unhappy with the charge of racial slur against India's of-spinner Harbhajan Singh.

I blame MTV's Yo Momma

I thought calling a mixed-race player a "monkey" was the problem? (xxp)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A30769914

Peter Roebuck : Ponting 'must be sacked'

http://www.theage.com.au/news/cricket/ponting-must-be-sacked/2008/01/07/1199554570948.html

Put the crack pipe down now, Peter.

Peter Roebuck: a man of many vices.

Roebuck OTM.

Sometimes it feels like the aussies can dish it out but cant take it. There's no excuse for racist abuse but its not surprising that things like that will happen when the sledging by the aussies creates such a nasty atmosphere.

This sums it up best

Kumble simmered as he delivered a line reminiscent of Bill Woodfull's famous Bodyline statement. "I think only one team was playing within the spirit of the game," he said, causing the Indian media contingent to break into applause.

Was it michael clarke who edged to slip but stood his ground for the umpire to make the decision?

"Sometimes"

friend of mine: "in the words of chopper read, india need to harden the f**k up"!

I'm with India all the way on this, fuck it. Peter Roebuck otm.

So what do you think is going to happen over this? Will Ponting and co tone down the sledging or insist there's nothing wrong with it?
It's certainly not very sportsmanlike and sets a bad example to fans. How can they be expected to behave when the captain and his players dont?

i think a three-match ban is harsh on harbarjan but he in particular, and india in general are hardly blameless in this though. they've been just as shittily petulant as australia at times! that last day was amazing, as "good" as the portugal-netherlands game at the last world cup.

I was gonna say, India are acting like spoilt brats. Sure they got the hard end of the stick with decisions but you've still gotta expect to keep out a part-timer with 3 wickets and 2 overs left! I don't think the Aussies would accuse Harbl of this if he hadn't said it, and although a 3-match ban may be a bit steep (I'd have fined him), there's no doubting that 'monkey' is racist rhetoric. Symonds and the Aussies could have risen above what was presumably an emotional comment, not indicative of any ingrained racial prejudice, but they chose not to, and the ICC have acted accordingly. What I want to see is everybody getting a light slap on the wrist and then told to get the fuck on with it. I'd also like to see tiny radio mikes attached to every player. That would sort these situations out. And provide us with some sterling entertainment.

In order to prevent this turning into a Pakistan vs. Darrell Hair-esque farce, the ICC should reverse their decision to ban Singh, but place him on a final warning for a lengthier ban should he say something similarly offensive in future. They should also fine him, and tell the Aussies that they are dirty sneaks.

You dont think there will be any action taken by the ICC on sledging then?

"Grow up, lads."

I don't see how they can reverse the decision. If they do that then each time something is done that a team doesn't like they will threaten to strike.

the ICC have to ban sledging and at least that way they have acted with authority.
Also in future they cant just accept someones word, they need evidence.

The way I see it, reversing the decision now isn't necessarily an admission of weakness, more a means of letting India off the hook just this once. I don't see many teams threatening to go on strike for ICC disciplinary decisions, and if they do, the ICC can simply choose to go "Fuck you". When this comes about, the team is the loser. I know India are a special case because their board is so powerful, but if the ICC reverse their decision, I reckon that they'd be grateful enough not to try a similar stunt again for a while.

Yeah right...

Also in future they cant just accept someones word, they need evidence.

-- Herman G. Neuname, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 12:24 (20 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

^^ Quintessence of the issue.

greg baum talks sense: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/01/07/1199554570951.html

So the ICC has dumped Bucknor (but not at the BCCI's request) (ORLY?) but oddly not Benson, who seemed just as incompetent than Bucknor, if not more so. Why one and not the other? India's long-held and widely known belief that Bucknor is biased against them no doubt had no bearing on the decision. None at all. And of course the ICC is compromised since India is largely responsible for ensuring the health of the ICC cash cow through TV rights.

And happily, Roebuck's call for Ponting's head has been treated with the contempt that it deserves - sometimes even selling lots of newspapers can still leave you as a laughing stock. Bad luck, Pete.

They totally make up the rules as they go, right?

-- HI DERE, Thursday, August 30, 2007 11:31 PM (4 months ago)

????

Kudos to the journalist who termed this the "Bollyline" tour.

In another remarkable day for world cricket, the financially powerful Board of Control for Cricket in India succeeded in having controversial umpire Steve Bucknor stood down for the Perth Test. New Zealand's Billy Bowden will stand in his place.

What, and giving this twat another chance to be a wanker is better in some way?

Some people are ruining cricket for me. Bowden and his self-obsessed arsehattery can get fucked.

(Mark Taylor's incredibly soporific commentary is another)

Billy Bowden pisses me off like you wouldn't believe.

Is Mark Benson usually crap? He was a decent opener for Kent and unlucky for England. He had an unusual batting style.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/7178634.stm

What do the actual aussie public think?

UH

I assume contrary to the reports in todays UK newspapers the public are totally behind ponting?

The public manages to ignore any news story in which Australia is criticised. If the situation were reversed we'd be beying for Indian blood.

Loads of countries are like this, but Australia is a bit over the top imo.

Common scenario: A male Australian 'football'* player fondles some woman in a club, reels off a template apology to the press, cops a fine and/or a several-match ban, continues to enjoy blanket media coverage, becomes role model for young boys.

* not football

way to generalise!!

interesting alternate perspective from india

^^^ author has 30 minutes to live

that guy is one of the best cricket-writers going, along with cricinfo colleague and amusingly-named-for-an-aussie peter english

you'd have to say 'peter australian' would be a lot funnier, surely

this is true

peter new zealander would be funniest of all

poida

Of course what is not being discussed anywhere is the woeful quality of the team that India has sent to represent their country.

Aside from Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly, Kumble and Dhoni the rest should all be dropped. Jaffer's made 22 runs in 4 innings and got out to Lee each time. Dravid's faced 443 balls for a pitiful 112 runs in 4 innings. And Yuvraj, the wonderkid, has 17 runs from 4 innings. Ana aside from Kumble, the bowling hasn't looked much better.

Perhaps they SHOULD go home.

lol you

india took a first-innings lead in the last game, were denied a potentially decisive one by a staggeringly poor bit of umpiring, and only failed to draw due to a) more bad umpiring and b) one freak over.

for your sake i hope india wins the next two tests

Bowden and his self-obsessed arsehattery can get fucked.

He's annoying, but also makes the correct decisions most of the time.

No, they "failed to draw" because they couldn't bat through two sessions.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4350433a6429.html

Has this been posted yet?

*speechless*

Incidentally, Symonds is not Aborigine as many think, but has West Indian heritage, so technically, he and Harbhajan are both Indians.

OK, this is a spoof

When's the bottle opener coming?

it's not a very well-advised spoof, if it even is one.

DNW: Bowden.

Also, that article is really fucking terrible.

I might be wrong, but I seem to recall Ian "cunt" Healy calling Symonds a gollywog a few years back?

He's annoying, but also makes the correct decisions most of the time.

-- Neil S, Thursday, 10 January 2008 22:40 (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

He can be correct without being knobtastic.

xp Symonds sometimes actually looks like a golliwog doll though, and not in a remotely racist way. Hair, complexion and white zinc cream on his lips.

i'm just waiting for bowden to rip his coat off after he makes a fantastic caught-behind decision and thus reveal a shirt reading "I Belong To Jesus"

olz

And Yuvraj, the wonderkid, has 17 runs from 4 innings.

i thought that their bowling has been ok, considering how young the two quicks are.

stick a fork in him!

YUVRAJ Singh's miserable tour of Australia is almost certainly over after he was dismissed by a courier driver for two runs during a practice match in Canberra yesterday.

Symonds sometimes actually looks like a golliwog doll though, and not in a remotely racist way. Hair, complexion and white zinc cream on his lips.

Whatever man, it's still a very "unprofessional" thing for a Channel 9 "commentator" to say.

exactly.

I agree totally. Sorry, I should have been clear on that.

(xp)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/mihirbose/2008/01/what_was_and_wasnt_said_in_syd.html

http://media.theaustralian.com.au/multimedia/2008/01/09-tshirts/index.html

http://www.headlinesindia.com/more/index.jsp?news_code=67850

and now Pakistan want the Oval result overturned
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/pakistan/content/current/story/330349.html

"We have made the application to the ICC and they will consider it at the next cricket committee meeting," the official told Cricinfo.

Pakistan's case, he added, was strengthened by the fact that England supported the application when the matter was discussed at the executive board meeting of the ICC.

"We have moved the application on the basis of the ICC dropping the ball tampering charges against our team," the official added.

Inzamam told BBC's Urdu service that Pakistan should take a lead from the Indian board and push to change the result of the Oval Test. Inzamam was referring to the ICC's decision to drop Steve Bucknor from the Perth Test between India and Australia after the BCCI complained over Bucknor's umpiring in Sydney. Inzamam said the Pakistan board should pressurise the ICC because the ball tampering charges were eventually dropped. England won the series 3-0.

Why don't they do away with the game altogether and just argue for three weeks.

dammit i predicted that series at 3-0 and was incredibly smug about it afterwards

India withdraw tour quit threat
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/7185056.stm

Shame.

"I mean, I'm not sensitive about it . . . but if I'm not your friend, if you're an opposition player or something like that, it is unacceptable."

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23043586-5003413,00.html

WOW AUSTRALIA'S 2 SHITTY OPENERS OUT -- 2/13

3 DOWN ._.

RIP mr cricket's average in the 80s ;____;

5 OUT FOR FUCK NUTHING ;__;

I HATE MICHAEL CLARKE BTW.

BUT I CAN'T NOT LIKE MR CRICKET

clarke going off the boil again. drop him and put hodge in, damnit!

So we're officially getting shat upon now.

Can someone please tell me why India is not declaring?

oh fuck this, this final day has pissed me right off.

As I see it there are two options for India:

1. Declare, have a slim hope in hell of getting Australia all out before stumps
2. Stay in like fucking twats and force a draw

Streaker beat down

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/03/04/streakerdown_wideweb__470x325,0.jpg

Wait, how does the streaker fit into the rules???

White Sox fans like cricket now?

ha. a spokesman for the International Cricket Council said: "He is not going to be charged because he brought down a spectator who entered the ground." Although section 4.2 of the council's code of conduct says players may be punished for assaulting spectators, the spokesman would not elaborate when asked if his words meant players could try to bring down streakers.

http://media.smh.com.au/?category=Breaking%20News&rid=36032 video.

So... was that 5 points?

5 runs, yes.

Handy Hint: Don't let your bros order Indian food when India is playing cricket? My bros and I were watching the cricket (LOL forever at Roy's elbowsmash at the streaker...that's the first time they've shown a streaker on the telly for YEARS) and we ordered Indian. SO IT DIDN'T GET DELIVERED FOR FUCKING AGES!!

:D

(for reference, this is the "rules of cricket" cricket thread, and the one for discussion of cricket events is "Cricket" without an ellipsis)

That's why I posted that link here, Louis.

Yeah, I know! I was just anticipating a rush of off-topic blabber.

Hello hello, it's back again

oh yes

Man, I thought this thread said "Chiclet". : (

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/148/425659704_7a39e32a3e.jpg?v=0

Yeah Verin came back with a massive bang in this one and pretty much definitively showed why she was far and away the most awesome Aes Sedai in the book IMO.

― lift this towel, its just a nipple (HI DERE), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:17 (29 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

fao DJP & others, this is cricket distilled 2 its ~essence~

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9x8STHMdRs

http://sportpulse.net/blog/top-25-most-handsome-cricketers-160801

want to know what exactly Chris Gayle's sculpted physic is

Ricky Ponting????!!!!???

always a good moment for Feminist Afridi

http://cache.pakistantoday.com.pk/Even-the-Feminist-Afridi-Tumblr-couldnt-offset-this-shoddy-outing.jpg

otm

shane watson's is the funniest inclusion/writeup

can only assume that anderson & broad are excluded on grounds of being cockroach england's enforcers

even the photo of Watson is perfect

altho as Tom points out, Ponting still looks like Ian Hislop with a weave

hott

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/58600000/jpg/_58600362_beard_getty.jpg

beard_getty.jpg

Shikhar Dhawan was robbed, imo.

My brother's middle name is Imran entirely because my mother had a crush on yr man in the 80s tho.

isn't yr surname also, like,

yeah

Yep

as this is the cricket ephemera thread not the rolling cricket match thread i shan't ask you to pass comment on yr lads' rickety bowling or suliemann benn's fielding/presence in international sport, may revive the other one tho, which will confuse ppl