God's sport

[Northboy]

Cricket ;-)

Ok, Canadian-peeps, how many of you
1, have played organised cricket, either at school or in a team?
2, fully (NB: fully) understand cricket?
3, attended a professional cricket match in England?
4, ditto, in Canada?

Most recently, July 09, I attended a Pro40 match in Guildford where Surrey CCC took on my county team Middlesex CCC. We won of course!
A lovely relaxing 2 to 3 hours, siiting in a small cricket ground in Surrey, very pleasant.

I understand He likes His hockey too. Note: Stanley Cup is the high prize.

In fact all sports that produce in some form the "production of joy" and community.

I don't know the rules of Circket....Very civilized, I must say...

Well, sorry for spamming your thread. Just a message.

 

[Blackleaf]

Can anyone take seriously a game named after a grasshopper wannabe?

Cricket is a game which has been played in England since as far back as the 1500s. It originated in the southern shires. It was once the national sport of England until football came along in the late 19th Century, although it remains England's second sport.

The International Cricket Council (ICC), cricket's equivalent of FIFA, has 104 members. It is the world's second most popular sport after football.

Cricket is ancient, and can be traced at least as far back as the Tudor times. But written evidence exists which shows that Prince Edward - the future King Edward II -may have played a form of the game in 1301.

Nobody knows for sure where the game gets its name from, but there are several theories. In the earliest definite reference to the sport, in 1598, it is called "creckett." Given the strong connection at the time between England and Flanders, which at the time was part of Burgundy, England's ally, the name may have been derived from the Middle Dutch krick(-e), meaning a stick (crook).

More likely (which Samuel Johnson also believed), it may derive from the Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "cricc" or "cryce" meaning crutch or staff.

Another possible source is the Middle Dutch word krickstoel, meaning a long low stool used for kneeling in church and which resembled the long low wicket with two stumps used in early cricket.

There are several other theories.

For those who love their sporting history, the first fatality known to have occurred whilst playing cricket occurred in 1624.

Jasper Vinall was playing for his village team in his village of Horster Keynes, West Sussex, on 28th August 1624 when a West Hoathly batsman whacked Vinall in the head with his bat whilst trying to hit the ball for a second time (I'm not sure about 1624, but these days it is illegal for a batsman to hit the ball twice and, if he does so, he is out). Henry Brand was killed in exactly the same way in 1647.

In 1622, several parishioners of Boxgrove, near Chichester in West Sussex, were prosecuted for playing cricket in a churchyard on Sunday.

 

[JamesPPB]

What are you talking about? A test match lasting 1 or 2 days? Indeed. A test match lasts for five days. After two or three days, they have a day of rest, so a test match, counting the day of rest, goes on for six days.

Even then, a great majority of test matches end up in a draw. Each side gets two innings, and it is difficult to get a side out twice in five days.

Incorrect on ALL points. A test match does not last for five days, the permissable time to complete the match is 5 days. A test match is an unlimited overs form of cricket. So there is no minimum time that has to be played. The time is governed by the skill or lack thereof of the players. I've seen test matches that were over by mid-morning on the second day. A fielding captain having bowled out the opposition for a low score (day 1), then his team gaining a high innings will often declare to avoid the loss of more wickets & to force the follow on (day 1). The oppostion removed quickly in second innings, no need for the team that declared to take a second innings on day 2.

As for your comment about a draw, utter nonsense! I've never attended or seen a drawn cricket match. Very few cricket matches end in a draw.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"These days I think the West Indies team is pretty weak."

Lately, they showed some improvement in their ODI series with Zimbabwe. Hopefully, they will build on that. In fact, they even managed to capture a couple of wickets by kicking the ball unto the stumps, soccer style! What remarkable skill!!

Zimbabwe. That really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Oh, how the might have fallen. I still remember one of their score against England. 403 for 3.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Incorrect on ALL points. A test match does not last for five days, the permissable time to complete the match is 5 days.

There are very few test matches which finish on fourth day or earlier. When a match is a draw (and many are), of course it goes on for full five days. Even when one team wins, the match most of the time goes on into the fifth day. If the match is finished fourth day or earlier, that means one team was much stronger than the other team. E.g. England vs. India, or West Indies vs. Pakistan (in those days).

And of course a match can finish if a result is obtained before five days, what is the big deal there? The match is scheduled for five days. If a result is obtained the match is over. That applies not only to cricket, but too many other sports and games (e.g. chess, tennis, badminton etc.), that is only common sense.

But a test match is scheduled for five days, and most of them do go on for five days.

A test match is an unlimited overs form of cricket. So there is no minimum time that has to be played. The time is governed by the skill or lack thereof of the players. I've seen test matches that were over by mid-morning on the second day. A fielding captain having bowled out the opposition for a low score (day 1), then his team gaining a high innings will often declare to avoid the loss of more wickets & to force the follow on (day 1). The oppostion removed quickly in second innings, no need for the team that declared to take a second innings on day 2.

As for your comment about a draw, utter nonsense! I've never attended or seen a drawn cricket match. Very few cricket matches end in a draw.

And contrary to what you may think, a great many test matches end in a draw, at least they did 20 year ago, when I stopped following cricket. In a 5 match series, the typical score for winning team maybe 2 wins, 1 loss and two draws. I have seen series where 4 or even all 5 test matches ended in a draw. I cannot recall even one series here they had all five ended in other than a draw.

I suggest you look up some historical data on internet as to test series in the old days. You will find that a great many test matches ended up in a draw (they probably still do). For somebody who calls himself a cricket fan, you seem to be surprisingly ignorant of old days. A real aficionado would know something about cricket all the way from Don Bradman (have you heard of him)?

 

[lone wolf]

So ... how many sites did you have to glean to find something that agrees with you?

 

[JamesPPB]

I'm sorry Sir Joe, but you are incorrect. You clearly aren't up to date with modern cricket. Most test matches DO NOT end in draws, on the contrary. Even 20 years ago they didn't.
I know a great deal about cricket of the old days, I have seen many videoed games and have read many books. And played cricket both at school and later as an adult.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

James, here is a result for a test series between England and Australia, 1954.

4 draws, England won 1.

HowSTAT! Test Series - Matches & Results

Or 1970 – 1971.

Four draws, England won 2, one abandoned.

HowSTAT! Test Series - Matches & Results

Contrary to what you may think, draws were quite common in the old days (I don’t know how it is today; I stopped following cricket 23 years ago). If you had been a real cricket fan you would know this.

 

[AnnaG]

There are very few test matches which finish on fourth day or earlier. When a match is a draw (and many are), of course it goes on for full five days. Even when one team wins, the match most of the time goes on into the fifth day. If the match is finished fourth day or earlier, that means one team was much stronger than the other team. E.g. England vs. India, or West Indies vs. Pakistan (in those days).

And of course a match can finish if a result is obtained before five days, what is the big deal there? The match is scheduled for five days. If a result is obtained the match is over. That applies not only to cricket, but too many other sports and games (e.g. chess, tennis, badminton etc.), that is only common sense.

But a test match is scheduled for five days, and most of them do go on for five days.

Wiggle wiggle wiggle. Now you are contradicting your original comment that stated a test match is 5 days after sneering about someone's comment on test matches lasting 2 or 3 days.
IOW, you flipflopped 180º

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'm sorry Sir Joe, but you are incorrect. You clearly aren't up to date with modern cricket. Most test matches DO NOT end in draws, on the contrary. Even 20 years ago they didn't.
I know a great deal about cricket of the old days, I have seen many videoed games and have read many books. And played cricket both at school and later as an adult.

No I am not, I believe I mentioned that I stopped following cricket after I left Britain in 1987. But I was an avid enthusiast the 8 years I was there, and I also read plenty of historical material in those days (starting with the all time great legend, Don Bradman).

And draws were quite common in those days. There was only test cricket in those days, one day and other forms of cricket came later.

 

[lone wolf]

Does cricket have goal posts?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'm sorry Sir Joe, but you are incorrect. You clearly aren't up to date with modern cricket. Most test matches DO NOT end in draws, on the contrary. Even 20 years ago they didn't.
I know a great deal about cricket of the old days, I have seen many videoed games and have read many books. And played cricket both at school and later as an adult.

How far back do the videotapes go, James? I doubt if they go further back that say 80s. If you read books, that is a different story. You may find Wisden useful in looking up the old test series.

 

[AnnaG]

James, here is a result for a test series between England and Australia, 1954.

4 draws, England won 1.

HowSTAT! Test Series - Matches & Results

Or 1970 – 1971.

Four draws, England won 2, one abandoned.

HowSTAT! Test Series - Matches & Results

Contrary to what you may think, draws were quite common in the old days (I don’t know how it is today; I stopped following cricket 23 years ago). If you had been a real cricket fan you would know this.

2 examples? You haven't any better statistics than 2 samples?

 

[AnnaG]

Does cricket have goal posts?

Yup. They're called wickets.

 

[lone wolf]

Yup. They're called wickets.

I suppose if one can't move it, it becomes a "sticky wicket"?

 

[AnnaG]

I suppose if one can't move it, it becomes a "sticky wicket"?

lol That's about the truth of the matter.

 

[AnnaG]

Post #22:

What are you talking about? A test match lasting 1 or 2 days? Indeed. A test match lasts for five days. After two or three days, they have a day of rest, so a test match, counting the day of rest, goes on for six days.

and then a few posts later:

There are very few test matches which finish on fourth day or earlier. When a match is a draw (and many are), of course it goes on for full five days. Even when one team wins, the match most of the time goes on into the fifth day. If the match is finished fourth day or earlier, that means one team was much stronger than the other team. E.g. England vs. India, or West Indies vs. Pakistan (in those days).

And of course a match can finish if a result is obtained before five days, what is the big deal there? The match is scheduled for five days. If a result is obtained the match is over. That applies not only to cricket, but too many other sports and games (e.g. chess, tennis, badminton etc.), that is only common sense.

But a test match is scheduled for five days, and most of them do go on for five days.

Wiggle wiggle wiggle. Now you are contradicting your original comment that stated a test match is 5 days after sneering about someone's comment on test matches lasting 2 or 3 days.
IOW, you flipflopped 180º

 

[TenPenny]

Anna, you've got to keep up:

'test matches last 5 days' actually means 'years ago, many test matches lasted up to 5 days'

There's a dictionary on this somewhere, I think I loaned it to YukonJack.

 

[AnnaG]

Anna, you've got to keep up:

'test matches last 5 days' actually means 'years ago, many test matches lasted up to 5 days'

There's a dictionary on this somewhere, I think I loaned it to YukonJack

Sorry. *sheepish look* (Um, "sorry" actually means "I am laughing my head off because Sir Porker is what B. Bunny would call 'a maroon' ").

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Anna, you've got to keep up:

'test matches last 5 days' actually means 'years ago, many test matches lasted up to 5 days'

There's a dictionary on this somewhere, I think I loaned it to YukonJack.

Quite so, TenPenny. the two mean pretty much the same thing (I have already mentioned that I stopped following cricket more than 20 years ago, so whatever I say by definition applies to that period), you are finally beginning to master the intricacies of English language.