5 Reasons why I do not Consider Cricket True Sport

crvlvr · Nov 5th, 2005, 00:55

best thing to happen to cricket was the one day matches, compared to the test series that lasted 5-6 days, this speeded up the game quite a bit. Now they should start considering 4 hour or 2 hour games -- come home from work watch the match, go to bed. whats wrong with that?

TREKorDIE · Nov 5th, 2005, 01:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by crvlvr

whats wrong with that?

Nothing's wrong.................only you get the pleasure of reading a magazine article instead of a novel!!!!!

cyberhippie · Nov 5th, 2005, 01:05

Though a newbie to the cricket scene I agree the ODIs lend more excitement to the game and a scenario where the games, are there to be won, by batting and fielding alone!!!
Test matches have too many variables for the casual fan like myself the "follow on" "bad light" "rain" all can swing the actual battle??

Having said that the recent test series for "the ashes" didn't suffer too much under these rules and even for me was a fascinating sporting event!!

It all seemed to break down to a series of linked ODIs such was the innings commitment.

Can't see this ever being a Scottish sport though. We have to take climate into account, so our sporting hero's tend to be in football, snooker, golf.......... all games you can play in the rain

PeakXV · Nov 5th, 2005, 01:09

2 Hour games ..... now I am getting interested. The first game I ever watched on TV in India went on for a week or something. I actually aged a year (Birthday somewhere in between) before the outcome became known.

Now if you change the tea party into a little Feni Frolic and get some cheerleaders happening ..... call them the Wicket Wenches or something

- I'll stop with these musings or some
sports entrepreneur might get ambitious ..................

TREKorDIE · Nov 5th, 2005, 01:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeakXV

2 Hour games ..... now I am getting interested.

What will call that game?......................"Si xet"!!!!

because there will be 11 batsmen to bat just for 2hrs(!!!!), a situation which will compell them to try to score a six per ball...............so, that should not be called cricket anyway............Sixet will be the best name for that.

Go...........you people enjoy Sixet...............I will be more happy to see those spectscular straight drives and splendid cover drives

ToD

Yetijuice · Nov 5th, 2005, 02:30

Cricket is fine with me. However, I consider baseball to be the opiate of the masses. I went to the church of the baseball 82 times in 2005, 85 times in 2004, 84 times in 2003, and 79 times in 2002. Lifetime I have been to 1,088 major league baseball games in person. I could have doubled that except for my spending 15 years in Asia. When I go to Los Angeles Angels baseball games I sit near the Jack Daniels stand. I don't want to have far to walk. JD certainly is better than tea at cricket.

A high brush back pitch in cricket is the easiest pitch to hit for a six. However, if the batsman swings and misses his nose may be all over his face. In baseball that is called a bean ball, a hit by pitch. A baseball player cannot hit that pitch for a home run (six equivalent) because only 90 degrees of the playing field is fair territory. True, it is difficult to hit a pitch that bounces. Baseball uses a round bat whereas cricket utilizes a flat bat.

By all means I have had discussions with cricket fans in bars in Manali and elsewhere, usually with a drink in hand. Once I was hit by a cricket pitch that broke my glasses, giving me a bloody tikka on the bridge of my nose.

My question to you cricket fans out there: Have any of you been to over a hundred cricket matches in person, never mind one thousand? Do you put your money where your sport is?

crvlvr · Nov 5th, 2005, 04:48

Quote:

only you get the pleasure of reading a magazine article instead of a novel!

The trouble is most people don't have the time or patience for "novel" these days -- atleast in developed countries. i amazed the continued cricket madness in India..but think of the potential international market out there.. the mosts poular game in the world, footballl/soccer last about 2 hours.

Peak XV had done some careful analysis and has fine recommedations.

davey · Nov 5th, 2005, 08:07

Im there at every match I can, also helmets are worn to prevent facial damage, come on Poms (I'm a yorkshire man myself) OZ rules the world in cricket they lost the Ashes Yes, still won the one day series and then went on to win the world eleven in Austrlia, shame about the Ashes tour though still hurts, although the best player England had happened to be a south African

jemmy · Nov 5th, 2005, 12:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by mridula

5. David Boon, Inzamam-ul Haq, ever expanding Virender Sehwag, and I can’t remember a similar Sri Lankan player’s name. Now look at the king of games, soccer and name a similar player who is that fat!

4. You switch on the TV to watch a test series and where are all the players? They have gone to have lunch! Or tea (but I wonder if the tradition still alive?). Now in which other game this happens that players have gone for lunch? It is more effective in Hindi, as a friend used to say “Arre ye players kahan gaye? Chai peene gaye hain!”

3. Have you seen any other game where players wear sweaters and play? Now if you want to compare with golf or carom, go ahead I have no problems. Look again at soccer and see, rain or snow players are still without sweaters!

2. Now I have not seen too many other sports where players black goggles and play or even keep black goggles on their caps and play! Why are black goggles so essential for cricket?

1. Which other sports gathers 12 to 15 teams and calls the event world cup? (das barah logon ko bator kar khel lete hain aur kahte hain world cup!) And which other country goes in a tizzy over it like we do?

You can also see the fun I am having at

http://traveltalesfromindia.blogspot...-consider.html

Hi Mridula,
Although i am a die hard football fan but i am not agree with your ideas. Comparing cricket and football is totaly unlogic. Cricket is known to be gentlemens game. Here best from a player come when he is above 30year's. Also you will rarely watch dispute among players in cricket whereas tackles, hot discussions are quite common in football.
Every game has positive and negative point. I think u don't like cricket but that doesn't mean you criticise it.
-------------------------------------------
Jemmy

Nachiket · Nov 5th, 2005, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yetijuice

Cricket is fine with me. However, I consider baseball to be the opiate of the masses. I went to the church of the baseball 82 times in 2005, 85 times in 2004, 84 times in 2003, and 79 times in 2002. Lifetime I have been to 1,088 major league baseball games in person. I could have doubled that except for my spending 15 years in Asia. When I go to Los Angeles Angels baseball games I sit near the Jack Daniels stand. I don't want to have far to walk. JD certainly is better than tea at cricket.

A high brush back pitch in cricket is the easiest pitch to hit for a six. However, if the batsman swings and misses his nose may be all over his face. In baseball that is called a bean ball, a hit by pitch. A baseball player cannot hit that pitch for a home run (six equivalent) because only 90 degrees of the playing field is fair territory. True, it is difficult to hit a pitch that bounces. Baseball uses a round bat whereas cricket utilizes a flat bat.

By all means I have had discussions with cricket fans in bars in Manali and elsewhere, usually with a drink in hand. Once I was hit by a cricket pitch that broke my glasses, giving me a bloody tikka on the bridge of my nose.

My question to you cricket fans out there: Have any of you been to over a hundred cricket matches in person, never mind one thousand? Do you put your money where your sport is?

I don't quite know what you meant by a 'high brush back pitch'...a full toss? a ball (pitch) that does not bounce? yes, that is the easiest to hit in cricket, and yes granted it is far harder to hit a ball with a round bat. On the other hand, you also have to concede that it is far harder to hit a ball that is bouncing in front of you, different grounds (and countries) have pitches (the surface that cricket is played on, not a baseball 'pitch' or throw) that make the ball behave radically differently along with present atmospheric conditions, which makes it a lot harder to negotiate than a baseball pitch.

Cricket might not look agressive at the begining, but it can be extremely so, specially with a fast bowler trying to decapitate a batsman, something which isn't allowed in baseball. There is no small zone where you can expect the ball to arrive in for you to hit as there is in baseball (over home plate and between the chest and knees I believe?)...the ball can land at your toes or bounce and hit your face/chest/arms. Also, no luxury of 3 strikes and THEN you're out....One is all you get. More skill needed? I think so.

Along with all this, the reason I consider cricket more of a sport than baseball are:
1. More sportsmanship in cricket. respect for the umpires (referees). no obnoxious coaches coming onto the field and yelling. No situation of steroids=success.

2. More of a mental and strategic game along with requiring greater fitness. Surely you need to be fitter to be in a field 5 days in a row often in temperatures exceeding 100F as opposed to under 3 hours? As I'm not really an expert on baseball, can you tell me where exactly all the strategy comes in besides batting orders and bunting (??) the ball, if the objective is to hit the ball out of the park? no field settings, bowling changes, deciding to bat/bowl first depending on conditions/strength of teams etc.

The reason people cannot afford to go watch 100's of games live is that along with not being able to afford to do so, games are played in different cities and countries, with a team playing roughly 30-40 (one day) games a year all over the world. there are no city/state teams (well there are but thats not what the passion is about...its all about supporting your national colors). So that question is a little unfair. but yes, I have probably watched 100's of matches on tv and so have millions of other fans.

If you ever are fortunate enough to be at Eden Gardens, Kolkata for an India vs. Pakistan/Australia/England game, you will see what 'opiate of the masses' really means. Trust me.

Sorry if this is too long, but I'm a passionate fan. Yetijuice, if you are as passionate about baseball, you will understand. And I do agree with the OP that some things are way more important than sport (even cricket...

). And I do think the OP could have been saying what she did with her tongue firmly in cheek.

sshekhar · Nov 5th, 2005, 12:59

Cricket is the game of kings and the king of games!!!

Indiamike should forbid any discussions remotely related to criticism of cricket. We Indians hardly play any sport, and some people want to take this away from us too

.

To be honest we play cricket cos we can't play anything else!! We are too damn vegetarian to play american football or soccer.

iwanttogoback · Nov 5th, 2005, 13:00

Quote:

Now they should start considering 4 hour or 2 hour games -- come home from work watch the match, go to bed. whats wrong with that?

isn't that what they are doing with the 20over a side matches they were trialling last summer (well, last summer here!)?

kaushiks · Nov 5th, 2005, 14:50

Yes, thats right. No discussions on cricket. I am closing this thread.
THREAD CLOSED.

Rob_The_Pom · Nov 5th, 2005, 15:13

20/20 is great but it is a quick fix.
I think the Ashes proved how fantastic test cricket at its best is.
As for baseball, when I lived in Japan I found it a wonderful substitute for cricket. I think in the end I've been to more baseball matches than cricket matches now! Of course, being a cricket player actually stopped me from going to games as a spectator.
I think if Yetijuice means a high full toss (brush back pitch?), it is actually one the hardest and most dangerous balls to try and hit in cricket. This is simply because no batsman is ever expecting it.

Quote:

Im there at every match I can, also helmets are worn to prevent facial damage, come on Poms (I'm a yorkshire man myself) OZ rules the world in cricket they lost the Ashes Yes, still won the one day series and then went on to win the world eleven in Austrlia, shame about the Ashes tour though still hurts, although the best player England had happened to be a south African

Australia did rule, but not any more. Pietersen may have been born in South Africa but he has a British passport and spent several years qualifying. Kepler Wessels did a very similar thing for Australia (although no Aussie parentage), Clyde Rathbone has done a similar thing in rugby for Australia.
Of course, England's best player is actually a certain stout Lancastrian, Pietersen is still the new boy on the block. Of course, England didn't lose to Bangladesh either (snigger).
And the Superfluous Series would have been more interesting if they had actually picked the best 11 players, rather than the likes of Graeme Smith.

mridula · Nov 5th, 2005, 15:52

Try some sense of humor guys.

Nov 5th, 2005, 01:09	#49
PeakXV Naan.tering Nabob Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Abode of Glooscap Posts: 4,333	2 hour games or Condensed Cricket! 2 Hour games ..... now I am getting interested. The first game I ever watched on TV in India went on for a week or something. I actually aged a year (Birthday somewhere in between) before the outcome became known. Now if you change the tea party into a little Feni Frolic and get some cheerleaders happening ..... call them the Wicket Wenches or something - I'll stop with these musings or some sports entrepreneur might get ambitious .................. __________________ We shall not cease from exploration and at the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started ...and know the place for the first time. T.S. Eliot Don't go to India ~ Pre-trip Warnings & Misconceptions?

Nov 5th, 2005, 15:52	#60
mridula Sair Kar Duniya Ki Galib , Jindagani Fir Kahan ... Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: India Posts: 1,345	Try some sense of humor guys. __________________ mridula http://www.gonomad.com/traveltalesfromindia/

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cockroaches - is this true?	loopylou	Health and Well Being in India	39	Oct 9th, 2005 07:22
is it true?	ammadas	Lodging and Hotels in India	11	Jul 23rd, 2005 20:04
I know it’s true, cause I saw it on TV :-)	dreamsyndicate	Chai and Chat	0	Jun 20th, 2004 22:45
say cheese ! is this true ,by the way ?	archits	India Travel News and Commentary	6	Jul 18th, 2002 03:20

Nov 5th, 2005, 00:55	#46
crvlvr Guru Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Hollywood Posts: 4,498	best thing to happen to cricket was the one day matches, compared to the test series that lasted 5-6 days, this speeded up the game quite a bit. Now they should start considering 4 hour or 2 hour games -- come home from work watch the match, go to bed. whats wrong with that?

Nov 5th, 2005, 01:05	#48
cyberhippie Account Closed by User's Request Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: the Netherlands Posts: 6,012	Though a newbie to the cricket scene I agree the ODIs lend more excitement to the game and a scenario where the games, are there to be won, by batting and fielding alone!!! Test matches have too many variables for the casual fan like myself the "follow on" "bad light" "rain" all can swing the actual battle?? Having said that the recent test series for "the ashes" didn't suffer too much under these rules and even for me was a fascinating sporting event!! It all seemed to break down to a series of linked ODIs such was the innings commitment. Can't see this ever being a Scottish sport though. We have to take climate into account, so our sporting hero's tend to be in football, snooker, golf.......... all games you can play in the rain

Nov 5th, 2005, 02:30	#51
Yetijuice Old Trekkers Never Die, They Go Over the Next Pass Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Behind the Orange Curtain, California Posts: 174	Cricket is fine with me. However, I consider baseball to be the opiate of the masses. I went to the church of the baseball 82 times in 2005, 85 times in 2004, 84 times in 2003, and 79 times in 2002. Lifetime I have been to 1,088 major league baseball games in person. I could have doubled that except for my spending 15 years in Asia. When I go to Los Angeles Angels baseball games I sit near the Jack Daniels stand. I don't want to have far to walk. JD certainly is better than tea at cricket. A high brush back pitch in cricket is the easiest pitch to hit for a six. However, if the batsman swings and misses his nose may be all over his face. In baseball that is called a bean ball, a hit by pitch. A baseball player cannot hit that pitch for a home run (six equivalent) because only 90 degrees of the playing field is fair territory. True, it is difficult to hit a pitch that bounces. Baseball uses a round bat whereas cricket utilizes a flat bat. By all means I have had discussions with cricket fans in bars in Manali and elsewhere, usually with a drink in hand. Once I was hit by a cricket pitch that broke my glasses, giving me a bloody tikka on the bridge of my nose. My question to you cricket fans out there: Have any of you been to over a hundred cricket matches in person, never mind one thousand? Do you put your money where your sport is?

Nov 5th, 2005, 08:07	#53
davey Grumpy Old fart Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Australia (Buderim) Posts: 536	Im there at every match I can, also helmets are worn to prevent facial damage, come on Poms (I'm a yorkshire man myself) OZ rules the world in cricket they lost the Ashes Yes, still won the one day series and then went on to win the world eleven in Austrlia, shame about the Ashes tour though still hurts, although the best player England had happened to be a south African

Nov 5th, 2005, 12:59	#56
sshekhar Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 131	Cricket is the game of kings and the king of games!!! Indiamike should forbid any discussions remotely related to criticism of cricket. We Indians hardly play any sport, and some people want to take this away from us too . To be honest we play cricket cos we can't play anything else!! We are too damn vegetarian to play american football or soccer.

Nov 5th, 2005, 14:50	#58
kaushiks Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: don't live anymore Posts: 446	Yes, thats right. No discussions on cricket. I am closing this thread. THREAD CLOSED.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password