cricket

[Arch]

probably.

Ok, go on, make us all laugh. Tell us what else is all made up too, in your world...

 

[Andy in Sig]

You do realise that he is having a laugh Arch and it is in fact hilarious when he gets somebody to take the bait ...

 

[Arch]

You do realise that he is having a laugh Arch and it is in fact hilarious when he gets somebody to take the bait ...

I know, I know. I just still have trouble understanding why someone who is actually intelligent (possibly) would devote their online time to making themselves look stupid. I suppose it's only like whatisname who was Frank Spencer...

 

[Andy in Sig]

It's a role play thing: he's literally playing the fool in a sort of Eric Morecambe way, a sort of cyber acting. I think he does it well and I must admit that when he is in full flow I really appreciate the performance. It is also a good technique for pricking the balloons of those who take things too seriously.

 

[User482]

And how was the "Body Line" so controversial. If you aim at the stumps and the batsman is very near the stumps, surely there is a danger of hitting the batsman?

Lastly, has Trescotthick returned to Cricket yet?

Good question. Bodyline (or fast leg theory) worked on the principle of bowling at the batsman's body on the leg side. The batsman would try and avoid injury by hitting the ball behind square, and would most likely be caught out by the 4 or 5 fielders that would be placed there. As a result, the laws have been changed so that the fielding side is allowed to place a maximum of 2 fielders behind square leg, and the use of intimidatory bowling is restricted by the umpires.

It was very controversial because it attempted to get batsman out through injury or avoidance of injury, rather than conventional means of taking a wicket. It certainly wasn't very sporting! However, it was very successful - even the great Don Bradman averaged under 60, compared with his career average of 99. England regained the Ashes easily. England's best fast bowler at the time was Harold Larwood, who never played for his country again as a result of the diplomatic outfall. However, his upper class captain (Douglas Jardine) survived the incident, despite him being the one who devised and implemented the tactic. Ironically, Larwood eventually emigrated to Australia.

Trescothick has retired from test cricket, but continues to play for Somerset. His autobiography is well worth reading.

 

[User482]

Bum, I see I was beaten to it by Rich P!

 

[Ashtrayhead]

so the skill of the bowler relies on how much he can vary the deviation of the ball AFTER it has hit the ground?

I was trying to explain about the full-toss.

And the TOTAL speed of his arm, relative to the ground, which may be increased by the fact that he's running, still isn't going to be over 100mph! Do you or do you not accept that (given no wind) for the ball to be travelling at over 100mph then the speed of the part of his hand that launches the ball HAS to be travelling at over 100mph at the point when the ball departs his hand?
You can't just say 'oh there are other contributory factors' without qualifying how the effect they could have manifests itself.

I don't have a degree in physics or anything so I'm not clever enough to work out why something happens. I've only ever seen it happen at live and televised matches.


P.S. Why don't you go on cricket websites and read up on the subject. I'm just a fan who enjoys watching the sport!

 

[rich p]

She was only the cricketer's daughter but she loved a full toss in her crease

 

[Rhythm Thief]

probably.

That word again ...

 

[marinyork]

Wouldn't worry Ashtrayhead I suspect he knows about relative motion and also that there's a fair probability the ball was travelling at 100mph. He's just winding people up just like 2 or 3 other people have been trying to do the same.

 

[yello]

He's just winding people up

He could use fewer sentences in doing it. The guy could turn wibbling into an Olympic event (note I didn't say sport!)

 

[col]

As far as sport fitness is concerned, and Im not throwing a spanner in here, but an average cricketer is just a normal healthy person, who could sprint a few yards for a bus say like the rest of us. Their only difference from most of us is the skill with the bat, or the ball. I mean how well would they do in a fitness competition between a rugby or football player, or any track or field sport? Not very well I would guess, as Im guessing their training doesnt involve anything like the other sports. People like gower or that other one who walked the elephant route, they were not as good as they were because of their extreme fitness, it was their skill in handling a bat and ball. So what im getting at is, in my opinion, cricketers are not really that fit in relation to other sports, just very good with a bat and ball, which I suppose most could be if they spent as long as them playing with them. So cricket could be compared to a darts player, in as much that they only really practice with darts with out much real fitness training , unless you class legging it to the bat at last orders.

 

[User482]

I reckon bowlers have to be pretty fit Col, and batsman are much fitter than they were in Gower's day. Different sports have different balances between skill & fitness, and it so happens that cricket is tilted more towards the skill end of the spectrum. But you wouldn't be able to play at professional level without being fitter than a darts player!

 

[col]

I reckon bowlers have to be pretty fit Col, and batsman are much fitter than they were in Gower's day. Different sports have different balances between skill & fitness, and it so happens that cricket is tilted more towards the skill end of the spectrum. But you wouldn't be able to play at professional level without being fitter than a darts player!

I know I was joking about the darts players there.
But Iv never seen cricketers do much more than nets and bowling as training, like running around the pitch doing warm ups then sprinting in intervals and all the other things the other sports do, surely if they did it would be an even better team?

 

[bonj2]

As far as sport fitness is concerned, and Im not throwing a spanner in here, but an average cricketer is just a normal healthy person, who could sprint a few yards for a bus say like the rest of us. Their only difference from most of us is the skill with the bat, or the ball. I mean how well would they do in a fitness competition between a rugby or football player, or any track or field sport? Not very well I would guess, as Im guessing their training doesnt involve
anything like the other sports. People like gower or that other one who walked the elephant route, they were not as good as they were because of their extreme fitness, it was their skill in handling a bat and ball. So what im getting at is, in my opinion, cricketers are not really that fit in relation to other sports, just very good with a bat and ball, which I suppose most could be if they spent as long as them playing with them. So cricket could be compared to a darts player, in as much that they only really practice with darts with out much real fitness training , unless you class legging it to the bat at last orders.

I reckon bowlers have to be pretty fit Col, and batsman are much fitter than they were in Gower's day. Different sports have different balances between skill & fitness, and it so happens that cricket is tilted more towards the skill end of the spectrum. But you wouldn't be able to play at professional level without being fitter than a darts player!

in other words, 'No', then...


Cricket doesn' trequire more skill than, say, football, or tennis, but football and tennis require skill AND fitness. That's why cricket's the lazy-man's sunday afternoon game.