Hereward Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 He may be the greatest batsman of my lifetime, but I just can't listen to Viv Richards. The man rambles on, saying absolutely nothing of note at very, very great length. Why is this man employed? Edit: three wides from Harmison, not even close to the square, then a wicket with a straight one as Ganga was too shocked to play it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser_not_appearing_yet Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Can someone give me a quick description of cricket, im of us extraction, all i know is that its similar to baseball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereward Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 God, that's a challenge. I've been trying to explain it to my wife for 10 years, without any luck whatsoever. Here's probably a good place to start. That or wait for Jeor, Vestrit or Stubby to turn up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser_not_appearing_yet Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 God, that's a challenge. I've been trying to explain it to my wife for 10 years, without any luck whatsoever. Here's probably a good place to start. That or wait for Jeor, Vestrit or Stubby to turn up. lbw? complicated is it? Thats cool, sounds like a challenge. I swear to learn the complete rules of the sport of cricket in a months time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereward Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 You're a brave man! Ignore LBW for now. To the right of that is the "Basics" section. Try to watch some clips on YouTube once you have that background, just to bring it alive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mevNWOCstZ4perhaps. fun too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Thursday Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 There was a thread a while back in which members of the board offered their explanations...it was quite good I thought. Unfortunately I can't find it anywhere . Sir Thursday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 8, 2007 Author Share Posted June 8, 2007 Oh my that was an extra special collapse by the Windies. Went from 216-4 to 229 all out. Got... to... hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Mongoose Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Stauss really need some runs - particularly against this attack. Can someone give me a quick description of cricket, im of us extraction, all i know is that its similar to baseball It's really simple. Both sides dress all in white for easy identification. Each side has 11 players, except for the 12th man who doesn't play. At the start of the game a coin is tossed, the winner of the toss decides who is in first. The team that's in goes out, while the team that's out goes out to try and get the team that's in out. Two players from the team that's in plays until one of them is out and another player then goes in. Once all of the players (but one) is out, that team is out except for the player that is not out. When the team that's in are out, both teams go in, and then the team that was out is now in, so they go out and the team that was in but are now out go in to try to get the team that was out but are now in out. When both teams have been in and out twice the team with the most runs wins. Unless it's a draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 8, 2007 Author Share Posted June 8, 2007 Both sides dress all in white for easy identification. Each side has 11 players, except for the 12th man who doesn't play. At the start of the game a coin is tossed, the winner of the toss decides who is in first. The team that's in goes out, while the team that's out goes out to try and get the team that's in out. Two players from the team that's in plays until one of them is out and another player then goes in. Once all of the players (but one) is out, that team is out except for the player that is not out. When the team that's in are out, both teams go in, and then the team that was out is now in, so they go out and the team that was in but are now out go in to try to get the team that was out but are now in out. When both teams have been in and out twice the team with the most runs wins. Unless it's a draw. That description again >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeric Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 TBH the best way to understand cricket is to play it Its how I learnt to understand the game. I tried watching some of the first day yesterday while I was waiting for some friends upstairs at the Union senete, but the craptactlur SU staff members we have decided to turn it off so they could play loud rubbish pop music that no one actually listens to if they can help it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Well, aside from sunburning my arms (my own fault for forgetting the suncream) that was an extremely entertaining day. I bet Jerome Taylor is kicking himself after that awful dropped catch Sidebottom offered him, if he'd held on England would have been out for 342 instead of 370. Sidebottom and Monty were obviously having a lot of fun with their last wicket partnership. Then there was Harmison - 3 wides in his first over before he surprised Ganga with a straight one. And then the Windies collapse - 216-4 to 229 all out. In fact, if you count Strauss's wicket in England's first over, there were 7 wickets for 15 runs in just under an hour. And the number of byes they conceded - none of which were the keeper's fault at all, just extremely inaccurate bowling. Still, if the bowlers don't know where the ball is going, what hope do the batsmen have? Also, Fidel Edwards is a walking no-ball machine. Oh, and I was sitting next to some guys dressed as pirates. I can confirm that their favourite player is Monty PanesARRRRR!! Edited to add appropriately piratey emoticon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 8, 2007 Author Share Posted June 8, 2007 That was an awesome ball from Fidel Edwards to Strauss. I couldn't believe the swing he extracted from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 That was an awesome ball from Fidel Edwards to Strauss. I couldn't believe the swing he extracted from it. Yeah, shame he bowled three consecutive no-balls in the same over though. Seriously, when both sides concede over 40 extras you know something's wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeric Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Bring back Jimmy Anderson! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 9, 2007 Author Share Posted June 9, 2007 Yeah, shame he bowled three consecutive no-balls in the same over though. Seriously, when both sides concede over 40 extras you know something's wrong. Definitely. It's got beyond laughable right now. Odd thing is how the new guy is England's most controlled bowler. Plunkett and, in particular, Harmy are just everywhere. Harmy's over where there were 7 wides and 4 byes (or something like that) followed by Ganga's wicket was comical. I actually laughed when Ganga got out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 Normally, a large number of byes indicates an incompetent wicketkeeper. However, aside from the five that Ramdin conceded in the final over yesterday when he let the ball go through his legs to hit the helmet on the ground behind him, neither he nor Prior could have done much about any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 9, 2007 Author Share Posted June 9, 2007 Agreed. And talking of cricket - England are pressing home the advantage. I expect them to declare halfway through the final session and have about 15 overs at the Windies openers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Thursday Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 Cook gets yet another century! The first Englishman to have scored 6 centuries by the age of 22, so sayeth the BBC. In other news, Pietersen's dismissal sounds rather comical...he needs a helmet with a better strap! The way the West Indies have been batting I can't England losing this, but probably a good idea to make sure...if they can get to a lead of about 500, I should have thought that would be enough. Sir Thursday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeric Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 The Pieterson dismissal is the bizzarest one I've seen in ages, I've seen batsmen back up onto their wickets, hit them with the bat by accident, but never with their helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted June 9, 2007 Author Share Posted June 9, 2007 Another century it may be, but the boy needs to make them bigger. 104, 105, 127, 116, 105, 106. Centuries, sure, but not sparkling scores by any stretch of the imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.