I would say that batting in cricket is tougher...... Simply because batting in Baseball basically involves perfecting the art of hitting, at the most, 5 or 6 different kind of balls that the pitchers can throw in. Obviously, it is tough but the point is, in cricket, there are so many different kinds of bowlers and they bowl so many different kinds of deliveries, sometimes with no real visible change in their bowling action, and also, the pitch is a whole new variable. The ball can do crazy things after pitching. Wasim Akram (He is the Roger Clemens amongst cricket bowlers, if you will) once said that he almost never knew why the ball moved in a certain direction after it pitched. Generally, even he had intended it to go in the other direction. Imagine the plight of the poor batsman in such a case. No offence or anything, but I think batting in cricket is a lot tougher than batting in baseball.
I suppose the one area where baseballers would easily be better than cricketers would be athleticism etc.. Those guys run faster than the best in cricket, IMHO.......
BTW, Adam Gilchrist of Australia has been offered an Baseball contract with one of the US teams. That should tell you that they fancy that cricket batters can convert to baseball more easily...
We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
A cricket supporter forever
Originally Posted by vic_orthdox
In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.
Member of CW Red
and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.
Check out this awesome e-fed: