Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
So he's the CW muse? Frankly, now he's been used, I don't want him. Sloppy seconds ain't my style.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
You know what really grinds my cricketing gears?
- Thread starter pasag
- Start date
Craig
World Traveller
People who ask who's winning in the cricket:
Worst question. Look I can accept you don't like cricket (
), it isn't your thing and you try and show some interest in asking how it is going, by being polite, even though you don't give a **** about it, but this has to be one of the most impossible questions to answer. Cricket is not like football, because unless it is the final innings of a Test match, or ODI, I can then give a answer as to say yes a team is 'winning', but even then, unless a team is chasing 265 in the final innings, and said team is 9/178 with 10 and 11 at the crease, or looks impossible for one team to win. If I say one team is on top, they will NFI what I am talking about (despite being asked this one the first or second day of a Test) and walk away none the wiser, so I have to bull**** an answer (my speciality TBF 
). Cricket is not a sport where it can be said a team is 'winning' or not as there are a lot of factors involved.
Worst question. Look I can accept you don't like cricket (
), it isn't your thing and you try and show some interest in asking how it is going, by being polite, even though you don't give a **** about it, but this has to be one of the most impossible questions to answer. Cricket is not like football, because unless it is the final innings of a Test match, or ODI, I can then give a answer as to say yes a team is 'winning', but even then, unless a team is chasing 265 in the final innings, and said team is 9/178 with 10 and 11 at the crease, or looks impossible for one team to win. If I say one team is on top, they will NFI what I am talking about (despite being asked this one the first or second day of a Test) and walk away none the wiser, so I have to bull**** an answer (my speciality TBF ). Cricket is not a sport where it can be said a team is 'winning' or not as there are a lot of factors involved.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
That's not the difficult part the difficult part is inhaling the fumes.
Craig
World Traveller
pics??
andruid
Cricketer Of The Year
Clam down man Calm down
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Haha, while I'm in full agreement that the term "good" being used to mean "good for batting" is very poor phrase-making, not all good batting pitches cause pointless Tests. ARG-esque pitches - ie, supine ones - are a different matter to a good batting pitch which is seen quite often and still plenty often enough ends-up producing if not neccessarily a result, then (provided no time is lost) five days of interesting cricket.
On that subject...
ARG-esque pitches in Test series of three games or less
I can just about tolerate the occasional one in a five-Test series (or six if applicable) but once you get a 650-plays-700 game in a two-Test series or a three-Test series that's basically reducing it to a one-off Test or a two-Test series.
Both of which I detest greatly.
On that subject...
ARG-esque pitches in Test series of three games or less
I can just about tolerate the occasional one in a five-Test series (or six if applicable) but once you get a 650-plays-700 game in a two-Test series or a three-Test series that's basically reducing it to a one-off Test or a two-Test series.
Both of which I detest greatly.
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
ARG-esque?
For my money, generally speaking, and excluding complete minefields, a pitch that favours bowlers will make for a better game of cricket than a pitch that favours batsmen.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Antigua Recreation Ground, I think
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Aye, I tend to throw around the abbreviation ARG as regularly as SCG and MCG, thinking it a tadge unfair to "colloquialise" certain grounds but not others.Antigua Recreation Ground, I think
Sadly that falls on its face a little when sometimes not everyone knows which ground I'm on about.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
That's one I've oft wrestled with. I was fully of your line of thinking until a few years ago when I heard Mikey Holding mention the fact that very often teams unneccessarily shy at the stumps. Why shouldn't they be punished for this?
The only way to make a completely fair ruling would be for some form of "Umpire's discretion" (the sort that exists on leg-byes where he has to decide whether a shot is played to call leg-byes or dead-ball) where he could call the ball dead if he adjudges that a shy has been made where there's a "genuine" chance of a run-out, and if he adjudges there wasn't then call overthrows.
The only way to make a completely fair ruling would be for some form of "Umpire's discretion" (the sort that exists on leg-byes where he has to decide whether a shot is played to call leg-byes or dead-ball) where he could call the ball dead if he adjudges that a shy has been made where there's a "genuine" chance of a run-out, and if he adjudges there wasn't then call overthrows.
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Presumably fielders shy at the stumps when there is no chance of a run out just to let the run stealers know they are there - similar to the police regularly feeling the collars of known villians even if they have no reason to suspect them of any particular crime - I reckon that's a fair tactic and the downside of possibly giving away a few buzzers isn't an unfair price to pay
You could make out a similar argument in respect of the blistering straight drive for which the batsman's reward is to get his partner out when the bowler manages to deflect it onto the stumps or the crashing pull that balloons off short leg's arse into mid on's grateful hands
You could make out a similar argument in respect of the blistering straight drive for which the batsman's reward is to get his partner out when the bowler manages to deflect it onto the stumps or the crashing pull that balloons off short leg's arse into mid on's grateful hands
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I reckon simply threatening to throw would do fine. I'd never, ever be happy as a bowler if someone cost me runs because they wanted to "let the batsman know they were there". Strikes me as often if not more often simply a macho thing on the fielder's behalf rather than actually wanting to save the bowler runs down the line.
These, unfortunately, are things that there's no way around - apart from batsmen not backing-up too far. Somehow the fluked catch never seems too unfair to me, however, given the regularity with which simple catches are floored. Until the cure for the dropped catch is procured, I can't ever be too sorry to see the rarity that is the fluked catch.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I agree with Richard above, saying that the umpire can decide (it's usually pretty obvious) if it was a genuine attempt to get someone out or just intimidation. Usually it's a genuine attempt, intimidation usually takes the form of throwing to the wk. What annoys me is that if they'd missed the stumps with a less good throw, the man backing up would have prevented any overthrows.
The examples you give are a lot rarer, but also there's no obvious and ideal solution. Deflecting the ball onto the stumps is a skill in itself, and short legs all ought to have firm, youthful buttocks in order to maximise the chances of such an event as you described.