why dont cricketers try baseball?

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Another aspect is that baseball players tend to be strong muscular types like B.Ruth, H.Aaron, J.DiMaggio, M.McGuire, S.Sosa, B.Bonds. I dont see the great smallish batsmen such as Bradman, Tendulkar, Lara succeeding.

I can name a load of great baseball players who certainly are not the huge muscular types. Strong, yes, but not huge frames. That's a misleading stereotype about baseball players.

You are kidding right?

The ground fielding in cricket far outstrips that of baseball. If someone makes a ground stop with their hands in baseball, they talk about it for weeks and weeks.

The ground fielding itself, in terms of actually reaching the ball is superior in baseball from what I've seen. And I'm a huge fan of baseball (though not quite as much as cricket). The reflexes and athleticism by the average baseball fielder is superior to the average cricketer. There are a handful of fielders in world cricket who could make the stops that the third baseman and first baseman make on a daily basis.

I agree that the commentators get carried away with the barehand thing, but collecting the ball cleanly is not the most important thing in ground fielding. It's about stopping the ball and, if possible, keeping it in front of you and close by. Very rarely do cricketers pick up the ball cleanly when it's hit hard at them. It's usually stopped and then picked up. So the barehand thing is not really an issue with a ground fielding comparison. Catching is another issue.

 

[Engle]

I can name a load of great baseball players who certainly are not the huge muscular types. Strong, yes, but not huge frames. That's a misleading stereotype about baseball players.

My point was in comparison to batsmen, baseball batters generally have to have the stronger physique (symantics aside). A batsmen of wiry/wispy physique can still be successful using other attributes such as timing, concentration, technical adeptness etc rather than sheer strength. It's the reason why we can have a Bradman, Hanif, Gavaskar, Lara, Tendulkar etc.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

My point was in comparison to batsmen, baseball batters generally have to have the stronger physique (symantics aside). A batsmen of wiry/wispy physique can still be successful using other attributes such as timing, concentration, technical adeptness etc rather than sheer strength. It's the reason why we can have a Bradman, Hanif, Gavaskar, Lara, Tendulkar etc.

And I'm comparing them to batsmen too...
I wasn't aware that there was any suggestion in my post that I wasn't. I've read it over and I still don't see it.
There are many exceptional baseball players with very similar techniques to the Bradmans, Hanifs, Gavaskars and Tendulkars of cricket. Baseball is not all about home runs, though there are several prolific home run hitters who aren't very big guys. In fact sheer strength is probably the least important thing in baseball. Timing, concentration and technical adeptness are much more important. Even in terms of hitting home runs.

In baseball, there are many big guys who hit big home runs who are still poor to mediocre batters. Again, it's a very misinformed stereotype that the good baseball players are generally bigger and stronger than cricketers.

 

[Engle]

For the sake of speculation, do you think India, for example, could produce a Baseball team akin to the one they produce in Cricket ? (if it were their national obsession like Cricket)

 

[Top_Cat]

IThe ground fielding itself, in terms of actually reaching the ball is superior in baseball from what I've seen. And I'm a huge fan of baseball (though not quite as much as cricket). The reflexes and athleticism by the average baseball fielder is superior to the average cricketer. There are a handful of fielders in world cricket who could make the stops that the third baseman and first baseman make on a daily basis.

I agree that the commentators get carried away with the barehand thing, but collecting the ball cleanly is not the most important thing in ground fielding. It's about stopping the ball and, if possible, keeping it in front of you and close by. Very rarely do cricketers pick up the ball cleanly when it's hit hard at them. It's usually stopped and then picked up. So the barehand thing is not really an issue with a ground fielding comparison. Catching is another issue.

Absolutely. What we see only the most athletic cricketers do (dive to stop a ball, bounce back up and nail a throw within a foot of the target), the average baseballer is expected to do. Fielding, there's absolutely no comparison; cricketers' have traditionally had atrocious techniques for throwing relative to baseballers. It's a lot better these days but still way behind. Aside from FC cricketers, players still don't know how to do quick throws on the fly in the way baseballers do. And, again, only the most athletic cricketers compare to the average baseballer when it comes to stops.

Why? Probably because there's so much to learn with the respective batting and bowling disciplines, fielding very much gets neglected. You have many more options with regards where and how to hit the ball in cricket which obviously takes a lot longer to learn (some people never do....). Bowling, there's many techniques to get right, how to bowl on different pitches, to different styles of batsmen, etc.

And I'm comparing them to batsmen too...
I wasn't aware that there was any suggestion in my post that I wasn't. I've read it over and I still don't see it.
There are many exceptional baseball players with very similar techniques to the Bradmans, Hanifs, Gavaskars and Tendulkars of cricket. Baseball is not all about home runs, though there are several prolific home run hitters who aren't very big guys. In fact sheer strength is probably the least important thing in baseball. Timing, concentration and technical adeptness are much more important. Even in terms of hitting home runs.

In fairness to Engle though, that sort of subtlety is being lost in the era of juiced balls and corked and aluminium bats. We've had three players in the last few years go past Roger Maris's HR record and a few more get right up there when it had previously stood unassailed since the 60's. Hitting HR's is definitely a more prominent part of the game and your Jeter types are being squeezed out a bit.

 

[albo97056]

We're not all football crazy, im so glad the season is nearly over. Problem is people wont stop talking about it in the summer either.