Thanks again guys for the explanations.
Thanks again guys for the explanations.
About Deep Midwicket - I felt it called that due to the path the ball follows once it passes midwicket off the bat.
I figured Cover is called Cover because the fielders on the offside were providing cover - olden day cricket used to be an off-side game till Ranji and a few others started flicking balls onto the legside. Otherwise bowlers just kinda plugged away outside off and apologised if they strayed down leg, no real effort was made by the batsmen to hit them into the legside. So I guess the bowler would just tell the fielders to field in the Covers and that was just the general area outside off, within the circle, that wasn't the slips, point (idk why it's called point tho) or straight down the ground (mid off/long off).
About the Pink Ball - the leather used is the same, but the dye used and the finishing will be different. Here's an interesting article about the red and white balls:
It seems the problem with the pink ball is that the dye and finishing used to make it last and avoid discolouration leads to the ball becoming soft very quickly, and thus leading to attritional slow cricket. Hard to hit it away, hard to get it to swing/seam/spin/bounce. Wasn't enjoyable for the players or spectators
this forum has the most dignified posters on the net. the sincere answers from the boys to Ike's sincere questions prove this once again.
It is quite refreshing to look at such long accepted cricketing jargon from the fresh perspective of an intelligent sport enthusiast getting introduced to the game and analyze the intended meaning of these specific terms.
Posting the entire spectrum of the field, just 'cause it looks sexy
~ Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference ~
wow.. lots more great information. The responses about fielding positions are great--not because I question anything, but because it helps to understand what the various terms, their true origins probably often lost in the mists of history, seem to mean to life-long cricket fans. Learning what established fans think of when they say or hear 'cover', 'short leg', etc., gives me a sense of this part of the game I couldn't get otherwise since I didn't grow up with cricket.
The article on red and white balls (and different manufactures) was great! The balls are one of four or five major "mysteries" to me (also the pitch, bowling, and batting, lol), and that article taught me a lot.
As for dignified posters compared to other cricket forums, I can't say.. I haven't been to any others. But I do know this forum is great, folks are friendly, helpful, and knowledgeable, and the forum compares favorably to many others I know in other areas.
Thanks for the diagram, harsh. I've looked at quite a few of them, online and in books, and have become rather adapt at spotting differences, because none are ever the same, and none seem complete. I've seen a cricinfo diagrams before, but I don't remember this one. It is quite complete, although it does leave out deep point (some diagrams, like Eastaway's, in his book Cricket Explained--and it's a great introductory book!--show both sweeper and deep point; however, the range he gives for deep point indicates it probably should be labeled backward deep point, if that term is ever used). One other thing it leaves out, that I think a 'complete' diagram would include, are arrows labeled for backward and forward, fine and wide (backward), and straight and wide (forward). The diagram also shows a position I've neither seen nor heard (as best I can remember) elsewhere: short mid off. Is there really such a position? I'd think a commentator, etc., would just say silly mid off, since silly mids don't play as close to the striker as silly point or under the helmet--by my understanding anyway. Again, I'd be happy to be corrected. Interesting that no corresponding short mid on position is given.
Once more, thanks to all for taking the time to help a newbie.
both silly mid off and short mid off exist. silly is usually too close; perhaps because standing that close to the batsman and risking injury is "silly"?
deep backward point is a conventional fielding position. your guess is bang on.
Here's a video of a batsman being caught at what you would call 'short mid on'. Silly mid on would be closer to half the pitch length away:
Also Ike, the correct response to that video is "lol Jonny Bairstow". This is important
Jeez that's a bad leave by Stokes.
The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.
Yeah. Also go back to the 2 minute mark (or so) for the greatest cricketing moment of all time -- a TPC home ton.
I remember I was at the pub with mates while it was happening, dragged 2 or 3 of my friends who don't follow cricket at all in front of the TV to witness it. They're all now Steve Smith fans.
Thanks again for the responses. Alas, they present more stuff that I don't understand the references to than they answer!
Based just on diagrams I've looked at, the position of the fielder who makes the catch I would have called silly mid on. Now I've learned more.
The rest of the responses, I pretty much can't understand. I'm familiar with the Ashes, although the last was before I started watching cricket, so I haven't experienced it live. Apparently, although it's traditionally held biennially, last year it was held twice. I won't get to see one until 2015.
As for Bairstow, I have no clue, lol.
I didn't watch the whole video to see what the bad leave by Stokes was, but I'm guessing a 'leave' is a shell?
As for the ton, I went back and watched that, but can't figure out what TPC means. I thought it might be the grounds, but I checked, and the fifth Test was played at Sydney Cricket Grounds, right?
What I can figure out is that Dan is an Aussie.
Stop this you bastards
"Causation - still a leading cause of correlation."
GIMH to claim the footage is doctored and none of that ever actually occurred. Like 2006/07.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)