Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
#2187 - 05/15/00 01:58 PM Re: batter  
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 19
GZini Offline
stranger
GZini  Offline
stranger

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 19
Washington, DC, USA
Googly, I've heard, but only in Jerry Seinfeld's American Express commercial. But I have no idea what it is, nor am I familiar with a silly point or a yorker. What are they?


#2188 - 05/15/00 02:47 PM Re: batter  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6
Cathryn Offline
stranger
Cathryn  Offline
stranger

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6
Queensland, Australia
Without delving into the mid-on and mid-offs - silly point is a fielding position in cricket - just picture the dumbest place to stand if you don't want to be beheaded by a fast moving cricket ball and you have silly point.


#2189 - 05/16/00 09:17 AM Re: batter  
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 81
Philip Davis Offline
journeyman
Philip Davis  Offline
journeyman

Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 81
One of the many reasons that cricket is a superior tactical game to baseball is that the fielding positions are not fixed but altered by the captain to suit the bowlers attack and the batsman's style. Silly point is a close in fielding position designed to get a catch off a batsman who is playing defensively (another difference, batsmen stay in until got out by being caught or bowled or run out or whatever so defensive play, where you protect the wicket until the bowler bowls a lose ball is ok. This tests the stamina and concentration of both batsman and bowler). A version of silly point is very silly point followed by suicide point at which point cricket becomes a contact sport. A yorker is a ball bowled at the batsman feet not likely in itself to get the batsmen out but designed to break his concentration. A googly is an offbreak ball bowled with a leg break action, ie a ball that is signalled to do one thing but actually does another.
As you can possible see cricket is very much a game of mental concentration and stamina. People who complain that it takes to long miss the point of the game which is to test mental stamina. As a beside the cricket ball is just as hard as the baseball and the bowler runs up so the speed of the cricket ball is faster than that of the baseball. More than one batsman has been killed by being struck on the head by a ball.
With regards to baseball I'm in favour of raising the mound back to it's full pre 1969 height.


#2190 - 05/16/00 09:31 AM Re: batter  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
shanks Offline
old hand
shanks  Offline
old hand

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
London, UK
To add to Philip's erudite post...

In cricket, there are two notional 'sides' to the wicket (or pitch, the strip between the batsman and the bowler). The 'off' side is the side on which he/she holds the bat. The 'leg' side (also called the on side) is, therefore the side where his/her legs are.

An off-break, therefore, is a ball bowled so that, when it pitches (bounces) it spins from the off-side towards the leg side. (In practice, it is an off-break even if it pitches on the leg side and then moves even further towards leg.) The leg break, by analogy, is a ball that does the opposite.

The googly is such a famous ball because, as you may understand, a bowler has to hold the ball in a distinctive fashion to bowl either an off break or a leg break. Good batsmen watch the bowler's hand to figure out what sort of ball to expect. In a googly, however, the action looks like one type of ball, but the spin is the opposite to what one would expect. The current master of legspin, Shane Warne, has a good googly, but the most legendary googly I ever remember was the one 'patented' by the Indian spinner Chandrashekhar (playing in the '60s and '70s).

I agree with Philip that cricket certainly taxes both tactical skills and stamina (how many other games are regularly played over a five day period?), but I am not sure of the claim that it is tactically 'superior' to baseball. I just think the tactics are different.

cheer

the sunshine warrior


#2191 - 05/16/00 09:55 AM Cricket v Baseball  
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 81
Philip Davis Offline
journeyman
Philip Davis  Offline
journeyman

Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 81
I suppose I think cricket is tactically superior because there are so many more variables to consider in cricket than in baseball. However, I'm not suggesting that it's a superior game. (It is but I'm not suggesting that.). Unfortunately the match fixing scandel has rather taken the edge of the game at the moment. Hopefully the game will rise afresh much as baseball has done after the strike.


#2192 - 05/16/00 10:11 AM Re: Cricket v Baseball  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
shanks Offline
old hand
shanks  Offline
old hand

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
London, UK
I agree. The Corinthian ideals with which we invest cricket ("It's just not cricket!" - what more resonant expression could there be of a sense of fair play?) appear to have been sorely besmirched by this scandal.

The only funny thing I heard about it was the one about the bookie who wasted money because he bribed the English team to lose! (The current state of the English cricket team is nearly as depressing as the match-fixing scandal, IMO.)

I also agree that cricket seems, at least to me, to be one of the subtlest, and 'best' games around. But then that is probably more a result of my upbringing than any innate superiority in the game itself. And I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed my one baseball viewing experience (Wrigley Fields, and the Cubs actually won that one).

cheer

the sunshine warrior


#2193 - 05/16/00 01:16 PM Re: Cricket  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
jmh Offline
Pooh-Bah
jmh  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
I was taken to lords a few years ago. It was a lovely sunny day for a pleasant doze and the Sunday papers - cricket is a big yawn. I was impressed by Angus Deayton (sorry, another UK reference) who put it in Room 101 alongside BBC's Radio 2.

Baseball has got to be more interesting.


#2194 - 05/16/00 01:23 PM Re: Cricket  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
shanks Offline
old hand
shanks  Offline
old hand

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
London, UK
As one might tritely say, "it's all a matter of taste". For cricket fans, Atherton's unbeaten 180+ in South Africa a few years ago was possibly the greatest achievement in English sport since, perhaps the '66 World Cup. For others, it's a tale told by an idiot, full of...

cheer

the sunshine warrior


#2195 - 05/16/00 04:03 PM "bit of a sticky wicket"  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
AnnaStrophic Offline
Carpal Tunnel
AnnaStrophic  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
lower upstate New York
I love baseball. Yet I've never seen a cricket game. Thanks for the insights, y'all from Over the Pond. I lived abroad (in the so-called "Third World") for so long that when I came back to the US, baseball was sort of a comfort thing to me. Still is :-) ... *ahem* Go BRAVES!


#2196 - 05/16/00 06:22 PM sports literature  
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
tsuwm Offline
Carpal Tunnel
tsuwm  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
Over here in the US there has been lots of fine writing about baseball over the years (Roger Angell, fiction editor for The New Yorker, leaps to mind); baseball seems to lend itself to very lyrical prose. I'm wondering if there is anything comparable in the world of cricket.

http://members.aol.com/tsuwm/

Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Jackie 

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,879
Posts224,140
Members9,031
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
brork, santo, piostylist, prgill, thefoeller
9031 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 57 guests, and 1 spider.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters(All Time)
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,538
LukeJavan8 9,042
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2017 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.019s Queries: 13 (0.004s) Memory: 2.7328 MB (Peak: 2.8669 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2017-11-24 05:49:00 UTC