Cricket. Not the Jimminy type.

[ray]

I’m doubting anyone from TGC that isn’t already here will be interested enough to sign up just to talk cricket with me, but if they are this is the place I’m allowed™️ to be a part of the community®️.

Bitter? It’s just a type of beer 🍺

Starc not included, I think it’s a mistake. Won’t get a look at the pitch for 2 hours but looks like Hazlewood (McGrath mk.||) will play for Pattinson.

Can’t mess with a batting order that made 400 in the 2nd dig.

Watch out for Head. He’s looking awesome based on the last test. Warner has to fire in one fo the two innings.


*note - I doubt the admins would have a problem with copy pasting my posts into the cricket thread if no one comes over. Is it too much to ask for you to do that if it dies over there Paulus?

[ray]

Watching 07 Adelaide while it’s raining. KP got robbed. He’d have played 150 tests @55 if he’d moved here instead of there..

[ray]

Can’t see any play happening today. Bedtime...

[ErixonStone]

I do not understand cricket. At all.

I have friends from India and the West Indies (who are of Indian descent) that follow the game closely - including taking days off from work to watch the Indian National team play in the world cup finals.

No one I asked has ever been able to explain even the most basic rules.

The game seems anarchic and chaotic, and I never have any idea what's going on. This is my complete understanding of the game:

A guy with the ball gets a running start and throws the ball toward a stick. A guy on the other team has a long, flat paddle and hits the ball in basically any direction, including backward. If the ball is hit over a fence, it's called a "six" and I suppose the team gets six points. This is seemingly a common occurrence. When it doesn't happen, fielders try to catch the ball and the guy with the paddle runs back and forth, seemingly forever.

I have no idea how the defense can stop the offense, and I have no idea how teams accumulate points or when they switch roles.

[boffo]

The first time I watched it I had no clue what was going on.  The second time I watched it I focused more on trying to figure out what was going on and less on how confused I was.  By the end of that game everything was making more sense.  It's technically much simpler than baseball, but from a North American perspective we obviously have far greater exposure to baseball than we do cricket.

[ray]

Aug 14, 2019 15:33:28 GMT ErixonStone said:

I do not understand cricket. At all.

I have friends from India and the West Indies (who are of Indian descent) that follow the game closely - including taking days off from work to watch the Indian National team play in the world cup finals.

No one I asked has ever been able to explain even the most basic rules.

The game seems anarchic and chaotic, and I never have any idea what's going on. This is my complete understanding of the game:

A guy with the ball gets a running start and throws the ball toward a stick. A guy on the other team has a long, flat paddle and hits the ball in basically any direction, including backward. If the ball is hit over a fence, it's called a "six" and I suppose the team gets six points. This is seemingly a common occurrence. When it doesn't happen, fielders try to catch the ball and the guy with the paddle runs back and forth, seemingly forever.

I have no idea how the defense can stop the offense, and I have no idea how teams accumulate points or when they switch roles.

It’s very similar to baseball in a lot of ways.

Both teams have 11 players. Batsmen bat two at a time so that when the 10th person gets out (called a fallen wicket) the last person can’t keep playing so the other team get to bat.

Batsmen can be out for a lot of reasons that are intricate and hard to explain, but the basic 3 methods of getting out are being caught, run out (by hitting the 3 sticks or ‘wickets’) while the batsman is out of his ground. We don’t have a base at the two ends, there’s a line about 2m in front of the wickets that marks the safe zone for a batsman. The 3rd way is for the bowler (pitcher) to hit the sticks with his bowl (pitch)

There’s 3 different forms of the game. Test cricket where both teams have 2 innings each. It can last 5 days and end in a no result, a tie or s win for either side.

One day cricket lasts about 9 hours, each team gets one inning if all batsmen are out or 50 ‘overs’ max (an over is a bowler bowling 6 balls (pitches))

T20 cricket lasts about 3 hours. Each team gets one inning if all batsmen are out or 20 overs.

Hope that helps clear up some of it. Happy to answer any questions 👍

[ray]

Aug 14, 2019 16:00:56 GMT boffo said:

The first time I watched it I had no clue what was going on.  The second time I watched it I focused more on trying to figure out what was going on and less on how confused I was.  By the end of that game everything was making more sense.  It's technically much simpler than baseball, but from a North American perspective we obviously have far greater exposure to baseball than we do cricket.

I respectfully disagree on it being more simple than baseball. We also play baseball and a bowler has a lot more variety available to him than a pitcher. A batsman has 360degrees to work with, and the field can be set any number of ways. I’m confident all of the Australian team would be a walk up start to a high level baseball team, I don’t think any baseballer would ever be able to play elite cricket. They have a hitting zone the size of the strike box, where we need to be able to play a ball coming directly at our body at up to 95 mph after bouncing on a potentially 5 day old pitch (the part between the bowler and batsman). A single strike is enough to get us out, so defending the wickets is an important skill.

Anyway - just my 2c

[boffo]

I meant from a learning the rules perspective, not from a playing perspective.

[ray]

👍

[giraffe72]

Bloody hell Ray, now I've got to keep up with two forums! Shame the weather is likely to make this test a non event. Although as I write Denley has just nicked one. Bring on the rain!

Been a decent contest so far today but the Aussies on top. Burns' batting stance makes me a bit queasy.

[ray]

Sorry Jamie. In fairness, I’m a pretty top bloke 😂

Thanks for what you said on the ‘real’ cricket thread - spot on analysis.

Jackos comment backs up what I’d said about Burns at Edgbaston - but he’s looked better today than the last test despite that drop, might be one of those times where a batsman grows from an innings? He did look sketchy against Cummings around the wicket early, but Siddle let them off the hook bowling 💩. I’d have had Starc for Siddle, I’m ok with Pattinson missing here so he’s fresh for the 3rd.

Interesting pitch. Didn’t think it would be dry and slow. Kudos to the curator for producing a batting pitch that’s going to spin later in the match.

Bad drop just now from Paine. Two hands for beginners. That’s 2 dropped off Siddle now.

Again, thanks for coming over to this forum mate, appreciated 👍

[ray]

Burns was stiff. Any catch at bat pad that doesn’t go straight in is unlucky. Good 50.

[giraffe72]

You realise this is all intentional? Having lost a days play we're just moving the game on. Clever...

You know what would make our day complete now? All out 170, close of play:

Archer 7-0-50-0

[ray]

Yeah not exactly delivering right now. Not like anyone has got a real Jaffa either...

Rain dance could help, I hear tomorrow is looking iffy.

[ray]

If Woakes can hang around and Bairstow finds his touch it’s still possible you’ll get 250. Would make for a good match if you can get a couple early before the end of play.