Cricket terminology - a bit strange.

axisus

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider. I just read this live report on BBC sport: "Stuart Broad may be the senior pace bowler in this England XI, but he's not taking the new ball at either end as Steven Finn is handed the second over. Like Woakes, he has two slips in, but he has Finch driving and missing at one that nips back off the seam and sails between bat and pad. However, after five dot balls, Finn strays onto the pads and is punished as Finch unerringly guides it for four through mid-wicket."

Lixarto

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider.

Yes, but the rest of us can picture the action from reading that passage

Heartfeltdawn

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider. I just read this live report on BBC sport: "Stuart Broad may be the senior pace bowler in this England XI, but he's not taking the new ball at either end as Steven Finn is handed the second over. Like Woakes, he has two slips in, but he has Finch driving and missing at one that nips back off the seam and sails between bat and pad. However, after five dot balls, Finn strays onto the pads and is punished as Finch unerringly guides it for four through mid-wicket."

Ask the average cricketer whether he favours true or relayed bypass pedals in his signal chain when trying to maintain sonic purity and check the response. 

vasselmeyer

I actually understood every word of that, and I wouldn't call myself a big cricket fan. If test match highlights are on I'll watch them, but only if I remember.

lloyd

Cricket on the radio sitting outside with a nice beer, cigar and a good book is one of life's simple pleasures for me. Reading that back I feel old!

Bellycaster

Heartfeltdawn said:

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider. I just read this live report on BBC sport: "Stuart Broad may be the senior pace bowler in this England XI, but he's not taking the new ball at either end as Steven Finn is handed the second over. Like Woakes, he has two slips in, but he has Finch driving and missing at one that nips back off the seam and sails between bat and pad. However, after five dot balls, Finn strays onto the pads and is punished as Finch unerringly guides it for four through mid-wicket."

Ask the average cricketer whether he favours true or relayed bypass pedals in his signal chain when trying to maintain sonic purity and check the response. 

Please don't start mixing Cricket with Guitar Pedals or we'll end up with Graham Goop!

Iamnobody

I understand it! Haven't watched cricket for years but obviously have an understanding of the basics.

Sports commentary is a real art - unfortunately there are some really bad commentators around. Sky sports darts springs to mind...

Anyway here's a classic snooker line...

" Steve is going for the pink ball - and for those of you who are watching in black and white, the pink is next to the green."

Any more Classic lines out there?

VimFuego

I miss test match cricket on the tele. Man, you could lose a whole summer to that.

Fretwired

Lixarto said:

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider.

Yes, but the rest of us can picture the action from reading that passage

Have to agree ...

xHymnal

VimFuego said:

I miss test match cricket on the tele. Man, you could lose a whole summer to that.

Wiz. Many happy hours spent doing exactly that. The last truly exciting test I saw on TV was the '05 Ashes series with Flintoff bowling what I believe to be the best few overs of his career. Edge of seat type stuff: excellent! 

thisisguitar

Along with Golf this is surely one of the most boring sports devised by man. Needs it's own language to make it seem interesting.

chillidoggy

What about croquet?

GuitarMonkey

"The batsman's Holding, the bowler's Willey."

RocknRollDave

Since cricket is shit, it doesn't worry me that I can't understand the lingo.

Gassage

Heartfeltdawn said:

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider. I just read this live report on BBC sport: "Stuart Broad may be the senior pace bowler in this England XI, but he's not taking the new ball at either end as Steven Finn is handed the second over. Like Woakes, he has two slips in, but he has Finch driving and missing at one that nips back off the seam and sails between bat and pad. However, after five dot balls, Finn strays onto the pads and is punished as Finch unerringly guides it for four through mid-wicket."

Ask the average cricketer whether he favours true or relayed bypass pedals in his signal chain when trying to maintain sonic purity and check the response. 

Buffered. Next question please.....

Gassage

axisus said:

Cricket terminology is largely incomprehensible to the outsider. I just read this live report on BBC sport: "Stuart Broad may be the senior pace bowler in this England XI, but he's not taking the new ball at either end as Steven Finn is handed the second over. Like Woakes, he has two slips in, but he has Finch driving and missing at one that nips back off the seam and sails between bat and pad. However, after five dot balls, Finn strays onto the pads and is punished as Finch unerringly guides it for four through mid-wicket."

And, these is daily expressions....I can't fathom why you'd not understand it. (as an aside, I find a lot of Cricinfo commentry hilarious due to the fact they've not really played so they use spectator's expressions not player's expressions.)

As Sir Geoff Boycott would say when in France.... "Jette dans le couloir d'uncertitude..."

stickyfiddle

It's simple really:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game!

Gassage

stickyfiddle said:

It's simple really:

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game!

Paraphrased, you bought a tea-towel from the Lords Shop.

Jalapeno

Cricket seems irrelevant - then you get John Arlott on Apartheid.

"It is political commitment and political belief that can make a man think that his opponent's views are so obnoxious that he will abstain from playing any game with him as a protest against what the other man believes," he said. "Any man's political commitment, if it is deep enough, is his very personal philosophy and it governs his whole way of life, it governs his belief, and it certainly governs the people with whom he is prepared to mix."

Gassage

I honestly couldn't imagine my life without playing cricket.

Lixarto

Heartfeltdawn said: Ask the average cricketer whether he favours true or relayed bypass pedals in his signal chain when trying to maintain sonic purity and check the response. 

What pedals?