International Cricket Thread

[Hot Pepsi]

International Cricket Thread

Another one:

I'm told that on a Six, the batters don't have to actually run back and forth to get their six runs. On TV/youtube, they never show the batter's reaction. Can he stand there and pimp it or is he supposed to look stoic and sportsmanlike?

And on on a long ground ball (er, a ball that the batter hits along the ground for a long way, I mean), I assume the runners keep running, even if it looks like it will go to the boundary for four, because they can't always be sure until it actually does, right? And then when it does hit the boundary, do they just stop running and take their four, or keep running? That's never clear watching it on tv because the camera just shows the ball rolling to the rope and the fielders trying to catch up with it. Sometimes he or she does, but it looks like the runners could probably get at least three anyway.

[Southport Zeb]

International Cricket Thread

After a six its quite normal for the batsman to celebrate in an understand crickety way - raising a hand or similar.

When a ball is going towards the boundary for a four the batsmen will run, just in case it doesn't get there (either if fielded or sometimes if the outfield is a bit slow) and so whatever runs they run do count. If it does reach the boundary and they haven't run four it doesn't matter - they still get counted as four without them having to be run.

Very occasionally, usually only if one batsman has an injury that prevents him from running (and he hasn't been allowed a runner), a pair of batsmen will not attempt to run and only score via boundaries. This is likely only to happen if the batting side needs to bat out time to avoid defeat - an example was the Australians against Sri Lanka (?) a few months ago when they ended up going about twenty overs without a scoring shot.

[tee rex]

International Cricket Thread

Once the ball goes over the boundary (4 or 6) the batsmen stop running. Grounds vary a great deal in size and shape, so it's not unknown for batsmen to run 4 or 5, especially below the top level where the fielding is less athletic. In fact, fielders in social cricket have been known to assist the ball to the boundary in order to concede "only" 4 (it's against the rules but if there are no cameras around ... ).

Of course the basic difference with baseball is that your reward for a home run is to let somebody else bat, whereas after hitting a six/four you are still there, facing the next ball. So you can see why showboating might not be the best idea when your opponent has a 100 mph missile in his hand.

[jameswba]

International Cricket Thread

The batsmen might run, even when a six is hit, as he might not know for sure the ball isn't going to drop short, but once the ball crosses the boundary (for four or six), the running becomes irrelevant.

There are certainly times when they don't run, like when they're sure the ball is going to the boundary. A batsman is considered to be preening himself a bit if he holds himself in his follow-through after the shot, to show it was a classical cover drive, straight drive or whatever. Michael Vaughan was known for doing this.

It can actually happen, eg when a fielder has a long chase, that the batsmen run five, in which case the fielder might not field the ball at all, but will try to let it run over the rope for just the four. Doesn't work if the outfield is really slow of course. And I don't know for sure, but I presume there's a rule prescribing a penalty (five extra runs perhaps?) in the event that the fielder deliberately throws/pushes/kicks the ball over the rope, rather than just 'willing' it over.

[SouthdownRebel]

International Cricket Thread

Hot Pepsi wrote: Oh, another question. I see that in Test cricket and, I suppose, other levels of first class or high-level cricket, the captain makes many of the big decisions and there's no coach on the field telling them what to do (I've also noticed that in rugby). But is that true in all levels of cricket? A the U12 level, is there a particularly wise 12-year-old deciding when to declare and when to pinch hit or is there more coaching at that level?

What you'll see in test cricket is that often a 'messenger' will come onto the field during a break in play (e.g. between overs) to pass on some observation from a coach in the changing rooms. To avoid the scathing opprobrium of the umpires for wasting time, they'll often bring out water or a change of equipment with them (this is for some reason seen as more 'necessary').

However, as you say, the captain is expected to take the lead in strategy. This would be the case at most levels of adult cricket, including local leagues etc. I suspect at age group levels this probably varies wildly. During my brief and disaster-filled school cricket career (no runs, no wickets, no catches) our "coach" (a general sports teacher who knew the rules) defined basic field settings and who would bat/bowl in which order and then expected everyone to carry out his instructions. Given that he was also an umpire and so in the middle of the action, he was also in a position to act like a captain of sorts.

That was my experience in a state school with zero pedigree for cricket - at the exclusive public schools, I dare say the arrangements are very different.

[Hot Pepsi]

International Cricket Thread

Thanks for that.

Is the boundary rope a bit shorter for women's cricket? I watched the highlights of the SA-Australia series and it seemed like they'd left a lot of room between the rope and the actual fence. And it was literally just a rope, not a thingy with advertising on it. It also seemed like there was hardly anybody there, which is unfortunate. As far as I can tell, women's cricket is plenty entertaining and, I suspect, the tickets are way cheaper than for the men's.

Also...
Is The Ashes the only Test series that has a name? It seems like India-England, among others, has been contested long enough that it would have a name and some kind of traditional trophy assigned to it.

[SouthdownRebel]

International Cricket Thread

I'm not sure about the boundary lengths for women's cricket, but it wouldn't be a surprise if they are shorter. That could also be due to the size of the ground though - there is no standard size, so somewhere like the MCG in Melbourne is renowned for having much longer boundaries even in the men's game.

Women's cricket is generally much less supported, though this is slowly changing. Mostly that's because of a lack of funding and coverage. That said, many tests around the world might as well not charge for entry - the current test between New Zealand and Pakistan in Hamilton seemed to only have a few hundred there. It really depends where the games are being played and what format.

Many of the other series do have official names, often named after legendary players from either side - some of these are listed here. However, the Ashes is by far the most famous and commonly used of these names. I've always known England v India as the Pataudi Trophy, but apparently when the teams play in India it's for the Anthony de Mello Trophy.

[ursus arctos]

International Cricket Thread

Here's a list of the "perpetual trophies" in Test Cricket

None of them is anywhere near the Ashes in terms of name recognition.

Women's test cricket (of which there isn't much) has smaller boundaries than the men's game. They must be 55 to 70 yards from the wickets, as opposed to 65 to 90 yards for the men.

ursus minor's junior cricket experience was similar to Southdown Rebel's. It's worth noting that most youth cricket (and anything that would be similar to Little League here) is based on a limited overs form of the game, so declarations don't really enter into it (though field placements and bowling selections do).

[SouthdownRebel]

International Cricket Thread

Thanks Ursus, that's a better list - surprising how recently some of those were inaugurated.

[ursus arctos]

International Cricket Thread

I think that the impetus has come from television, which can apparently sell ads for trophy presentations and the like, as well as boards who can flog series sponsorships

[Kevin S]

International Cricket Thread

We touched upon the Sri Lanka v Australia one earlier in the year.

[Hot Pepsi]

International Cricket Thread

Women's cricket is surprisingly old. First recorded match was 1745 and the first test was 1934. A quick read on Wikipedia suggests that women's cricket was much better organized and established than women's football until fairly recently and may still be that way in some places (not in the US, of course).

[longeared]

International Cricket Thread

Pakistan doing a Pakistan in Hamilton and losing nine wickets in the final session to lose the match.

[Kevin S]

International Cricket Thread

The rebirth of the World Test Championship, with the accessions of Ireland and Afghanistan?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/1070568.html

[Kevin S]

International Cricket Thread

Australia starter another home series today, against Pakistan.

[jefe]

International Cricket Thread

I do not entirely know what the Big Bash is, but it's going to be on NBC Sports Network in the US soon.

[longeared]

International Cricket Thread

It's the Australian T20 league, like the IPL but better because it's [strike]less corrupt[/strike] shorter and has an accompanying women's tournament.

[Hot Pepsi]

International Cricket Thread

I've been playing the Big Bash game on my iPhone. I'm playing as the women's Stars team.

[Etienne]

International Cricket Thread

Pakistan have not started well.

[Satchmo Distel]

International Cricket Thread

Kevchenko wrote: The rebirth of the World Test Championship, with the accessions of Ireland and Afghanistan?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/1070568.html

I don't think the current structure is broken; the problems are all associated with squeezing in T20 international and domestic tournaments. England and Australia are playing too many Tests but I don't think any other country has that problem. South Africa have tended to play too few Tests of late.

[Hot Pepsi]

International Cricket Thread

From the linked column:

the latest idea on the table is a pair of six-team conferences, a modus operandi devised by Major League Baseball more than a century ago and subsequently adopted by the other three major US team sports.

That's not exactly right. Baseball didn't really "devise" this system. The American League, previously the Western League, simply grew in wealth and stature to rival the National League. They colluded to recognize each other as the only "major leagues," create a national commission to arbitrate disputes (which then turned into the powerful commissioner system after the Black Sox scandal) and for the champions of each to play in the hyperbolically named World Series. The American and National Leagues were operated as separate entities with their own presidents and separate umpiring crews until they formally merged with MLB in 1999, and the DH rule discrepancy still remains.

Likewise, the modern NFL was created by a merger between former commercial rivals - the old NFL and the AFL. The current NFC and AFC conferences still reflect that, even though a few teams have switched conferences to balance out the numbers.

However, the other leagues' conferences and divisions are based purely on geography.

[ad hoc]

International Cricket Thread

Shame that Pakistan couldn't quite pull off what would have been one of the greatest test victories of all time

[Etienne]

International Cricket Thread

Yes, brilliant effort.

[Kevin S]

International Cricket Thread

Cook captains the ICC Test Team of the Year. Voting closed in September...

[Kevin S]

International Cricket Thread