Live data from Hacker News

An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

cs.purdue.edu

11–20 of 66 posts

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#11

I came to the UK aged 10 from (the mighty) USA. Forced to play cricket at school. No f*cker told me the rules. I wish I'd' had this page back then.

Did you bat or bowl? For batting: 'See ball, hit ball'. 'The faster it comes, the harder you hit' For bowling: never figured it out :(

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#13
post #10

Test cricket (international matches played over five days) is a truly wonderful experience that I urge everyone to try and watch* at least once. When you try and explain that the most engaging of matches can end in a draw, after all that time, you rarely succeed on winning over sceptics, but find a friend that is willing to sit and watch for a few days and try it out. *or listen to, it's equally at home on the radio,…

For those who don't know it: in cricket, a draw is different from a tie. A tie means both teams are equally strong, a draw that no conclusion could be reached because time ran out, either because the weaker team managed to postpone defeat long enough or because of the weather (playing in bad light or in rain makes the game too dangerous, so play can get stopped, even when one team is on the brink of victory. Watching the weather forecast is very important in test cricket)

Draws can be very interestng even if the teams involved have widely different strengths.

Ties in test cricket are extremely rare. There were 2 in over 2000 tests since 1877.(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tied_Test)

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#14
post #4

> "The most infamous event in cricket was the 1932-33 English tour of Australia " Many fans of the game would likely disagree; personally, a couple of match fixing scandals and the underarm delivery vs New Zealand were worse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkQRERykq5M

Matter of opinion, but I'm not sure the events you reference resulted in diplomatic activity...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodyline

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#15

I came to the UK aged 10 from (the mighty) USA. Forced to play cricket at school. No f*cker told me the rules. I wish I'd' had this page back then.

The rules are pretty straightforward, it is the names of all the different field positions and bowling actions that get confusing.

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#17
post #10

Test cricket (international matches played over five days) is a truly wonderful experience that I urge everyone to try and watch* at least once. When you try and explain that the most engaging of matches can end in a draw, after all that time, you rarely succeed on winning over sceptics, but find a friend that is willing to sit and watch for a few days and try it out. *or listen to, it's equally at home on the radio,…

Test cricket is the ONLY cricket... none of this one-day nonsense ;)

Once you know the rules (easy* ) and start to understand the strategy (hard) then test cricket is fascinating and pretty exciting!

* The easy rules are easy, then there about a thousand weird rules that hark back to ol' England. You take "tea" for example. Though my favourite is that if a ball is damaged or goes missing in the middle of a game, they go down to a kind of ball library and choose other balls that would be in similar condition (ball condition is extremely important and plays a major part in game strategy). Then both team captains must decide which of the candidates should be used.

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#18
post #4

> "The most infamous event in cricket was the 1932-33 English tour of Australia " Many fans of the game would likely disagree; personally, a couple of match fixing scandals and the underarm delivery vs New Zealand were worse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkQRERykq5M

Matter of opinion, but I'm not sure the events you reference resulted in diplomatic activity... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodyline

Dawood Ibrahim (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawood_Ibrahim) is widely believed to be behind match fixing in cricket; I think that's worse than diplomatic activity.

I agree, however, that what we are discussing is a matter of opinion.

Re: An Explanation of Cricket (2009)

#19
post #4

> "The most infamous event in cricket was the 1932-33 English tour of Australia " Many fans of the game would likely disagree; personally, a couple of match fixing scandals and the underarm delivery vs New Zealand were worse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkQRERykq5M

I have always wondered why we have not had a repeat of the underarm delivery [1], but just done by bowling overarm very, very slowly. As far as I know there is no rule in how fast the ball has to be bowled and if you bowled very slowly the ball would reach the batsman rolling along the ground.

1. For those that don't know the history of the underarm delivery, in a match between Australia and New Zealand the final ball was bowled underarm so the batsman had no chance of hitting the ball over the fence for 6. This was the only way NZ could win. For historical reasons bowling underarm had been allowed, but it had not been used for more than 100 years.

Edit. There have been some changes to the rules so you can't let a ball bounce more than twice now [2]. You should be able to bowl very slowly though.

2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_ball

Post reply on HN