-
SPORTS
AND
GAMING -
-
Sports & Gaming Moderators: ghostfreak
The Cricket World Cup.
- Thread starter MazDan
- Start date
Infinite Jest
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 24,398
It's impossible to understand, really, unless you grow up with it. But basically:
Like baseball, you're trying to score runs. You've got two batsmen at once. They score runs either by hitting the ball to the fence, or by hitting it into the field, and running to the other end of the pitch. (So basically like running a base in baseball, kinda).
If the bowler (pitcher) bowls the ball too wide of the batsman, the ball must be bowled again, and the batting team gets an extra run.
The batsman can be out caught, or bowled (if he misses the ball and it hits the sticks behind him) or run out (if he tries to make a run, but a fielder hits the sticks with the ball before he reaches them).
The batsman does not have to run if he hits the ball, and can bat as long as he likes (he can't be 'struck out').
Each team has 11 players. An innings ends when 10 members of the batting side are out.
There are no foul zones like in baseball - you can score runs anywhere on the field.
Each side would usually use between 4-6 bowlers in a game.
That's simplified - there are some time restrictions on how long you can bat, but at the simplest level these don't matter. There are also lots of other ways to get out, but I've listed the main ones.
Like baseball, you're trying to score runs. You've got two batsmen at once. They score runs either by hitting the ball to the fence, or by hitting it into the field, and running to the other end of the pitch. (So basically like running a base in baseball, kinda).
If the bowler (pitcher) bowls the ball too wide of the batsman, the ball must be bowled again, and the batting team gets an extra run.
The batsman can be out caught, or bowled (if he misses the ball and it hits the sticks behind him) or run out (if he tries to make a run, but a fielder hits the sticks with the ball before he reaches them).
The batsman does not have to run if he hits the ball, and can bat as long as he likes (he can't be 'struck out').
Each team has 11 players. An innings ends when 10 members of the batting side are out.
There are no foul zones like in baseball - you can score runs anywhere on the field.
Each side would usually use between 4-6 bowlers in a game.
That's simplified - there are some time restrictions on how long you can bat, but at the simplest level these don't matter. There are also lots of other ways to get out, but I've listed the main ones.
MazDan
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,745
I still think this is the easiest way to understand.......
The teams toss to decide who will go out and who will go in.
The team going out will try to get the team going in out.
The team going in will try not to get out while they are in.
If a player from the team that is out gets a player from the team that is in out then that player goes off and another goes in until he is out.
When all the players that were in are out then the players that were out are in and those that were in are now out trying to get the players that are in out.
I think thats about as clear as it gets really.
The teams toss to decide who will go out and who will go in.
The team going out will try to get the team going in out.
The team going in will try not to get out while they are in.
If a player from the team that is out gets a player from the team that is in out then that player goes off and another goes in until he is out.
When all the players that were in are out then the players that were out are in and those that were in are now out trying to get the players that are in out.
I think thats about as clear as it gets really.
xtcxtc
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 30, 1999
- Messages
- 1,978
xtcxtc said:
just a few days ago discovered Sri Lanka won it in '96 & that their population about the same as ours.
but apart from making the nation blissfully happy i imagine many other countries in that area would be overjoyed.
still Australia has looked awesome.
to win
1.425 AUS
3.325 SL
so my wish has a 30% chance.
chopped_chimp
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,641
MazDan said:
Clear???? You've got to be joking!!!!! Thats as clear mud!! In, out, out, in, in and out WTF???
The point of the game is to score as many runs as possible. You have 11 players all up. Once 10 are out (you can't bat by yourself) then your team is out. The next team then tries to beat your score before they get out. Each team has a maximum of 50 overs to do this.
In a nutshell.
MazDan
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,745
xtcxtc said:
Bro, lets start being honest with each other aye.........you dont give a rats ass about making them freakin happy............truth is you have a cool mill or two on them and are trying to will them over the line.
Anyways I certainly dont give a rats ass about them being happy cos I wanna be happy meself and see us get up..........ooo aaaa Glen mcgrath.
chopped_chimp
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,641
MazDan said:
Hmmmm....I had a hard day at work...
My bad!:D
Infinite Jest
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 24,398
I wish I'd put money on SL when I was going to (right after they toured NZ, so before the Aus-Eng-NZ tri-series). They were paying 8-1 then at Centrebet.
I take consolation in knowing that it basically unfolded as I predicted
I take consolation in knowing that it basically unfolded as I predicted
PinholeStar
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2005
- Messages
- 1,748
A shambolic end to a frankly dreadful tournament. The ICC should be utterly ashamed of themselves.
Congratulations to Australia though. They were leagues ahead of every other team & deserved winners, if only for Gilchrist's magnificent innings in the final!
Congratulations to Australia though. They were leagues ahead of every other team & deserved winners, if only for Gilchrist's magnificent innings in the final!
Infinite Jest
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 24,398
^
+1.
The Australian team have played superb cricket all the way through this tournament, and have probably taken tournament play to a higher level. (Remember earlier world cups, where Australia started slowly, e.g. 1999 when NZ beat them early on?). This time, the Aussies hit a high level early on, and never dropped their performances at any point.
They have been quite quite brilliant, and a joy to watch. I just wish we had seen some more competitive games. Honestly, can you guys even remember a close game in the Super Eights? Other than two England games (v Sri Lanka and the West Indies) I can't remember a single game that one side didn't dominate and win easily. So very disappointing in that sense.
And the ending of the final (I'm just watching it now) was absolutely disgraceful, and people should be sacked. No-one knowing what was going on. Those fucking umpires telling the Aussies that the final three overs would have to be bowled tomorrow....not to mention the fact that no-one knew what the Lankans were chasing when they came out after the second rain break....(and why can't they play a rain-interrupted game over two days, rather than play 38 overs?).
One class team. One good team that gave them a bit of a fight. That's really about it for the tournament. A real shame - it was shaping up to be an interesting tourney after the Ireland and Bangladesh upset wins, but all in all it was a huge disappointment.
Anyone want to travel to India for the next one? :D (I'm actually kinda serious....)
+1.
The Australian team have played superb cricket all the way through this tournament, and have probably taken tournament play to a higher level. (Remember earlier world cups, where Australia started slowly, e.g. 1999 when NZ beat them early on?). This time, the Aussies hit a high level early on, and never dropped their performances at any point.
They have been quite quite brilliant, and a joy to watch. I just wish we had seen some more competitive games. Honestly, can you guys even remember a close game in the Super Eights? Other than two England games (v Sri Lanka and the West Indies) I can't remember a single game that one side didn't dominate and win easily. So very disappointing in that sense.
And the ending of the final (I'm just watching it now) was absolutely disgraceful, and people should be sacked. No-one knowing what was going on. Those fucking umpires telling the Aussies that the final three overs would have to be bowled tomorrow....not to mention the fact that no-one knew what the Lankans were chasing when they came out after the second rain break....(and why can't they play a rain-interrupted game over two days, rather than play 38 overs?).
One class team. One good team that gave them a bit of a fight. That's really about it for the tournament. A real shame - it was shaping up to be an interesting tourney after the Ireland and Bangladesh upset wins, but all in all it was a huge disappointment.
Anyone want to travel to India for the next one? :D (I'm actually kinda serious....)
StoneHappyMonday
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 10, 2001
- Messages
- 18,084
PinholeStar said:
+2.
MazDan
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,745
Are you guys aware that the most wickets Australia lost in a game was 6.......meaning McGrath, Tait and Bracken never even picked up a bat in the tournament.
On the flip side............Australia bowled there opposition out in every single game except the 22 over match against Bangladesh and the rain shortened Final with Sri Lanka.
I dont believe it is the best team Australia has ever or could have produced but it is the most dominant display I have ever witnessed.
On the flip side............Australia bowled there opposition out in every single game except the 22 over match against Bangladesh and the rain shortened Final with Sri Lanka.
I dont believe it is the best team Australia has ever or could have produced but it is the most dominant display I have ever witnessed.