Boring? Cricket? Never!David Pawson reckons that God gave cricket to the English to give them a sense of what eternity is like.I think even 20-20 cricket is too long. They should come up with a 15 minute game- then i might watch it.
I was just reading your comment to Arthur and he mentioned that the captain of the West Indies team in the 80's summed up cricket as a game that can be played for 8 days straight without a winner.
Yes, it certainly would. My aunt used to say that if these folks had to deal with a Canadian winter every year, it would knock the desire to fight right out of them. I keep thinking more and more about the lion and the lamb - won't that be nice!!
That would be 5 days Lois (6 if they include a "rest" day). A test match (i.e. between countries) is generally played over 5 days, occasionally 6. Each team has two innings, and it's possible to have a draw if one team fails to complete both of its innings in that period.What's really good is when you have a whole series of say 3 or 4 matches with every one a draw.Australia and West Indies once played a tied test. They actually managed to finish with exactly the same number of runs.I guess the idea of having that kind of time to play a game is typically British upper class. It's played over British civil service hours 10 to 5 with breaks for lunch and tea. Either very civilised or very boring depending on your point of view.Wouldn't the world be a much better place instead of fighting about things, we played cricket? Millions of lives could have been saved if they had challenged Hitler to a Test match- winner takes Europe. And what about Iraq and Afghanistan? Teach those terrorists to play cricket instead of blowing themselves up.
Cricket has value in that it actually involves strategy - something that's not clear until after the rules and procedure are grasped. Compare this to other team sports that are almost entirely a competition of speed and strength - mindless rubbish often played by mindless competitors - very boring indeed. Cricket is for people who don't want to completely switch their brains off while watching.There is a format shorter than Twenty20, called "beach cricket". In cutting the size and period of the game that far, they've reduced it to a mindless slog - fast paced but trivial. Is that what you're after? :p The first "Rugby" style "football" game played in Australia went for 2 days straight without either team scoring at all. Since then they've reduced the number of players to make a result possible, and occasionally increased the number of points attributed to each success as a way to make the game appear more exciting.Fishing - now THAT is a boring "sport".
Lol it seems that the statistics and trivia of the game are just as boring as the game itself :P
ReplyDeleteBoring? Cricket? Never!David Pawson reckons that God gave cricket to the English to give them a sense of what eternity is like.I think even 20-20 cricket is too long. They should come up with a 15 minute game- then i might watch it.
ReplyDeleteI was just reading your comment to Arthur and he mentioned that the captain of the West Indies team in the 80's summed up cricket as a game that can be played for 8 days straight without a winner.
ReplyDeleteYes, it certainly would. My aunt used to say that if these folks had to deal with a Canadian winter every year, it would knock the desire to fight right out of them. I keep thinking more and more about the lion and the lamb - won't that be nice!!
ReplyDeleteThat would be 5 days Lois (6 if they include a "rest" day). A test match (i.e. between countries) is generally played over 5 days, occasionally 6. Each team has two innings, and it's possible to have a draw if one team fails to complete both of its innings in that period.What's really good is when you have a whole series of say 3 or 4 matches with every one a draw.Australia and West Indies once played a tied test. They actually managed to finish with exactly the same number of runs.I guess the idea of having that kind of time to play a game is typically British upper class. It's played over British civil service hours 10 to 5 with breaks for lunch and tea. Either very civilised or very boring depending on your point of view.Wouldn't the world be a much better place instead of fighting about things, we played cricket? Millions of lives could have been saved if they had challenged Hitler to a Test match- winner takes Europe. And what about Iraq and Afghanistan? Teach those terrorists to play cricket instead of blowing themselves up.
ReplyDeleteIt certainly will.
ReplyDeleteCricket has value in that it actually involves strategy - something that's not clear until after the rules and procedure are grasped. Compare this to other team sports that are almost entirely a competition of speed and strength - mindless rubbish often played by mindless competitors - very boring indeed. Cricket is for people who don't want to completely switch their brains off while watching.There is a format shorter than Twenty20, called "beach cricket". In cutting the size and period of the game that far, they've reduced it to a mindless slog - fast paced but trivial. Is that what you're after? :p The first "Rugby" style "football" game played in Australia went for 2 days straight without either team scoring at all. Since then they've reduced the number of players to make a result possible, and occasionally increased the number of points attributed to each success as a way to make the game appear more exciting.Fishing - now THAT is a boring "sport".
ReplyDelete