Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[Victor Ian]

What's with this?

Younis Khan c †Bairstow b Stokes
BA Stokes c †Sarfraz Ahmed b Wahab Riaz

Why do we need to know the full name of Pakistan players but only a surname for everyone else?

 

[Burgey]

Cricinfo just keeping the white man down again, I guess. They do it with Indian players too. It's stupid. If you're unsure who's playing, you probably won't be looking at the scores anyway.

Can understand it with a name like Singh, I suppose, where there's number of contemporaries who share the name - RP, Harby & Yuvraj as examples. But otherwise, yeah, don't get it.

I suppose most Pakistani and Indian players have pretty short term careers, so it's nice for their families to have the full name on the scorecard when they frame it on the hovel wall.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Because Khan and Ahmed are amongst the most common surnames in Pakistan. Generally, subcontinental first names have much more variety in first names than the western countries, who are mostly a blurry mess of Bens and Steves and Michaels and Ians. Conversely, it's not so for the family names in the SC, where you have a gazillion Singhs and Khans and Patels.

 

[Burgey]

I get what you're saying, but there's a few Smiths around the place too, but you don't see a scorecard which reads Khan c Stephen Smith b Starc.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Sif Younis Khan would ever get dismissed by Starc.

 

[Burgey]

It was Zaheer

 

[morgieb]

IIRC Pakistani/Bangladesh name conventions have it as their first name and last name on scorecards, rather than initials + surname. Not sure why their name conventions are different to Western ones though.

 

[Daemon]

Cricinfo just keeping the white man down again, I guess. They do it with Indian players too. It's stupid. If you're unsure who's playing, you probably won't be looking at the scores anyway.

Can understand it with a name like Singh, I suppose, where there's number of contemporaries who share the name - RP, Harby & Yuvraj as examples. But otherwise, yeah, don't get it.

I suppose most Pakistani and Indian players have pretty short term careers, so it's nice for their families to have the full name on the scorecard when they frame it on the hovel wall.

I don't think they do, from a quick look at a couple of random scorecards. Only the Singhs appear to have their first names spelt out.

3rd ODI: India v New Zealand at Mohali, Oct 23, 2016 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

1st Test: India v West Indies at Delhi, Nov 6-9, 2011 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

2nd Test: England v India at Manchester, Aug 9-14, 1990 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Napoleon Einstein is the only name that deserves writing out in full.

 

[Daemon]

I'm just happy they don't try that **** with Sri Lankan players

 

[Victor Ian]

Because Khan and Ahmed are amongst the most common surnames in Pakistan. Generally, subcontinental first names have much more variety in first names than the western countries, who are mostly a blurry mess of Bens and Steves and Michaels and Ians. Conversely, it's not so for the family names in the SC, where you have a gazillion Singhs and Khans and Patels.

In the match I pulled that record out of, there was no other Khan, Ahmed or Riaz. There was no confusion. I understand doing it when there are multiples of the same name in a team, such as when the Chappells played.

It seems to be a thing only with Pakistan and Bangladesh scores that the first name is important everywhere.

 

[Adders]

No Cookies | The Courier Mail

"The day Kerry Packer tore apart Nine anchor Mark Nicholas"

(as well as Healy & Taylor)

Jesus, I reckon Kerry would turn in his grave at the state of Ch 9's commentary nowadays, given these were his thoughts......

[FONT=&quot]“Without warning, he launched into a spellbinding attack on our commentary,” Nicholas wrote. “He talked quietly but firmly and with a sense of threat. His words were less advice than instruction and the long and short of them was: stop telling us something is interesting, the viewer can decide whether it’s interesting; don’t use that word ‘clever’ — it’s a game of cricket, that’s all; stop asking questions of other commentators and excluding the viewer; stop telling us about s*** weather; cut out the in-jokes — we’re not interested in your tennis and golf games or your fish and chips; keep women, kids and blokes who don’t play the game in the loop by keeping it simple and explaining it for dummies; call the f***ing game, not the peripherals; tell us about the game but don’t analyse everything — it’s not science, it’s a game, and all that analysis is boring; call the game; know the players, know the figures, know the conditions and take us inside the game. Don’t lecture. Call the bloody game.”[/FONT]

 

[Daemon]

It's something to do with Muslim names imo - 3rd ODI: Bangladesh v Afghanistan at Dhaka, Oct 1, 2016 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And this - 1st T20I: United Arab Emirates v Ireland at Abu Dhabi, Feb 14, 2016 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo - where the non Muslim name guy gets given initials

 

[Black_Warrior]

Sif Younis Khan would ever get dismissed by Starc.

He might after he gets bored with 200 to his name

 

[Black_Warrior]

IIRC Pakistani/Bangladesh name conventions have it as their first name and last name on scorecards, rather than initials + surname. Not sure why their name conventions are different to Western ones though.

I am not sure if there is actually a norm that anyone follows with consistently, at least not amongst the scorers in the SC.

It's mainly what OS said where the first name is more important in SC culture..so they probably settle somewhere in the middle as the Broadcasters usually opt for the last name..

So they opt for both. With Bangladesh, you'll often 3-4 players with the same surname
Shafiul Islam
Taijul Islam

Nasir Hossein
Rubel Hossein
Shahadat Hossein

So they probably do that to avoid confusion

 

[Julian87]

Because Khan and Ahmed are amongst the most common surnames in Pakistan. Generally, subcontinental first names have much more variety in first names than the western countries, who are mostly a blurry mess of Bens and Steves and Michaels and Ians. Conversely, it's not so for the family names in the SC, where you have a gazillion Singhs and Khans and Patels.

Reckon there'd be a fair whack of Asifs and Wasims to have represented Pakistan just quietly.

 

[cnerd123]

Reckon there'd be a fair whack of Asifs and Wasims to have represented Pakistan just quietly.

I think if you tried to create an ATXI of cricketers using only the following names:

Imran
Khan
Wasim
Asif
Mohammed
Akram
Syed
Mushtaq
Shahid
Ali
Yousuf

You could make a really, really good one.


inb4 Howe attempts this.

 

[cnerd123]

Maybe take out Shahid and Syed for Zaheer and Moin/Moeen

 

[Victor Ian]

It's something to do with Muslim names imo - 3rd ODI: Bangladesh v Afghanistan at Dhaka, Oct 1, 2016 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

And this - 1st T20I: United Arab Emirates v Ireland at Abu Dhabi, Feb 14, 2016 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo - where the non Muslim name guy gets given initials

That's a good find and looks rather odd. I am starting to believe it is religious profiling of sorts, but I notice that they don't fully qualify moeen ali nor usman khawaja. I htink cricinfo needs to get there **** more together.

 

[mr_mister]

I think if you tried to create an ATXI of cricketers using only the following names:

Imran
Khan
Wasim
Asif
Mohammed
Akram
Syed
Mushtaq
Shahid
Ali
Yousuf

You could make a really, really good one.


inb4 Howe attempts this.

like what even is this post limit it to 3-4 names to make it a challenge

that's seriously like me saying i reckon i could make a good cricket team out of these names


smith
jones
hobbs
bradman
chappell
waugh
warne
hadlee