Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[Shri]

Don't wear pants, duh.

 

[Bijed]

strong points
i feel if a team found two guys like this the icc could finally justify outlawing the runner, because tbf i imagine the logistics of unsheathing when you are that, er, unwieldy, could be a hassle...

Oh, so when you were asking about Battle of the Members in the "doesn't deserve a thread" thread just now, this is what you meant

 

[Victor Ian]

if you have an obscenely long, um, appendage, could you in theory get millions of runs by
after hitting the ball
stepping out of your crease
dropping anchor at the other crease (one run)
lifting it
and stepping in your crease (two runs)
and repeating the process?

I have often thought if I could cheat in a similar vein. If I had a long shoe lace that extended down the pitch and the other batsman likewise, could we not score **** loads of runs at no risk by grabbing each others shoelace ends and tapping them in and out of the crease? Sure, it's not in the spirit of the game, but would this cause a rewrite of the laws if someone tried it? For that matter, could a bowler bowl no balls with impunity if he had really long shoelaces that dragged behind him? Laces are part of the shoe!

 

[TheJediBrah]

I have often thought if I could cheat in a similar vein. If I had a long shoe lace that extended down the pitch and the other batsman likewise, could we not score **** loads of runs at no risk by grabbing each others shoelace ends and tapping them in and out of the crease? Sure, it's not in the spirit of the game, but would this cause a rewrite of the laws if someone tried it? For that matter, could a bowler bowl no balls with impunity if he had really long shoelaces that dragged behind him? Laces are part of the shoe!

Reminds me of those shoes that a few fast bowlers started wearing a few years ago that had extended flaps out the back. Not sure they ever caught on

 

[Burgey]

Wouldn't the two well hung blokes make more dough and get more enjoyment out of making Paul Bongiornos rather than playing cricket?

 

[Daemon]

I have often thought if I could cheat in a similar vein. If I had a long shoe lace that extended down the pitch and the other batsman likewise, could we not score **** loads of runs at no risk by grabbing each others shoelace ends and tapping them in and out of the crease? Sure, it's not in the spirit of the game, but would this cause a rewrite of the laws if someone tried it? For that matter, could a bowler bowl no balls with impunity if he had really long shoelaces that dragged behind him? Laces are part of the shoe!

A pair of Rapunzels would've certainly made great batsmen.

 

[Borges]

Harare to Hatcliffe: A journey of care, compassion and contribution | Cricbuzz.com

: )

 

[trundler]

Here's an excerpt from a Cricket Monthly article about Bodyline and Sandpapergate regarding unhelpful pitches for fast bowling all the way back in the 30s.
What do Bodyline and Sandpapergate have in common? | The Cricket Monthly | ESPN Cricinfo

"The way pitches have been prepared, steadily growing easier for
batsmen, has denied fast bowlers some of the response they used to get from the earth," Robinson lamented. Of the time before Bodyline, Robinson wrote, "dull-paced wickets and modern, long-term batting skill had reduced even Larwood to panting futility in Tests against the Australians".
Very interesting article too. Has little really changed since back then?

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Not exactly, because there were times before and after the 20s-30s high-scoring era where batting has been, well, harder than today.

Further more, there have been some changes meaning that the scoring circumstances are different today even though the pitches, at least in Australia and England, are similar:

- Timeless in tests in Australia (FC as well I think) and S. Africa (at least those two): no draws and therefore no reason to declare
- No l.b.w. for balls pitching outside off, introduced experimentally around 32-33, the changes proved controversial.
- Consequently, much pad-play.
- Scoring rates were still generally slower
- Conversely, over rates were faster
- Longer boundaries at grounds
- Thinner bats making it harder work to score
- Back-foot no ball rule reduces likelihood of taking a wicket off a no-ball
- No reverse-swing
- Kookaburra nowadays lacquers its balls, a practice Bradman criticised ball manufactures for doing as he said they made for worse bowling*
- I suspect Australian balls were stitched properly back then
- England and Australia were actually capable of winning in the other country

So circumstances now are not exactly the same as back then. And there certainly hasn't been no change over the intervening period

Still, you can consider these at your leisure.


*Incidentally, this makes me think people who say a non-lacquered ball wouldn't stand up here are talking out of their rear-ends. Although a non-lacquered Kookaburra probably wouldn't.

-----


As for the rest of the article:
- What Jardine planned was not illegal, what Smith & Co. did was
--- Furthermore, sandpaper does not fall within the stupid-excuse-making zone mints and lollies in the mouth do. There's no way anyone would do an SLC with sandpaper involved
- The sandpaper plan was (probably) not thought up before the series commenced.
- Any permanent psychological effect on Smith, when compared to Bradman, is entirely due to actions he did or approved of, not something he was on the receiving end of.

 

[AndrewB]

Not exactly, because there were times before and after the 20s-30s high-scoring era where batting has been, well, harder than today.

Further more, there have been some changes meaning that the scoring circumstances are different today even though the pitches, at least in Australia and England, are similar:

- Timeless in tests in Australia (FC as well I think) and S. Africa (at least those two): no draws and therefore no reason to declare

Only Australia; there were drawn Tests in all other Test playing countries between the wars. (There were of course some timeless Tests elsewhere).

The Sheffield Shield switched from timeless to 5-day games in 1927-28 (the year after Queensland was admitted, and Victoria scored 1107).

 

[Engle]

Here's an excerpt from a Cricket Monthly article about Bodyline and Sandpapergate regarding unhelpful pitches for fast bowling all the way back in the 30s.
What do Bodyline and Sandpapergate have in common? | The Cricket Monthly | ESPN Cricinfo

"The way pitches have been prepared, steadily growing easier for
batsmen, has denied fast bowlers some of the response they used to get from the earth," Robinson lamented. Of the time before Bodyline, Robinson wrote, "dull-paced wickets and modern, long-term batting skill had reduced even Larwood to panting futility in Tests against the Australians".
Very interesting article too. Has little really changed since back then?

Makes me wonder why Larwood is held in such high esteem. Were it not for Bodyline, his aura and accomplishments would have been well-nigh forgettable

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Only Australia; there were drawn Tests in all other Test playing countries between the wars. (There were of course some timeless Tests elsewhere).

The Sheffield Shield switched from timeless to 5-day games in 1927-28 (the year after Queensland was admitted, and Victoria scored 1107).

Well, no draws may be a simplification (after all, the record long test in Durban in 1959 was timeless and yet still drawn). I suspect fewer draws was probably the case outside of England.

Point I meant to make but didn't was the this probably would have geared batsman then towards staying in for a long period and accumulating runs without much time pressure. I also suspect that this affected pitch preparation somewhat (the same excuse today, 'to make it last the distance')

I suspect that the 'long-term batting skill' Robinson mentions is probably less evident today than it was back then.

 

[fredfertang]

Makes me wonder why Larwood is held in such high esteem. Were it not for Bodyline, his aura and accomplishments would have been well-nigh forgettable

None of his contemporaries would agree with that

 

[trundler]

The thing with Larwood is that whilst athletes of all kinds have have gotten immensely fitter, there he was bowling 95+ MPH back in the 30's! His county stats are great too. Besides, like Grace and Trumper, his impact on the game was far greater than his raw stats.

I'm thankful to all those who answered my query with insightful comments. Generated some quality discussion.

 

[stephen]

The thing with Larwood is that whilst athletes of all kinds have have gotten immensely fitter, there he was bowling 95+ MPH back in the 30's! His county stats are great too. Besides, like Grace and Trumper, his impact on the game was far greater than his raw stats.

I'm thankful to all those who answered my query with insightful comments. Generated some quality discussion.

I'm not sure Larwood was quite that quick. He was probably a more reasonable 145-150 kph merchant. Suggesting he bowled 155 might be pushing it. Just the shoes the bowlers wipe back then would probably have slowed him down a notch.

 

[trundler]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/quiet-man-dealt-in-terror-at-100mph-1592794.html
I think based on estimations from footage, Larwood, Tyson and Thommo were all well above 90 MPH

 

[Red]

Makes me wonder why Larwood is held in such high esteem. Were it not for Bodyline, his aura and accomplishments would have been well-nigh forgettable

1427 FC wickets at an average of 17, SR of 40.

 

[Gnske]

1427 FC wickets at an average of 17, SR of 40.

Sticky wickets though, meaningless. Every last one of those scalps

 

[cnerd123]

Some guy on reddit has filtered out player's batting averages for only games where they face a 'potent' attack - one which has a combined bowling average of less than 28 before the start of the match.

Tests - https://i.redd.it/futect2kr2911.png
ODIs - https://i.redd.it/yyr5vt662c911.png

Some interesting results.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Some guy on reddit has filtered out player's batting averages for only games where they face a 'potent' attack - one which has a combined bowling average of less than 28 before the start of the match.

Tests - https://i.redd.it/futect2kr2911.png
ODIs - https://i.redd.it/yyr5vt662c911.png

Some interesting results.

The NZ middle order is going to be lost without Ross Taylor. I knew he was good, but surprised to see him rubbing shoulders ahead of Kohli and Root.

Impressive jumps in ODi for Morgan and Cronje.