Here in North American, cricket is a mysterious sport. We recognize that it is a little bit like baseball, but when people talk about it they use all kinds of funny words we don’t understand. Then, if we ever see it on TV—and we rarely do—it’s so confusing because it just looks like a whole mess of people running around aimlessly. However, I’m here to tell you if you just take the time to learn a little bit about the sport, it starts to make sense pretty quickly. Now, maybe you say, “yeah, well, why bother? Who even cares about cricket?” Well, at least 1.5 billion people care about cricket, that’s who—probably twice as many as those who care about baseball or American football. So if nothing else, for serious sports fans it’s worth leaning a bit about the sport just to see what all the fuss is. With that in mind, here’s a list of 11 things you need to know in order to understand the sport of cricket. Why not enlighten yourself a little?

11. A cricket field is oval-shaped

Inside the main oval playing field is a smaller oval territory called the infield, which is 30 yards wide. Inside the infield is the pitch, where all the action of cricket begins. The pitch is 22 yards long and 10 feet wide, and at either end is a wicket.

Source

10. The basic goal of cricket is pretty simple

One guy throws a ball toward another guy who tries to hit it. The act of throwing the ball is called bowling and, as you would expect, the guy bowling is called the bowler. The guy trying to hit the ball is called the batsman. If he hits the ball far enough, he can score points for his team—called runs—by running back and forth between two safe zones called creases. If the batsman misses the ball, however, and it hits the wicket behind him, he is dismissed and doesn’t get to hit anymore. He is also dismissed if (a) he hits the ball but it is caught on the fly by a fielder, or (b) the ball is not caught on the fly but the fielder is able to knock over the wicket while the hitter is outside the crease. Obviously, the team that scores the most runs wins.

This sort of reminds you a little baseball doesn’t it? You hit a ball to somewhere on a playing field; if it is not caught before it touches the ground, then try to get to a designated area before the ball does. Speaking of baseball…

Source

9. Cricket and baseball share a lot of the same terminology

Baseball is most likely a derivation of an early form of cricket. For evidence of this, all you need to do is look at the terminology the games share today. In cricket, as in baseball, there are “innings,” “bats” and “batting,” an “infield,” an “outfield,” and, of course, “runs.”

Now, the basic action of batting in cricket is pretty much the same as in baseball, although the object of batting is somewhat different, as is the equipment. (Don’t worry, we’ll get to the object of batting shortly.) The terms “infield” and “outfield” are also similar in that they apply to the areas of the field closer to and further away from the person batting, but of course the field itself is a different shape. Ditto for runs: in baseball and cricket, you score runs by hitting the ball and then running to a designated area, but the designated area is different for the two sports. The only shared term that is almost completely different in baseball and cricket is “innings.” In both games, “innings” refers to a discreet unit of gameplay. However, in baseball an inning (singular) is comprised of 6 “outs” (3 per team), while in cricket an innings (always plural for some reason) is an entire team’s turn batting.

Let’s explain cricket’s innings in baseball terms. In baseball, each team gets to bat until they make 27 outs, right? However, instead of taking all their at-bats in a row, the teams take turns batting and fielding. You get 3 outs, we get 3 outs, and we call 6 outs an inning. Well, if instead of taking turns every 3 outs, each team batted until they made all 27 outs, then an “inning” in baseball would be like an “innings” in cricket.

8. There are always two batsman on the field at the same time

There are always 2 batsman on the field for the offensive team—one at each wicket. The one to whom the bowler is bowling is called the striker. The one just standing there watching is called, un-creatively, the non-striker. When the striker hits the ball, he and the non-striker can decide to attempt to score runs by running back and force between the two creases. If they do attempt to score runs and they end up switching places, then the striker become the non-striker, and vice versa.

Source

7. The smallest unit of play in a cricket (like at at-bat in baseball) is called an “over”

An over is a series of 6 deliveries from a bowler. It’s called an over because, after 6 deliveries, the umpire yells “over!” An over is kind of like an at-bat in baseball, only there is a finite number of pitches. Bowlers are allowed to throw multiple overs in a game, but no bowler may throw 2 overs in a row. Instead, after each over, the defensive team switches ends and different player bowls toward the other wicket at the opposite end of the pitch. Now the non-striker who stood at the other wicket becomes the striker. If he was not dismissed during the previous over, the guy who was the striker becomes the non-striker. If the previous striker was dismissed in the previous over (at-bat), then a new batsman takes his place as the new non-striker.

Of course, another key difference between an over and an at-bat is that the person batting can change in the middle of an over. This occurs when the striker and non-striker attempted a run that caused them to switch places (as in the above photo).

Source

6. Every cricket player has two goals

Unlike a batter in baseball, a batsman in cricket has to be somewhat defensive minded. That’s because, in cricket, unlike baseball, if you swing and miss and the ball hits the wicket behind you, you’re out (i.e., dismissed). You don’t get three chances. And when 10 of your 11 players make outs (are dismissed) in cricket, your innings is over. Thus, while the 27 outs you get in baseball are precious, the 10 dismissals you get in cricket are even more precious. So every player has two equal goals. If you’re the batsman, you want to (1) avoid being dismissed and (2) score runs. If you’re the bowler, you want to (1) dismiss the batsman and (2) prevent runs from being scored. And if f you’re a fielder, you want to (1) dismiss the batsman and (2) prevent runs.

5. Test cricket is ridiculously long and drawn out

The three kinds of cricket are Twenty20, Limited Overs Cricket, and Test Cricket. Test cricket is considered the purest form of the game, and the greatest test of skill and endurance. In this format, there is no limit to the number of overs (at-bats) each team gets on offense. Instead, each team gets 2 innings (turns batting) for a total of 4, and they must be played in no longer than 5 days. In this format, an innings is over only when 10 of the 11 batters have been dismissed. There is never any limit to the amount of overs one batsman can take, so in Test cricket it is theoretically possible for one batsman to bat for the entire match. In reality, of course, even the best batsman would wear out and eventually be dismissed. There is no specific limit to the number of overs a bowler can bowl; however, since he can never bowl (pitch) two consecutive overs (at-bats), he can never bowl (pitch) more than 50% of the overs (at-bats). Since there are 2 innings (turns batting) for each team and no limit to the amount of overs (at-bats) in each innings, a Test match is only over when (a) 40 dismissals (outs) have been made or (b) the 5-day time period has run out.

(FYI, you can always tell if it’s a Test match if the players wear all white.)

Source

4. Limited overs cricket can be long, but it’s better than Test cricket

For the sake of time, there is also limited overs cricket. There are several varieties of limited overs cricket, but the most esteemed is the one-day international (ODI) format. In ODI cricket, each team gets only 1 innings (turn) on offense, which is limited to 50 overs (at-bats). Thus, unlike test cricket, an innings in ODI cricket can end in two ways. Either 10 of the 11 batsmen have been dismissed, or they have reached their allotment of 50 overs. In addition, ODI cricket places stricter limits on who can bowl, thus limiting the effect a top-notch bowler can have on a match. In ODI cricket, a bowler can bowl a maximum of 10 overs (at bats), meaning each team will have to use at least 5 different bowlers.

(In the video here, note the score display in the top left corner. It starts out at Over 49, meaning they have completed an even 49 of 50 overs. Then is goes to Over 49.1, Over 49.2, and so one, meaning 49 overs and X deliveries. When the counter reaches 49.5, that means Australia is only 1 delivery away from giving the opposing team their 50 overs.)

Source

3. Twenty20 cricket is the newest kind of cricket match, and the shortest

In Twenty20 cricket, each innings is only 20 overs, and those 20 must be taken within 75 minutes. Like all other forms of cricket, there is no limit to the amount of overs a batsman take take, but no bowler may bowl more than 4 overs. This means one stellar offensive player can dominate, making for a shorter, more explosive match. Cricket purists abhor this version of the sport; however, because it is easier for fans to take in a match under these rules, it is more profitable and has therefore become extremely popular.

Source

2. There are 2 basic types of bowlers

The two basic kinds of bowlers in cricket are the fast bowler and the spin bowler. You get the idea of what they do from their names: the fast bowlers specializes in throwing the ball really fast, while the spin bowler specializes in making the ball take crazy bounces (the ball can bounce twice before it either hits the wicket or is hit by the batsman). One way to measure the greatness of a bowler is to look at how many wickets he earned—that is, how many batsmen he dismissed by throwing the ball by him and knocking over the wickets. This stat is very much like the strikeout in baseball.

Source

1. Batting a “century” is a big deal for a cricket batsman

In cricket, you score runs by hitting the ball far. If you hit into the gap of the outfield but the ball stays in the field of play, you can easily score 2 or 3 runs by running between two wickets on the pitch 2 or 3 times. However, if you hit the ball such that is land in the playing field but eventually goes out of the playing field, that’s an automatic 4 runs. And if you hit the ball and it leaves the field all together, that’s an automatic 6 runs. This is called “hitting a six,” and it is obviously the equivalent of hitting a home run in baseball. The best offensive players in cricket can hit for many overs (at-bats) without being dismissed (making an out). If they hit for power, then they can achieve what is called a century—scoring 100 runs in a single match. Only once in the history of ODI cricket has a player hit a double century. This player was India’s Sachin Tendelkar. He is a cricket stud, and a superstar in India.

Source

That was evident during Sunday’s fourball action when the USA’s Jeff Overton used some nasty backspin to drop his second shot on the 8th hole into the cup for an eagle.  If you thought Tiger Woods’ fist pumps were emphatic, wait until you hear Overton’s “Boom Baby!”

Perhaps the only one more pumped-up than Overton was his partner, Bubba Watson.  However, I can’t help but wonder if such enthusiasm is ever really beneficial to one’s game on the golf course.  Apparently not, or at least not in this case as Overton and Watson would eventually fall to the European pairing of Peter Hanson and Miguel Angel Jiménez.

As for the rest of the American team, they would make things interesting, but in the end they just didn’t appear to have enough “boom”, “bang”, or anything else as they fell 14.5 to 13.5 to the Europeans.

So what happens when the driver of such a vehicle leaves his car in a non-designated parking space as he goes shopping for an Armani suit to wear to the gym?  He gets the boot.  Or, at least his car does.

You can not possibly feel bad for this guy.  In fact, you should probably envy him.  Is his car too good for the real parking spot?  Okay, so maybe it is.  But at least he will not have any problems paying the fine.

Hat Tip Pic – [Jalopnik]

Well that’s what Jeremy Tyler a 6-foot-11 junior out of San Diego High School has decided to do.  Tyler who is only 17 will become the first American born High School basketball player to leave school early and play professional basketball overseas.

“Nowadays people look to college for more off-the-court stuff versus being in the gym and getting better,” Tyler told the Times. “If you’re really focused on getting better, you go play pro somewhere. Pro guys will get you way better than playing against college guys.”

Even with an offer from the #1 ranked Louisville Cardinals and Rick Pitino (infamous white mobster suit), Tyler has decided to opt out of his verbal agreement and follow former High School grad Brandon Jennings for Europe.  Jennings after playing one season in Lottomatica Virtus Roma, is projected to be a high pick in this years NBA Draft.

Hopefully this is the right decision for Jeremy Tyler and he has a long and successful basketball career.

First Barry Melrose was fired by the Tampa Bay Lightning, then the Ottawa Senators redid themselves of Craig Hartsburg.  Michel Therrien was fired about a week ago by the struggling Pittsburgh Penguins, and now Tom Renney has completed the sweep.  All four coaches began the 08-09 regular season of the NHL overseas in Europe with the Pens facing the Sens and the Rangers squaring off for two against the Lightning.So who or what is to blame here?  Have all these teams simply suffered from a European hangover or are there other factors to be considered.  Here are some suggestions on each team:

Tampa Bay Lightning:  The Lightning are just plain bad.  They have superstars like Vincent Lecavalier and Martin St. Louis, but after that there is little to be optimistic about.  Their poor start should have been of little surprise and because of this the firing of Melrose could be somewhat questionable.  They finished near the bottom of the standings last year, hence first overall pick Steve Stamkos.  As for their big “Seen Stamkos?” promotion.  Well my answer to that would be no, but if you could tell me when he will start playing, I would love to watch.

Ottawa Senators: The Senators are a question mark in themselves.  Sometimes it seems as though they have a solid team, but in reality their problems go far deeper than the players and coaches.  Getting rid of players like Chara (instead of Redden), Redden (instead of Phillips), Corvo, Hossa and Havlat over the years has had detrimental effects on the once powerhouse club.  Hartsburg was definitely not the one to blame here.  Instead, fingers should be pointed at management who have failed to solidify what was once a top tier defense and a deep offense.  One thing that can be said though is that Cory Clouston has revitalized a sluggish team, but how long this will last is anyone’s guess.

Pittsburgh Penguins: The defending Eastern Conference champs have not met expectations this season, but when you really look at it, there are legitimate reasons.  The loss of Hossa, Malone and Roberts to free agency and Gonchar and others to injury have diminished the once deep team.  Crosby and Malkin appear to be in top flight, but the Penguins have little to offer after that and Fleury is looking like the same guy who scored in his net in the finals of the World Junior Championships.  Therrien may have taken the bullet, but he can only coach the players, not produce them.

New York Rangers:  An interesting story here.  Tom Renney had his Rangers sitting in a tie for 5th place and just 2 points out of the division lead, but I guess a loss to the Toronto Maple Leafs is good enough reason to let anyone go.  The Rangers have been struggling and find themselves falling fast, but the timing of such a coaching change is still questionable.  Don’t all teams hit a rough patch at some point?  As for the Euro hangover.  The Rangers started off the season in first in the division. No excuses there.

The Australian Football League (AFL) is a game that involves hands and feet, and provides a rough and physical product for spectators, much like American football.  In order to differentiate the two games, Australians often refer to the NFL as “grid-iron” and almost never refer to it as football.  This is similar to the way in which North Americans reserve the term football for the NFL and have nicely coined the phrase “soccer” to refer to that other game so to speak.

Nevertheless, this battle of terminology proves that sport is sometimes more than just a game.  In this case, football is a tradition, that in three respective continents has deep cultural roots that people are not willing to relinquish.  This pride is something that can be detected when traveling and speaking of foreign sports in other countries. One thing is certain, regardless of which football game you are most familiar with, they are all important traditional staples to their respective societies.

Buffalo @ New Jersey – 10,567
Columbus Blue @ New York – 10,184
Florida @ Atlanta – 10,584
Dallas @ Boston (On a Saturday) – 14,576
Chicago at Columbus (On a Saturday) – 14,680
Ottawa @ Florida – 13,567
Vancouver @ Los Angeles – 13,652
Anaheim @ Columbus – 10,494
Calgary @ Nashville – 12,042
Minnesota @ Florida – 12,106

Total Pro Sports – These are just a handful of games that have happened over the past couple weeks. As you will notice none of the home teams listed are from Canada. Canadians love the game of hockey so regardless of their teams record they sell out every game.

Looking at these numbers it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to notice that the NHL is struggling not only in a sinking economy but in markets that should not have an NHL team.

Is anybody tired of hearing Gary Bettman tell us all the NHL is fine and is not struggling to gain attendance, new fans and money? If he didn’t want us to know how bad of a state hockey is in the U.S maybe he shouldn’t publish attendance records on his site.

Over the past 6 weeks the Canadian dollar has been sinking, only making a recent surge. This has hurt Canadian teams, as they earn revenue in Canadian dollars and pay out player salaries, in US greenbacks.

We have heard over the past few years about rumblings of NHL expansion to places such as Winnipeg, Quebec City, Toronto and the Hamilton area. Each time these rumblings get discussed we hear that annoying commissioner of the NHL tell us why it wouldn’t work. Bettman has said in the past that Winnipeg doesn’t have an arena big enough ( Well they have a 15,000 plus arena and would sell out every night).

With the declining Canadian dollar it may be feasible for the NHL to lower the cap and maybe split TV revenue with all teams, like the NFL does. I think it is very important to expand back into Canada, Gary Bettman over the years has tried expanding into smaller US markets and it hasn’t worked. It’s time to move back to where the game started.

Ideas For The Future NHL

1. The NHL needs to be the first North American Sports League to expand to Europe. With the sagging World economy it will be tough move, but this is something that should be done within the next 5 years. The reasons are simple, why have a team in Nashville when you can have an arena full in Prague, Stockholm or Helsinki?

The Euro is stronger than the US dollar, so ticket prices could be less in order to ensure the NHL doesn’t price themselves out of the market. Players will complain that the travel is too much and that they don’t want to live in Europe. Expand enough teams to make a division there and have one trip made out to Europe per Year, perhaps shorten the season by 6 games, and when teams go over to Europe give them a few days off. For the European teams it will be even harder, as they will have to come to North America more often. So make their road trips long, put them in the eastern conference where they will have to travel 6-7 hours to get to, and have them have one big road trip where they play all the west coast teams at once. Players will complain until they see how much more money they would make, not to mention that many European owners of sports teams often pay the taxes for the players, hence why Jaromir Jagr is making such a ridiculous salary with Omsk.

2. The NHL needs to go back into Canada, with Winnipeg and Toronto being the first and maybe only two cities to come too. It’s obvious Toronto can support 2 NHL teams, and it needs to happen sooner rather than later. Small market teams in Canada and perhaps all Canadian teams considering how much Toronto pays in revenue sharing, should also be given the opportunity by the government to lower the land tax that they pay. At last check Montreal’s land taxes on the Bell Center were more than all the US teams combined and other Canadian teams were also paying a ridiculous amount. This is unacceptable. The NHL should bargain with the government. If you make it easier financially on Canadian teams we will pursue more NHL teams here, which will open up more employment, more excitement, etc, etc… Not to mention this would be a great public relations move by both the NHL and the Canadian government to Canadians.

3. The NHL should look at a Champions League type tournament. Now traditionalists will not like this idea, but with the expansion of the KHL, and the NHL’s need for publicity and forward advancement, nothing is better than this idea. People who follow soccer and specifically the Champions League will love this idea because the Champions league is possibly the greatest club sports tournament in the world. Basically the Champions League is a tournament of the best soccer clubs across Europe played to find out which club is the best in Europe. Many of you will say well the NHL is the best league; yes the winner may come from the NHL, but upsets happen and it’s more about exposure of the game than anything. Having the Hockey Champions league in Asia coukld help gain fans from that untapped market. Have the top 2-3 teams from all major sports leagues, including the AHL play each other in a tournament in September instead of a training camp. If this isn’t feasible, get international corporations to sponsor the idea, who will then offer big prize money to the winning owner and winning team. Players will be enthusiastic on the idea for monetary reasons and for pride and same goes with the owners. This idea has been brushed aside in the past but it should at least be given consideration.

4. The NHL needs to look outside the box on ways of giving it positive publicity the same way it looks outside the box on rule changes. The NHL recently moved the General Manager meetings to after the trade deadline. It use to happen a week before the trade deadline, and often was heavily attended by American media and got people interested in the game. The NHL should have moved the meetings to during the trade deadline. Not only would huge attention be put on this move, but it would garner huge positive publicity. Instead the NHL listened to old, out of date General Managers, who didn’t want the distraction of the media and therefore have moved it to a time when no one will care, shame on the NHL for that.

The way I see it, the NHL is being way to laisse faire concerning this attendance catastrophe and also the sagging economy, if any of the major sports leagues needs to be working extra right hard right now, it’s the NHL.

Stay tuned,
Ozel