WOOOOOOOOOO YEAAAAAAAAH

[CC97]

About 10 years back our local PPV company mistakingly broadcast some cricket championship for free... i took the opportunity to look up the rules and try to understand it -- i actually picked it up surprisingly quickly and enjoyed watching it... i did the same thing during the Rugby World Cup in 1995 (I think it was 95)

Great sports to watch once you understand what's going on!

[Fred T. Jane]

You know, had England actually had some backbone, and not declared in the second match, it would still be interesting. They had the Aussie bowlers on the ropes and let them off. Then after the Aussies showed they could score even easier, the English let wickets fall like leaves in the Fall. This was just a formality. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.

[DEAD!]

I think Canada are in it. They were in South Africa last time.

Yes, Canada qualified through the ICC Trophy qualifier. They did get a win against Bangladesh in 2003. I'm still getting acquainted with Test matches. I'm more familiar with one-day matches, which is what is used in the World Cup. I have also watched some highlights every Sunday.

[Alphabet Man]

You know, had England actually had some backbone, and not declared in the second match, it would still be interesting. They had the Aussie bowlers on the ropes and let them off. Then after the Aussies showed they could score even easier, the English let wickets fall like leaves in the Fall. This was just a formality. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.

That England second innings was just very very stupid batting.

Still a great win considering the night before it looked like England would bat through the day.

Yes, Canada qualified through the ICC Trophy qualifier. They did get a win against Bangladesh in 2003. I'm still getting acquainted with Test matches. I'm more familiar with one-day matches, which is what is used in the World Cup. I have also watched some highlights every Sunday.

Yeh their captain Davidson, (really is an Aussie) scored the quickest century ever in ODI's....It's in the Guiness world records book i have, not sure what year though.

Now we hold every trophy in world cricket....of the ones we can play in.

[DEAD!]

Yes, Canada qualified through the ICC Trophy qualifier. They did get a win against Bangladesh in 2003. I'm still getting acquainted with Test matches. I'm more familiar with one-day matches, which is what is used in the World Cup. I have also watched some highlights every Sunday.

Yeh their captain Davidson, (really is an Aussie) scored the quickest century ever in ODI's....It's in the Guiness world records book i have, not sure what year though.

Now we hold every trophy in world cricket....of the ones we can play in.

Davison had the quickest century in World Cup history in the 2003 world cup against the West Indies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Davison

[baseballking99]

"I smoke rocks."

lol awesome reference to chapelle

[Alphabet Man]

[HedleyLamarr]

I wonder how many shots the Aussies took from that trophy....

[Discrim]

Oh nah, we were hurt more about losing the Ashes last year. Anytime we beat the Poms, ya gotta enjoy it. We'll win the Soccer World Cup within 20years.

Hurry up USA and get a decent cricket team, so we can get a chance to beat ya's.

heh, at this rate the chances of our national footy team putting up a fight agaisnt Australia seem more realistic.

[Alphabet Man]

A couple of years back we played yas in a ODI, from memory it was raining down and the Aussies were at the hotel expecting them to call the game off, but had to rush over to beat the US side in about an hour or two. They made 60-odd all-out, and i think we lost one wicket along the way and won it in about 5 overs.

I think countries like the US, like Canadia, Holland, Kenya, Scotland those countries seem to be close to getting a berth at the WC each time, if they can get results at the WC, more consistant ODI matches will come and hopefully considerable developement. Kenya was close to gaining Test-playing status in 2003 after making the Semi's at the last WC (losing to Australia, eventually). If Kenya can replicate those performances, I think theyll get Test-status.

[rmered]

I wonder how many shots the Aussies took from that trophy....

The trophy comes from a death notice in an English newspaper.

In affectionate remembrance of English cricket which died at The Oval, 29th August, 1882. Deeply lamented by a large circle of sorrowing friends and acquaintances, RIP. NB The body will be cremated and the Ashes taken to Australia.

The next series the English promoted as winning back The Ashes.

So given the trophy is 124 years old, and full of ash, the answer to your question is "not many; though don't put it past them"

And just to prove it's still a gentleman's game, here's Javegal Srinath of India celebrating a maximum hit 6 runs off South African trash talker Andre Nel

[-Helix-]

*If your friend has an opinion, he/she can come here and post it themselves*

[Alphabet Man]

Haha, yeh, Nel is a wanker!

[Swiss]

Yeah, the Aussies beat those Brits!!! GO SOUTH!!!

[winters in buffalo]

Innings: Like Baseball, its a teams turn number to bat. A Test consists of 2 innings per team (unless the either team bowls the other out before they passed their score). Unlike Baseball, the whole team has to be dismissed before they swap over.

Overs: 90 of these a day. Every 6 balls is an over, bowled by the same bowler. At the end of these, the field swap ends and a different bowler bowls from the other end.

Batsmen: The 2 men at the crease whose job is to hit the ball and try make runs by running up and down the pitch, or hitting the ball over the boundary.

Bails: The two pieces of wood that sit on top of the stumps, a wicket (unless caught) is when the bails are dislodged from the stumps.

Bowler: The one who bowls the ball to the batsmen, trying to get to hit the stumps behind the batsman, or trying to to beat the batsman to get a dot ball.

My name is Dr Man. Thank you for listening to Alphy's Cricket School.

Nice effort... but DAMN, your explainations have more terms that need defining that the original ones.

[Fred T. Jane]

I think countries like the US, like Canadia, Holland, Kenya, Scotland those countries seem to be close to getting a berth at the WC each time, if they can get results at the WC, more consistant ODI matches will come and hopefully considerable developement. Kenya was close to gaining Test-playing status in 2003 after making the Semi's at the last WC (losing to Australia, eventually). If Kenya can replicate those performances, I think theyll get Test-status.

We're never going to get test status, as our national team consists solely of expats and immigrants, and the game is pretty much unheard outside of there. This isn't a knock against the team by any means, but it's just the facts. If there was more of a mainstream effort to get people playing cricket, I think you could get enough players to have an impact on the sport similar to the US' impact on international football.

When I was in college, I was going to the library on a Sunday afternoon after church, and saw a match on the old football field on campus. I went up and asked if I could play, and the players were shocked that an American even knew what cricket was, much less wanted to play with a gaggle of Pakistanis and Indians (You can guess how the teams were divided... ). I ended up joining the Indian side, and acquitted myself reasonably well, though after ripping off three fours in a row, I took a shot to the helmet by an unamused Pakistani bowler. I responded by ripping off a six before mistiming a shot and got bowled out. It was quite fun, and I was a member of the Cricket Club for 1.5 years, though since graduating I haven't been able to go back. However, in a nod to UL's significant South Asian student body, the new Intramural complex includes a regulation-size Cricket grounds. This is pretty cool, and has already been used for the annual, er, "Derby" between UL and LSU. The Cajuns rolled over the Tigers in the One Day, er, Intranational.

The old UL Cricket grounds, now the home to the new Computer Science Building.

http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&a...mp;t=k&om=1

The New Cricket Grounds (at the time of the photo, it was a work in progress by yours truly and my father)

http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&a...&iwloc=addr

[maz]

Well, I barely know what cricket is {I'm sure its an amazing sport} but congratulations nevertheless.

Afterall, a sport is a sport right?

[Alphabet Man]

I've definately got to get to a game whenever I go to Canada.

Afterall, a sport is a sport right?

A sport is a sport. Yes. No problems there.

---

Warnie has announced he'll retire after the Sydney Test and Ohh Ahh Glenn McGrath will retire after the World Cup.

Our side will change significantly over the next few years as Warnie, Ohh Ahh, Gilchrist, Hayden and Langer will staggerly retire. But nevermind England, we'll be at our peak for the next Ashes Series.

[Alphabet Man]

Group A		   Group B		   Group C			   Group D 

Australia		 Sri Lanka		 New Zealand		 Pakistan 
South Africa	  India			 England			 West Indies 
Scotland		  Bangladesh		Kenya			   Zimbabwe 
Netherlands	   Bermuda		   Canada			  Ireland

So the top 2 go through I think.

So thats:

Australia		 India			  New Zealand		West Indies
South Africa	  Sri Lanka		  England			Pakistan

Then they have a new format which i cannot work out.

But ranking those 8 final teams: AUS, RSA, IND, NZL, WI, SRL, ENG, PAK off the top of my head.

Final 4 would be: AUS, IND, NZL, RSA i would say ar the top 4 in the world.

Interesting if we get to the final we could end up playing our interstate rivals in New Zealand. South Africa shouldn't be underestimated though.

THe only upset i can see is Zimbabwe or Ireland in Group D, that looks to be the weakest group. Scotland and Holland are :censored:ed, no chance. Bermuda may get a win against Bangladesh. Kenya and Canada could have half a chance against England depending on how drained they are from being smashed by the Aussies 16 times in a summer (in Tests and One-Dayers) anda few more times by the Blackcaps.

[sc49erfan15]

Innings: Like Baseball, its a teams turn number to bat. A Test consists of 2 innings per team (unless the either team bowls the other out before they passed their score). Unlike Baseball, the whole team has to be dismissed before they swap over.

Overs: 90 of these a day. Every 6 balls is an over, bowled by the same bowler. At the end of these, the field swap ends and a different bowler bowls from the other end.

Batsmen: The 2 men at the crease whose job is to hit the ball and try make runs by running up and down the pitch, or hitting the ball over the boundary.

Bails: The two pieces of wood that sit on top of the stumps, a wicket (unless caught) is when the bails are dislodged from the stumps.

Bowler: The one who bowls the ball to the batsmen, trying to get to hit the stumps behind the batsman, or trying to to beat the batsman to get a dot ball.

My name is Dr Man. Thank you for listening to Alphy's Cricket School.

WAIT...I think I got it.

The bowler bowls the ball to the batsman, whose job is to hit the ball. If the batsman misses and the ball hits the stumps and dislodges a bail, he's dismissed. (Sort of like baseball...except you can get out on one strike?)

If the batsman hits the ball, he can run to the other end of the pitch (sort of like running straight to second base) to score a run, and can run as many times as he can back and forth to score more runs. But, if the ball is caught on the fly, he's out, and if the ball gets returned and the bails dislodged while he's still running, he's ran out? But if he stays and the ball is returned, the next batter bats, and you have to get all the batters out for the inning to be over.

Obviously, team with the most runs wins.

This might not be as confusing as I think...unless I completely missed something. Again, it would be much easier to see it in action.