Talk:History of cricket
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is this page really necessary, much of the history is covered in Test cricket and I think ODI stuff is also covered on its own page. Lisiate 00:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
- I'd say that history material from the Test and ODI pages should be consolidated and moved here. It forms a more coherent story together. This is also a place for the origins of cricket, which was a bit out of place in the main article. The structure of the cricket articles is a bit haphazard and I think some consolidation of subtopics is a good idea. How about I move all the history stuff here and then see how it looks? dmmaus 01:25, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
- I've done the consolidation and added a significant amount of new material (codification of rules, rise of one-day cricket, World Cup, banning of South Africa). There's heaps more to add too. dmmaus 03:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
-
- Excellent - well done. Much more coherent. The cricket articles really do need thinking about - after a little work on fielder yesterday, I found Fielding positions in cricket today :-/ -- ALoan 10:01, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Underarm dating
The text implies only underarm bowling existed prior to 1864. Can I challenge that? There are several John Leech cartoons in the 1850s complaining about the advent of "round arm" bowling (that it was so much faster) so if the rules changed in 1864 they must have trailed practice in games by at least a decade. --BozMo|talk 23:00, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC) see e.g. 1854 Punch Sketch
- You're right - the rules did trail practice. Just as some bowlers today challenge umpires, so they did in the 1850s and 1860s (throwing was also a big problem then too!). Sometimes the bowlers got no-balled for breaking the rules, often they did not. jguk 10:27, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
The change in 1864 came after Wilsher, the most notable and prevalent of the illegal overarm bowlers, was no-balled six times in a match. Finally the MCC had to give way to practice! jguk 19:14, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Illegality of cricket?
I have removed the reference to cricket being illegal from Cromwell's day up to a 1748 decision by the Court of the King's Bench. I have just started reading A Social History of English Cricket by Derek Birley - and even though I'm only up to the 3rd chapter, I'd heartily recommend it - It was the William Hill Sports Book of the Year in 1999. It doesn't refer to cricket being illegal at all, and the only reference to a 1748 court case I've seen so far is to a magistrate's decision. I have amended the article in line with this, jguk 19:20, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] India Debut...
"Finally, England matched up against one of its own colonies, India, on June 23, 1932, at Lord's." Is this necessary? Surely the West Indies were one of England's colonies (or indeed a collection of) and arguably Australia, Sth Africa, NZ et al;although Dominions in a legal sense, were colonies where cricket had taken root. Seems slightly misleading.
-
- agree with that. They were all colonies.
[edit] Origins of cricket
I thought that there was a specific town in Hampshire, England that was called the home of cricket and where an old form of the game is still (once a year) played. It differs from modern cricket in that there are 12 players, they use curved sticks similar to hockey sticks and bowl underarm. I am surprised to see that there is no reference to this in the article. Also there is no reference to 'Bat and Trap' which is an old pub game with a more than passing resemblance to cricket still played in parts of Kent. I think there is an article on this sport on Wiki already.GordyB 10:17, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- You'll be thinking of the village of Hambledon. Some aristocratic bigwigs started a club 2 miles away from the village. It lost its dominance after its key members joined the MCC (around 1787, when Lord's was founded). I'm not sure about this "old form of the game". The original Hambledon Club died centuries ago - although some have recently restarted it, jguk 18:31, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Missing Text...
Ummmm, why are there 2 subject titles under 'Controversies' that have no text under them at all? I was gonna delete on the spot, but this just seemed too strange to have no reasoning behind it.
[edit] Cricket and the USA
I had read that cricket was more popular than baseball in the USA up until the civil war. Can anyone add to that?
- I don't know about that, but here's an interesting article with heaps of information on early USA and Canadian cricket and tours if anyone's interested. -- Ian ≡ talk 08:41, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Pro-Cricket Reference Under 'The Future' Sub-Heading Needs Updating
I must add that under 'The Future' sub-heading it mentions that the Pro-Cricket league started in the US in 2004, but obviously that needs updating because not long after the Pro Cricket League being established it folded/ended for good after only 1 season. I generally don't follow cricket happenings in the US though, and don't live in the US, so I can't give much further detail unfourtunately.
