This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Palace Old Geezer Midhurst 15 Apr 21 12.55pm | |
---|---|
Ever since, in my junior school report, the only good thing they could find to say about me was "He would make a good cricketer" I have disliked the game intensely. But, reading the other day that some bright spark in the governing body had decided to modernise the terminology made my blood boil. Now, I'm not averse to change, I spent a large part of my working life making changes to improve results. But the reason for changing the terminology in cricket is to make a new competition,"The Hundred", attractive to newcomers and to expand it's fan base. The term 'wickets' is to be replaced by 'outs' and batsmen will be known as 'batters'. There are more, but you get the drift. Are folk really too daft to understand what a wicket is? No more sticky wickets - bonkers. Needless to say, my mind wandered to thoughts of how football terms could be changed to make our game more understandable. Goals could become 'ins' I suppose. But I thought there might be an opportunity for some creative thinking by livelier brains than mine, so what new terms would you suggest. Finally, if you've got the time and the inclination, this is an amusing piece on the subject by Henry Blofeld.
Dad and I watched games standing on the muddy slope of the Holmesdale Road end. He cheered and I rattled. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 15 Apr 21 1.35pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Palace Old Geezer
Ever since, in my junior school report, the only good thing they could find to say about me was "He would make a good cricketer" I have disliked the game intensely. But, reading the other day that some bright spark in the governing body had decided to modernise the terminology made my blood boil. Now, I'm not averse to change, I spent a large part of my working life making changes to improve results. But the reason for changing the terminology in cricket is to make a new competition,"The Hundred", attractive to newcomers and to expand it's fan base. The term 'wickets' is to be replaced by 'outs' and batsmen will be known as 'batters'. There are more, but you get the drift. Are folk really too daft to understand what a wicket is? No more sticky wickets - bonkers. Needless to say, my mind wandered to thoughts of how football terms could be changed to make our game more understandable. Goals could become 'ins' I suppose. But I thought there might be an opportunity for some creative thinking by livelier brains than mine, so what new terms would you suggest. Finally, if you've got the time and the inclination, this is an amusing piece on the subject by Henry Blofeld. Batters and outs are both baseball terms - if the (out)fielders start shagging flies it’ll add another dimension.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
becky over the moon 15 Apr 21 1.44pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Palace Old Geezer
Ever since, in my junior school report, the only good thing they could find to say about me was "He would make a good cricketer" I have disliked the game intensely. But, reading the other day that some bright spark in the governing body had decided to modernise the terminology made my blood boil. Now, I'm not averse to change, I spent a large part of my working life making changes to improve results. But the reason for changing the terminology in cricket is to make a new competition,"The Hundred", attractive to newcomers and to expand it's fan base. The term 'wickets' is to be replaced by 'outs' and batsmen will be known as 'batters'. There are more, but you get the drift. Are folk really too daft to understand what a wicket is? No more sticky wickets - bonkers. Needless to say, my mind wandered to thoughts of how football terms could be changed to make our game more understandable. Goals could become 'ins' I suppose. But I thought there might be an opportunity for some creative thinking by livelier brains than mine, so what new terms would you suggest. Finally, if you've got the time and the inclination, this is an amusing piece on the subject by Henry Blofeld. A Front = Offside That's a Leg = someone made a tackle That's an Ice = ditto sliding tackle Stop = goalkeeper made a save Decoy = dived
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
mezzer Main Stand, Block F, Row 20 seat 1... 15 Apr 21 1.56pm | |
---|---|
Reminds me a bit of a conference I went to where an American speaker mentioned people who were experiencing an ongoing negative lifecycle (dead). Anyway, I suppose a save could be an in rebuttal
Living down here does have some advantages. At least you can see them cry. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 15 Apr 21 2.04pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Palace Old Geezer
Ever since, in my junior school report, the only good thing they could find to say about me was "He would make a good cricketer" I have disliked the game intensely. But, reading the other day that some bright spark in the governing body had decided to modernise the terminology made my blood boil. Now, I'm not averse to change, I spent a large part of my working life making changes to improve results. But the reason for changing the terminology in cricket is to make a new competition,"The Hundred", attractive to newcomers and to expand it's fan base. The term 'wickets' is to be replaced by 'outs' and batsmen will be known as 'batters'. There are more, but you get the drift. Are folk really too daft to understand what a wicket is? No more sticky wickets - bonkers. Needless to say, my mind wandered to thoughts of how football terms could be changed to make our game more understandable. Goals could become 'ins' I suppose. But I thought there might be an opportunity for some creative thinking by livelier brains than mine, so what new terms would you suggest. Finally, if you've got the time and the inclination, this is an amusing piece on the subject by Henry Blofeld. What are they going to call ‘silly mid-off’?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lombardinho London 15 Apr 21 2.38pm | |
---|---|
The batsman's Holding, the bowler's Willey is to be normalised.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Cannonball High in the Ozarks. 15 Apr 21 3.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by becky
A Front = Offside That's a Leg = someone made a tackle That's an Ice = ditto sliding tackle Stop = goalkeeper made a save Decoy = dived Surely a dive should be known as a Salah.
Touch my coffee and I will slap you so hard even Google won't be able to find you. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Midlands Eagle 15 Apr 21 3.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Palace Old Geezer
But the reason for changing the terminology in cricket is to make a new competition,"The Hundred", attractive to newcomers and to expand it's fan base. The term 'wickets' is to be replaced by 'outs' and batsmen will be known as 'batters' "The Hundred" is supposed to be an attempt to attract younger people to cricket but I'm not sure that real cricket fans will take to it as it's franchise based and not county based. I wonder how many people would be willing to watch football if Palace, Charlton and Millwall were amalgamated and renamed South London which is effectively what will happen with The Hundred. Incidentally professional cricketers have always referred to batsmen as batters Edited by Midlands Eagle (15 Apr 2021 3.54pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Tom-the-eagle Croydon 15 Apr 21 5.00pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
"The Hundred" is supposed to be an attempt to attract younger people to cricket but I'm not sure that real cricket fans will take to it as it's franchise based and not county based. I wonder how many people would be willing to watch football if Palace, Charlton and Millwall were amalgamated and renamed South London which is effectively what will happen with The Hundred. Incidentally professional cricketers have always referred to batsmen as batters Edited by Midlands Eagle (15 Apr 2021 3.54pm) Whilst I don’t disagree, teams being amalgamated could possibly work as in Australia where State of Origin is huge.
"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Bexley Eagle Bexley Kent 15 Apr 21 5.19pm | |
---|---|
Just of the subject of the Hundred it is a competition concocted by marketing men so jealous of the IPL’s success they had to come up with something “revolutionary”. I am a cricket fan and this kind of bollox is not something I will give two hoots about. Change for changes sake. There are so many t20 (and even a t10) francises around the world the last thing we need is another one.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Tom-the-eagle Croydon 15 Apr 21 5.22pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Bexley Eagle
Just of the subject of the Hundred it is a competition concocted by marketing men so jealous of the IPL’s success they had to come up with something “revolutionary”. I am a cricket fan and this kind of bollox is not something I will give two hoots about. Change for changes sake. There are so many t20 (and even a t10) francises around the world the last thing we need is another one. In danger of being a poor mans IPL
"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
lush1076 leatherhead 15 Apr 21 7.46pm | |
---|---|
The Hundred sounds awful. I'm 36 and my favourite is, was and always will be test cricket.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.