TimbaLanD Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Australia South Africa Scotland Netherlands Sri Lanka India Bangladesh New Zealand England Kenya Canada Pakistan West Indies Zimbabwe Ireland
insane_alien Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 scotland, just cos i'm scottish. i don't actually bother with football though.
timo Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 What are you talking about? Some sort of sports? Which one? Cricket?
TimbaLanD Posted March 7, 2007 Author Posted March 7, 2007 Yes, cricket of course!! You guys are funny!!! )
GutZ Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 What? 2007? Either way Netherlands of course, there is no better team.
TimbaLanD Posted March 7, 2007 Author Posted March 7, 2007 What? 2007? Either way Netherlands of course, there is no better team. GutZ, you do realise we are talking about CRICKET here!
GutZ Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Cricket? Those crazy dutch bastards will win that too!
ecoli Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 the FIFA world cup is every four years, and considering the last one was 2006, I doubt they'd have one in 2007. Cricket, by the way, is a stupid sport, which doesn't hold a candle to baseball.
John Cuthber Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 What's a FIFA? "Cricket, by the way, is a stupid sport, which doesn't hold a candle to baseball." That's a point open to debate. I understand that baseball is a variation on rounders- a game that, here in the UK, kids grow out of when they leave primary school at about 10 years old. However, to be fair, it didn't derive from rounders, we invented baseball first, then rounders. For those unfamiliar with cricket, an explanation the rules can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_towel_explanation_of_cricket So far as I am aware, there is no explanation of baseball.
Phi for All Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 So far as I am aware, there is no explanation of baseball.Baseball is a game where the best outcome is that your opponents never hit the ball. Spectators enjoy the game because this never happens.
Sisyphus Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Groucho Marx, two hours into watching a cricket match: "Boy, this looks exciting! When does it start?"
timo Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 What's a FIFA? The organization that organizes the FIFA world cup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifa
Heretic Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Baseball is a game where the best outcome is that your opponents never hit the ball. Spectators enjoy the game because this never happens. Actually there are a number of recorded "no-hitters".
Pangloss Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Baseball is a game where the best outcome is that your opponents never hit the ball. Spectators enjoy the game because this never happens. Classic! (BTW Heretic, the fact that it's not technically true is beside the point. Baseball punditry is a deliberately inexact science, and a whole, unique area of American comedy.)
Phi for All Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Actually there are a number of recorded "no-hitters".On both sides? Ninety years ago there was supposedly a double no-hitter but I believe that was overthrown.
Sisyphus Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 It's impossible to have a double no-hitter because the game couldn't end. If there has ever been a double no-hitter, then that game is still technically in progress.
Pangloss Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Actually that's not correct. A run may be scored via error or walk, preserving the "no hitter". 27 batters up and down is called a "perfect game". There've only been a handful of those, whereas you see no-hitters once or twice a season (though sometimes less).
Phi for All Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 It's impossible to have a double no-hitter because the game couldn't end. If there has ever been a double no-hitter, then that game is still technically in progress.There you go, it never happens. I just think it's weird that if a baseball team had an uber-version of Nolan Ryan who could throw no-hitters in half the games of the season, attendance at the stadium would probably drop due to sheer boredom. One of the few instances in professional sports where if you perform perfectly most people would be yawning. Can you imagine watching a game where one run is scored early on and the rest of the game is a battle between pitchers with no more hits? At least I'd get to leave earlier than I planned. Oh, btw, I'd bother to watch the World Cup if they were playing Brockian Ultra-Cricket.
Pangloss Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 So... is the general consensus that this thread was made in error under the mistaken belief that there would be a World Cup Soccer tournament this year? Not to try to embarass the OP or anything, but I'm wondering if maybe we should strip out the poll and rename the thread just to avoid embarassment. (You know, other forums might point and laugh!) ;-)
Phi for All Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 So... is the general consensus that this thread was made in error under the mistaken belief that there would be a World Cup Soccer tournament this year? Not to try to embarass the OP or anything, but I'm wondering if maybe we should strip out the poll and rename the thread just to avoid embarassment. (You know, other forums might point and laugh!) ;-) They're definitely talking cricket. There is an ICC World Cup this year (could be every year, don't know, don't care). I blame ecoli for mentioning FIFA. I blame him for global warming and long lines at the supermarket too, but that would be off-topic.
Pangloss Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. Instead y'all can just point at me and laugh.
Tetrahedrite Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 So... is the general consensus that this thread was made in error under the mistaken belief that there would be a World Cup Soccer tournament this year? Not to try to embarass the OP or anything, but I'm wondering if maybe we should strip out the poll and rename the thread just to avoid embarassment. (You know, other forums might point and laugh!) ;-) No... the OP knew exactly what he was talking about, it is the rest of you who don't have a clue!!! As for the question, I have no doubt that Australia will win, that little hiccup with the Poms and the Kiwis will not be repeated when we have a full strength team. Furthermore, baseball doesn't even compare with cricket.
Phi for All Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 I have no doubt that Australia will win, that little hiccup with the Poms and the Kiwis will not be repeated when we have a full strength team. Furthermore, baseball doesn't even compare with cricket.In a Blue Mountains match, the batsman Tetrahedrite was out first ball. "Not like last week," said the wicket-keeper. "No," said Tetrahedrite. "Last week I stayed in and got forty and when I got back all the beer was gone!" When John Cuthber's wife was expecting, he rang the hospital to see how his wife was getting on. By mistake he dialed the number for Lord's Cricket Ground. "How's it going?" he asked. "Fine," came the answer, "We've got two out already and hope to have the rest out before lunch. The last one was a duck!"
ffsjoe Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 No... the OP knew exactly what he was talking about, it is the rest of you who don't have a clue!!! As for the question, I have no doubt that Australia will win, that little hiccup with the Poms and the Kiwis will not be repeated when we have a full strength team. Furthermore, baseball doesn't even compare with cricket. here here, couldnt agree more. Australia FTW!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now