MLB players vs World class cricketers

hmmmm...... wrote:

And okay, North America (only some countries), South America (again only some countries), and Japan play baseball but cricket is played across the world including Africa, Asia, Oceania, North America.

Canada, USA, Mexico, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Puerto Rico (in fact, most of the Caribbean islands), Venezuela, Taiwan, Japan, Australia, Panama, Philippenes, South Korea have all had significant presence in MLB, Little League World Series, Olympic Games, or a combination of the three. Additionally, all countries in South and Central America (excepting Surinam and Guinea), and the majority of countries in SE Asia and Pacific play Little League baseball.

What's a better first name?

Jiminy (Cricket)

or

Jimmer (Fredette)

those are nothing compared to ozzie smith's barehanded diving stop.

The catches in baseball are far better. Occur far more often.

Cricketers are not as good of athletes as baseball players. This is not debatable.

the top cricket players do get paid quite a bit.

the new Indian Premier League, which features a shortened version of the game, is becoming quite popular. Players from all over the world, not just India, can play, and they are rewarded quite handsomely.

in that video about what is harder to hit, cricket or baseball, it is so flawed.

for starters, the cricket bowler is supposed to run at full speed, then bowl the ball. in the video, the guy takes like 1-2 jog steps.

also, it is easier to make CONTACT with a cricket ball. that does not make it easier.

the baseballer in the video, he is making contact, but driving everything into the air. in cricket, that will cause you to get OUT. you have to hit the ball on the ground in cricket.

i'm american, grew up playing baseball. went to india, tried to bat at cricket for a bit. you can make contact, but the ball has a tendency to go straight into the air if you're used to baseball.

the best mlb players, had they been born in india, would be good cricket players. the best cricket players, had they been born in the dominican republic, would be good baseball players. it takes a long time to learn the batting skills of either sport.

in baseball, we are amazed when someone makes a barehanded play. in cricket, all catches are barehanded.

there are no out-of-shape cricketers.

Of course, to make it to the top level in either sport requires a lot of talent and application.

Cricket's a tough game to master, especially when you consider this:

The three main skills are batting, bowling and fielding. Everyone on the team is expected to be able to field well: saving runs, taking catches (no gloves here) throwing down the stumps.

Everyone on the team is expected to bat. Even the team's best bowler is usually called upon to bat, and is often the source of the winning runs. Imagine a baseball team's starting pitcher needing to also star at bat.

And amongst the batsmen, it's pretty standard for them to be able to be decent part-time bowlers... which is a bit like being a relief pitcher.

So in cricket, you need to master at least two skills, and many players have a good mastery of three skills. That's tough.

Oh, and if you're batting in cricket and you get hit in the head or the chest or the nuts with a rock-hard ball travelling at 100 miles per hour, you don't get to take a walk to first base. You get to face up again, like a man.

I think the top Japanese would convert to cricket comfortably, not so sure about the MLB guys, it's a thinking man's game...don't have a coach out there telling them what the bowler is about to bowl and telling the dumb asses when to run. Ichiro Suzuki would be a freak cricketer, not exactly a newsflash to suggest his skills could be transferred to most sports though.

Most top batsmen in cricket, particularly the 'eye' batsmen would convert well to baseball. Current players that come to mind, Ricky Ponting, Virendar Sehwag, Kieran Pollard, Kevin Pietersen, Johnathon Trott, David Warner, Chris Gayle, Kumar Sangakkara.

I'd love to see the greatest ever field hockey player Jamie Dwyer try either cricket or baseball, he has an amazing eye, great footwork and faaaaast hands.

It's a disgrace that anyone excluding the catcher is permitted to wear a glove, really makes it hard to justify my love of the sport to anyone outside of traditional baseball nations.

Baseball players are not as good of athletics as cricketers. THIS is not debatable.

Oh, and cricket players make barehanded diving stops EVERY game. It's nothing special like it is in baseball.

I'm an American and I speak American and I under the rules of baseball. I have a little understanding of cricket but not much. Anyways:

does anybody remember when the Pirates signed two guys from India to be pitchers? I think one used to throw the javelin but the other played cricket. Obviously these weren't world class cricket players but I don't think they made it out of single A baseball.

But the Pirates are pretty smart for trying to tap into Indian talent pool.

OzRunner wrote:

Oh, and if you're batting in cricket and you get hit in the head or the chest or the nuts with a rock-hard ball travelling at 100 miles per hour, you don't get to take a walk to first base. You get to face up again, like a man.

Haha, that's a good point.

It's funny the way it's completely the opposite than baseball. The bowler is actually trying to hit the bowler on the head (or at least make him nervous), but when he actually does, they're always the first person to show concern.

That particular delivery (ignoring the injury) is seen as excellent bowling in cricket. It's the 'perfect' bouncer.

Playing cricket won't get you laid in America.

[quote]baseballsBACKinTHEcapitalCITY wrote:

3)The better athletes self-select into baseball because thats where the money is at, and if the cricketers had the skill to, they would play MLB and make millions. This is also the reason that the MLB players choose to stay in that league instead of picking up cricket.

quote]

Typical Funking Stinking Hot day here in Bombay.

The reason all these cricketers who have the skill to go play in MLB is not because they can't, it is because for all intent and purposes baseball does not exsist is traditional cricket playing countries and they find it to be a stupid, boring game.

Soonhellhaveascar wrote:

baseball does not exsist is traditional cricket playing countries and they find it to be a stupid, boring game.

Just what we Mericans think about cricket.

David -- Get off of letsrun and lets run.

TOP NOTCH ATHLETES

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets/670387/bermuda.650.jpg

Fred Simmons wrote:

I'm an American and I speak American and I under the rules of baseball. I have a little understanding of cricket but not much. Anyways:

does anybody remember when the Pirates signed two guys from India to be pitchers? I think one used to throw the javelin but the other played cricket. Obviously these weren't world class cricket players but I don't think they made it out of single A baseball.

But the Pirates are pretty smart for trying to tap into Indian talent pool.

Not really, as India is the home of the spin bowler, who delivers the ball slowly and relies on it changing direction as it bounces.

It is funny though because right now out of India's main group of bowlers, really Harbhajan and I guess Yuvraj are the only spinners (good ones at that though). But it's true that Nehra, Zaheer Khan, and Munaf don't bowl at the speed of Akhtar, Malinga, Lee, etc.

The guy who started this thread recognised that he might be affected by cultural bias, and I think it's safe to say that he has. I probably am as well, although I'm trying not to be.

Firstly, you have to be fit to play cricket. I've watched some baseball - I usually get bored long before the end of a game - and there is no discernible difference between the athleticism of the players. In fact you do get some rather chubby baseball players - but these days you rarely see a fat cricketer at top level.

It's a fact that the ball is "in play" far more in cricket than in baseball. About four balls in six are hit and so fielders and batsmen run a lot more often and eventually further than they do in baseball. Also the bowler in cricket, especially the fast bowlers, bowl on the run rather than standing still like a baseball pitcher.

As for skill, there is definitely more in cricket. The cricket batsman has to play almost every ball and there is no restricted area that the bowler has to bowl to so the ball can be to the left or right of the batsman and at any height from on the ground to slightly above his head. The ball can also be straight at the batsman, and deliberately at his head - that isn't a foul, it's a legitimate tactic - and so the batsman has to be brave. Also, because there are no "foul" lines in cricket and the batsman can score 360 degrees, there are far more different shots a cricket batsman needs to be able to play than there are in baseball. In cricket as well, the ball not only moves in the air, it also often changes direction when it bounces off the ground, whereas in baseball the ball only moves through the air.

Catching in cricket is also significantly more difficult (and more spectacular) than in baseball. There are no gloves, the ball is harder and heavier than a baseball and some of the fielders are very close to the bat and so have to have super-fast reactions to take catches. Also dismissals (outs) in cricket are rarer and more important than in baseball, so fielders will do anything to take a catch - whereas baseball fielders are more concerned about stopping runs.

Finally bowling; there are four completely different styles of bowling in cricket and within each style the bowler needs to be able to bowl several different types of ball; so overall the variation of balls ("pitches") that a cricket batsman might face is much greater than in baseball. Also, though generally not as fast as baseball pitches, genuine fast bowlers in cricket are still bowling around 100 mph, sometimes over, and often bowling directly at the batsman, even at his head, because, as I've mentioned above, intimidation is a legitimate tactic in cricket as long as it's not overdone.

To end with, back to cultural differences. To someone raised on cricket, nothing much seems to happen in baseball a lot of the time. The batter hardly ever hits the ball; when he does the crowd get wildly excited even when the hit is nothing special; outs happen every few pitches and are for the most part completely unspectacular; the only remotely spectacular thing is a home run hit - even then, to our untrained eyes, must hits just look like lucky swings. All this because the pitcher/batter balance is weighted hugely towards the pitcher.

In cricket something happens almost every bowl. The batsman can't just leave the ball (or not as often). Scoring is far more frequent and just as spectacular. The bowler/batsman balance is much more even - it's actually difficult to get a batsman out, and so dismissals (outs) are rarer, often spectacular, and therefore much more exciting than in baseball.

I think the bottom line is that generally to appreciate a game you have to have played it. If Americans played cricket, I'm sure they would love it as it's a great game to play; similarly, if we played baseball we would probably enjoy it too and appreciate what we are watching on those rare occasions that we can be bothered to watch it.

Need to weigh in here...just came across site!

A cricket ball is heavier and harder ( denser) than a baseball and 10 of 11 fielders do not wear gloves. Fielders can stand very close to bat at times,so catches can be very close or mid field or outfield ( in bball terms). 99% of the time bball catches are with gloves,99% of times cricket catches are without gloves. Baseball players make great catches with their gloves and cricket players make great catches without gloves! Watch enough of both games and the answer will become obvious which is harder,or better yet have someone let you take the catches and you will soon find out! I've played and followed both games for decades.

Athletes--- I have seen only one top class overweight cricket player in years ( and his pic is posted somewhere on this site...go figure, he represented the Bahamas years ago and is not a ' major league' player) ..I see overweight baseball players almost every game. So what! I see overweight weightlifters,wrestlers,shot putters,etc. But the comment that cricketers are not as good athletes as baseball players is just plain wrong...if anything it is the other way around.