recognizing records

So according to this article, a couple of Indian kids have broken the record for the highest partnership in any form of recorded cricket. In a school match, they put on 721 runs in just 40 overs.

My question is, why is this being reported as if it is actually a record? Is it comparable to Sangakkara and Jayawardene making 624 in an actual Test against South Africa this year? I mean, good for these kids, but this was a Hyderabad Under-13 school tournament.

Even Tendulkar and Kambli's 638-run stand in a 3-4 day game in a 16-17 year old all-India interschool tournament is a more valid record, although that too is overrated. Cricinfo's wording is priceless:

"The closest any Test batting duo came to going past the Tendulkar-Kambli record was when Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara added 624 for the third wicket against South Africa in Sri Lanka earlier this year. "

The closest they ever came?! Are you kidding me? 624 is pretty damn close to 638, and 624 in an actual test trumps 638 in a school tournament by about 500 miles. They shouldn't even be discussed in the same sentence.

Kambli, of course, remained unwilling "to buy the argument that school cricket makes for easy records."

So here's what I think. Tomorrow, there's a match in my studio apartment. All are welcome - boys, girls, infants, and seniors. The wall by the radiator is a six, and the tv stand is the wicket. If you hit the computer, you're out... Let's make some records!

bringing running to a standstill

As much as I love cricket, I think it's lame that it allows you to have "runners" and "subs" in the way that it does. If you get tired of batting, you can call someone to come and run for you; and if you get tired of standing in the field you can go inside and chill while some random dude fields in your place.

I have fervently castigated other sports, like American football and baseball, for breeding "specialist" athletes - e.g. a quarterback's entire role is to throw the ball when he is told, and a pitcher in the American league will never bat. I now realize that cricket is not dissimilar, because runners and subs rules allow a player to narrow his task down to swinging his bat or bowling his over without worrying about other aspects of the game.

If you get cramps from smacking a ball around all day, then maybe you need to toughen up and build your stamina. You are, after all, an athlete playing at the highest level of your game, so it's not too much to ask. If you can't perform ALL the tasks of batting or bowling (including running and fielding) then you shouldn't be allowed to bat or bowl. If you do call in a substitute, he should have to play for the rest of the match.

It's time cricketers got up off their asses and increased the level of athleticism in the game. This will make for more interesting viewing. Maybe then the rest of the world will actually start respecting the sport.

why so crabby?

Somebody has left the following comment on last Monday's post:

"this is a crab site there is no picz"

Needless to say, I am distraught at the quality of readers my site is attracting...

(It's okay if they're reading this - I deliberately used big words like 'distraught' and 'quality' so they wouldn't understand.)

staying up to date

So this is what shows up when you open up Netflix these days. I've blocked out my name, of course, but take a look at the two items they are asking me to "update" on my profile. And no, it's not like they don't have this information, you have to enter it when you sign up. They just want to keep their info up to date.....

epic tetus

I have just discovered that there was once a philosopher named "Epictetus." I wonder if he was as 'full-bosomed' as his name suggests...

if looks could kill

Fans will notice (if they are still reading) that billu.net has a new look! Big up to our friends at 4e44 for helping us out with this. Finally, an orange theme that works!