Is this quote true? Not the mystery part, the rain part.
“Why it was the British who invented cricket, the only game that cannot be played in the rain, remains one of history’s great mysteries.”
I was browsing through Amazon.com’s Look Inside! feature, reading the first pages of Empires and Barbarians: The Fall of Rome and the Birth of Europe by Peter Heather, when I ran into that quote.
Is it true that cricket can’t be played in the rain? Is it because of some part of the game mechanics, because the equipment can be damaged by rain, or is it part of the rules, written or unwritten.
Well tennis can’t be played in the rain either for pretty much the same reason: to play the game properly the playing surface has to produce a reasonably even bounce which is not possible if it becomes seriously wet.
Also, a cricket ball becomes slippery when wet, and the players’ footing is uncertain, and the pitch is likely to cut up in short order. The last of these used to be a big factor back in the day, because play could resume as soon as it was possible to stand up, and a rain-damaged pitch could be unplayable.
A Test series was once decided by the weather. In 1936-37, an unfancied England (ok, MCC) team were two up in a five-match series, and running through the Australian batting in the third. Then the rain came down and Australia’s total of 180-odd suddenly looked formidable instead of lame. They reached 200, then declared so that England had to bat on a horrible pitch. England lost seven for 30-odd or something like it, then declared in their turn to at least make something of the situation; but Bradman cleverly reversed his batting order so that England could only pick up a couple of useless tail-enders before play ended for the day. Next morning was dry and warm, the pitch cleaned up a treat, and Bradman obliged with a huge score. The weather also helped in the last two matches, to a lesser extent, and Bradman was seriously in the groove (he was a matchwinner when he was in form, which he usually was), and Australia turned the series round.
Cricket is not played in continual rain/hail/snow
Cricket is not played when the light is inadequate
Cricket is not played when the ground conditions are
Cricket is not played during electrical storms
If the rain is a light shower that’s then it play on.
As to the “only” bit, I presume that if the basketball court was outside you wouldn’t play if raining. Netball is the same. Lawn bowls and croquet are subject to nearly identical playing conditions to cricket. As indicated tennis isn’t played during rain.
And cricket, tennis, bowls and crocquet all originated as English summer sports.
The significant difference here between baseball and cricket is that the cricket bowler bounces the ball on the pitch before it reaches the batsman. A damp pitch would significantly affect the behaviour of the ball.
Thank you, all. That makes much more sense. He was overstating.
Now I don’t know if I want to put his book on my wishlist. Of course, he could be more careful with his history facts than with this sports comment, which was obviously an aside. Still.
Prior to pitches being covered, most Test series were affected by weather to some degree, sometimes critically.
The Brisbane Test 1950 was one of the most effected games when following a storm the pitch went from a good batting pitch to a near unplayable “sticky”. Chasing a moderate total 228 England Captain Freddie Brown were batting at the time. They declared at 7 for 68 to get the Australians in under the conditions. Australian captain, Lindsay Hassett, despite reshuffling his batting then followed up declared his team’s second innings closed on 7 for 32. With batting conditions improving England failed to chase down the total, though at times it looked like an English win was on.
The ball doesn’t have to bounce before it reaches the batsman, a non-bouncing delivery is called a full toss and usually considered an error by the bowler as they are considerably easier for the batsman to hit. However a full toss is a no-ball if it reaches the batsman above his waist.
Similarly a ball that bounces twice or more before reaching the batsman is also a no-ball.
One of the key skills of bowling well is the ability to control the length of the delivery (ie. where the ball bounces) to suit the conditions, the ability of the batsman and the field settings.
A yorker is a delivery that bounces at the batsman’s feet - quite difficult to play effectively. However this requires very good control on the bowler’s part as an attempted yorker can either become a rank full-toss or a half volley (if too long or short respectively) and easily scored off by the batsman.
In fact it was generally noteworthy when a side batting on a rain-affected pitch didn’t collect a good hiding. This guy and his famous partner dealt with two especially notable situations, one of which was
Rule 24.6 i) A ball may not bounce more than twice.
Cricket Bat:
(a) The overall length of the bat, when the lower portion of the handle is inserted, shall not be more than 38 in/96.5 cm.
(b) The width of the bat shall not exceed 4.25 in/10.8 cm at its widest part.
Baseball Bat:
with the thickest part of the bat being 2.75 inches and the length no more than 42 inches
Interesting question over which one looks more like a paddle!
