Sivad wrote:You listen to MLB on the radio? I do that a lot, I love radio, it's a whole different perspective on the game.
Yeah, it's something that baseball and cricket have in common - radio might be the best way to take a game in (unless you're actually there). The BBC's Test Match Special
is a real national treasure.
As for the athleticism question - I'd say it's similar to a lot of American vs European sports. Baseball, like other American sports, is set up around explosive bursts of action. So a big hitter almost certainly has more strength and power than a cricket batsman does. Similarly the use of gloves increases the range over which fielders can defend, meaning they do a lot more sprinting, leaping and diving than your typical cricket fielder.
In contrast, test cricket, uniquely among professional sports, can last up to five days (with about 7-8 hours of play each day), so stamina is far more important. In the recent England vs India test, England's best fast bowler, James Anderson, bowled a total of 38 overs (228 balls) in the space of two-and-a-half days, with very little deterioration in speed or accuracy throughout. Even the best starting pitchers rarely go above 100 pitches in a game, and then they'll have four days to recover.
@Red_Army I'm a Devils fan! I live in Hoboken, so I'm pretty close to the Prudential Center. I went to a couple of Islanders games when I lived in Brooklyn, but found it all a bit depressing since they're so far from their natural home. The arena was barely more than a third full most of the time. And, there is simply no way I can afford to go to watch the Rangers, so I never really bothered with them. It's easier to win new fans with tickets that start at $20, than $90.
"Perhaps you want me to die of unrelieved boredom while you keep talking." - Martin Luther