Talk:Glossary of cricket terms/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Links

Please see discussion at User talk:ALoan/Archive#Cricket terminology.

Is it useful to have each item listed in Cricket terminology linked to another page? Quite a few don't exist but probably should - for example, carry the bat, county cricket, wide (cricket). Others are less likely to need a main page - such as bowled, caught (cricket).

I also deliberately broke Wiki-style, linking many terms more than once (such as batsman, bowler). Is this useful? -- ALoan 10:39, 17 May 2004 (UTC) [forgot to sign first time]

I agree with User:Bob Palin actually. I think several of these terms don't require more than a single line of explanation, and linking to a page that nobody will bother writing (or if they do, will consist of one sentence) is not useful. I don't think carry the bat needs a page, for example, but I agree county cricket and wide (cricket) could use one - so those links can remain.
Oh, and referring to your comment on your user page about four (cricket) - I created that page just a few days ago. :-) dmmaus 02:39, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
Fine - have stripped out extra links. -- ALoan 16:02, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

New page

Given the proliferation of cricket articles being worked on, I'm thinking it might be an idea to create a new List of cricket topics page, with links to all of them, organised by general subject matter. Then when anyone creates a new cricket page they can link to it there and the rest of us can see it immediately just by watching that page. For example:

General: Cricket (sport), History of cricket, Cricket statistics, etc

Batting: Batting (cricket), Batsman, etc

Bowling: Bowling (cricket), Bowler (cricket), Googly, etc

Lists: List of cricketers, List of Test cricket grounds, etc

(But formatted more nicely.) What do you think? dmmaus 22:39, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

Yes - do it! In an attempt to fill some of the red links, I have recently added Duckworth-Lewis method, County cricket, List A cricket and Club cricket -- ALoan 23:41, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
Done. Please add any other articles you know about! dmmaus 01:16, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Cheers!

splendid workPedant

Strange formatting

Does anyone have any idea why (at least in my browsers -- Netscape 7.1/IE6 on Win2K) the first 2 entries under 'F' are in bold? It must be something obvious, like an extraneous single quote, but if it is I can't find it. --Lancevortex 16:02, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Italicised text in entries

What is the general opinion on italicising words in the definitions that are themselves defined in the article? I have to confess it was me that introduced this to the article, for what I think are sound reasons, but I always feel when I'm reading the definitions that it makes them sound a bit odd in my head -- I'm always emphasising the italicised words. I'd be interested to hear what others think. --Lancevortex 16:08, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not keen on the italics. I'd vote to remove them. --dmmaus 08:52, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I'm not keen on the italics, but I think it's marginally better that putting (qv) after everything. Any alternatives? Bold or underlined seems altogether too much...

Style edit

I've just completed a big edit to make the article more consistent, especially in style. In particular, with a couple of exceptions, all the entries start with a lowercase letter and end with a full stop, and the first sentence of each definition is (approximately) the same part of speech (noun, etc.) as the term itself.

The exceptions are 'twelfth man', which I couldn't turn into a noun satisfactorily as it is rather complex (maybe a separate article is warranted?), and a few terms which needed rewriting by someone more familiar with the term than me. The latter includes at least "Placement" and "(Taking) Guard" but probably some others as well (sorry, I didn't note down which ones).

I also added 'extra' and 'sundry' and edited a few others to reflect this, and added a bit to other entries where I felt it would be useful.

--Hairy Dude 07:25, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, looks like I timed out. The edit at 07:19, 25 July 2005 should be attributed to me. --Hairy Dude 07:27, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, that happens at times. Thanks anyway, good job! Sam Vimes 07:48, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Doodlebug

At Doodlebug#Cricket there's a reference to this term and Max Walker. Has anyone heard this before? -- —Moondyne 13:03, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Never heard of it: I'd call a head-high full-toss a beamer. It could come from his book, Hooked on Cricket [1]. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:14, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Minor point

Just on the formatting for terms with more than one definition - are numerical lists the norm on here? To me i), ii), iii) etc seems more natural, or perhaps 1), 2), 3). I won't edit if you all think not. Alecto 02:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

It just uses the Wiki built-in numbered list (with # at the beginning of each line in the markup), so I guess it's standard. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, fair enough. I might email them about that though, it bothers me for no real reason...Alecto 04:57, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I found a Cricinfo page on cricket terminology

here When I get the time, I will make sure the Wiki page has all the terms and more than the Cricinfo page, which looks quite good at first glance. GizzaChat © 05:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 08:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Mr X

I can't believe there isn't a mention of Mr Xavier Tras on this page, or the page relevant to this gentleman. I'm no cricket expert, but I would have thought this important gentleman would be mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia, especially where his sterling efforts on the cricket field are mentioned. Shame! I almost feel like adding him myself, but this page in particular seems quite intricate, as well as sourced, so I don't want to dilute it. Any takers in the cricket community want to add him? 172.143.44.20 15:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)(Stevebritgimp not signed in)

Having signed in, have done this, plus putting links to and from Extra (cricket). A quick google for Xavier Tras brought up 3 results that were relevant - all in Australia - so I don't know if this is a specifically Australian idea in origin. Stevebritgimp 16:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

All-round spin

"a player who can bowl both wrist spin and finger spin adeptly." In almost fifty years of following cricket, I don't recall ever before encountering this term. I was tempted to delete the entry, but is it perhaps in common usage in some country other than England (where I live)? JH (talk page) 18:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Not in the subcontinent. Tintin 11:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I have not heard the term used in Australia. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Bowling off the wrong foot

The current definition of wrong foot is rather opaque. Perhaps the following definition would be better?Abeer.ag (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

A vast majority of bowlers release the ball off their front foot. Bowling off the wrong foot is bowling off your back foot, or releasing the ball before your front foot lands.

Handled the ball

I don't see it in the list... could also be "handling the ball". There is a wikipedia article for it.76.110.165.21 (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong foot

I always thought that bowling off the wrong foot was releasing the ball when the front foot was the same side as the release arm.76.110.165.21 (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Draw shot

I always thought that the draw shot directed the ball between the batsman's back leg and the wicket, not between his left leg and his right leg!! The action to execute such a shot is a "glance" with a slight pulling action (draw) from the off side to the leg side.76.110.165.21 (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Can't we have newest comments at top?

76.110.165.21 (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No, newest comments at bottom is standard practice across Wikipedia, and to adopt a different convention for this page would generate confusion. DuncanHill (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Can "paceman" be wikilinked to "pace bowling"?

  • Can "paceman" be wikilinked to "pace bowling"? Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 01:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Backing up

Was this rule changed recently? I seem to remember hearing something about the way the bowler had to break the wicket? 83.104.27.217 (talk) 10:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Which particular rule(s) do you mean, 217?--Shirt58 (talk) 11:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Out/dismissed

Can someone please add text which explains what "out" means? Currently it's just a circle reference, "out means being dismissed", "a dismissed batsman is out"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.232.230 (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Spell

According to the article: 

Spell 
1. the number of continuous overs a bowler bowls before being relieved.
2. the total number of overs that a bowler bowls in an innings.

I have never heard of the second meaning. Is there any evidence of someone using "spell" to mean a bowler's whole innings performances? Also, I'd have thought the term refers to more than just the simple number of overs - it encompasses all aspects of the bowler's performance during that period of overs.

SteveRwanda (talk) 10:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

thick edge

I cannot see "thick edge" on this page, but I may have missed it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.6.2 (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Useless "citations needed"?

Do we really need citations for definitions for terms like bowler and bowled out? I'm new to wikipedia and was unable to remove them so if someone could tell me how to do that, I'd appreciate it. 119.152.73.74 (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Important! It may be mistake.

About "supersub" explanation: It's clearly written in the article about Vikram Solanki that he did 53* in his historical supersub appearance but here in the glosary it states that he didn't get to bat as Enlgand lost just one wicket in the chase (in biography article it's written that Enlgand had batting collapse). Well.. What's right then?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.112.254.167 (talk) 18:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

chasing down Australia's target

...means what? Ling.Nut (talk) 13:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

That means "England was batting last with a target score. And they were batting and scoring last. They would do that as long as they reach target or they are all out. If they reach target, innings and match is completed. No more play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.112.254.167 (talk) 18:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Ducks

There seems to be a some variation in usage of the various ducks and I'd like some clarification as to what others think...

We can all agree a duck is a score of 0. A pair is any 2 ducks.

A golden duck is a first ball duck. Again - no problem there I guess.

This is where I think there is variation - The diamond duck - to me that is a duck without facing a ball. What does everyone else think? If you disagree please state your country as it may just be a country usage thing which we can define easily enough.

Again in the realms of variation a royal duck to me is a duck to the first ball of the teams innings. Again if you disagree please state the country you hail from.

A king pair used to be two royal ducks in the same match but as this is so very rare its common usage has moved to include two golden ducks. Again - your thoughts and country please.

--LiamE 17:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

To me in the UK, a diamond duck is a duck on the first ball of an innings; and a king pair is two golden ducks in one match. YMcleary doesV. -- ALoan (Talk) 20:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, never heard of a "royal duck". -- ALoan (Talk) 16:37, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Ditto. India. Tintin Talk 20:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


I'm in the UK, and I think a diamond duck is being out without facing a ball. So I guess both are common. I've never heard of a royal duck. Stephen Turner (Talk) 20:50, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm in NZ. I'm familiar with royal duck, diamond duck and king pair as you've described them. On a sidenote, I've never heard of the term rubee used to describe a royal duck. --Muchness 21:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
During a game this week Kerry O'Keeffe described facing one ball and not scoring any runs and then being run out as the non-striker as a Peking duck. ;-) -dmmaus 21:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Would 2 of those in a match be a Bombay duck do you think? Either that or Peking duck with sweet and sour sauce....
A royal duck as I know it is the first ball of a match. Lewis, South Africa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.189.120 (talk) 10:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Half yorker

The above new article has been proposed for deletion. Should it instead be merged into this article? -Arb. (talk) 23:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Support: the term doesn't appear sufficiently notable for an article that could ever be developed significantly beyond a stub; also Wikipedia is not a dictionary, so it's better to put this in a list of terms than in a standalone article.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 02:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Article length

I think this article might have reached a long enough length where we should split the article into separate sections eg. List of cricket terms A-G, H-M, N-Z or something like that. The article is quite long and is getting hard to read. Bozzio (talk) 12:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Military Medium

I changed the definition for this a while back, but it was reverted. Any idea why? Anyway, the change I made was to the suggestion that it's usually a derogatory term - that very much depends on context. It can also be meant as praise, suggesting that although a bowler is of no great pace, their excellent accuracy and consistency is comparable to military regularity. Glen McGrath was described as "military" on more than one occasion. 94.170.107.247 (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2011 (UTC) Dave

My original edit was: Military medium : medium-pace bowling that lacks the speed to trouble the batsman. Often has derogatory overtones, suggesting the bowling is boring, innocuous, or lacking in variety, but can also be a term of praise, suggesting a military regularity and lack of unintended variation. A good military medium bowler will pitch the ball on the same perfect line and length for six balls an over, making it very hard for the batsman to score runs. (Changes italicised - except 'medium-pace', which was obviously already italicised). 94.170.107.247 (talk) 23:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC) Dave

"Double Hat Trick"

There was debate on another page about 4 in 4 being called a double hat trick. I'll try and find it and hope that the consensus that 4 in4 is not a double hat trickWillE (talk) 08:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

There is still no evidence that the use of a double hat trick for 4 in 4 is correct, only the preponderance of use by lazy journalists following Malinga's feat. Repetition of a mistake does not validate it. After all, a score of 101 is not called a Double hundred..... WillE (talk) 13:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
A good while on - if no-one can find a reference to Bob Crisp taking two "double hat-trick"s or even Shaun Pollock or Kevan james more recently, can we bury this recent "development" of cricketing terminology as just wrong? WillE (talk) 20:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Glossary templates

Hallo. I reformatted this page to use {{term}} and {{defn}} templates. Their main benefits are

  • structured markup (the content has semantic HTML code embedded now, and a computer will be able to parse them as individual glossary entries)
  • and they automatically embed anchor links (so every entry can now be linked, without adding any spans or code. Just a # , eg Glossary of cricket terms#Strike).

The drawback is increased editmode complexity. Hopefully you agree that the pros outweigh the cons!

The next level beyond, for a large and full-featured page such as this, would be to create your own template similar to {{cuegloss}} (as used in Glossary of cue sports terms) to clarify when a bluelink is a within-the-page link, vs a link to another article. If you want that, it's up to you! (I haven't used them yet, but might be able to advise/assist).

HTH. -- Quiddity (talk) 03:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Not all terms in the cartoon are explained

For the record, I'm an American just learning about the game. I happen to wonder the same thing as the father in the article's cartoon (how did the kid get out). I see that splice and gully are explained in the article, while I grasp the meanings of cocked and blighter as non-cricket-specific words ("struck" and "fellow I dislike", yes?).

But what about gathered? Does that just mean "caught" (I suppose you might say a fielder "gathered" the ball), or does it have a cricket-specific meaning, such as running a batsman out? Or is it simply ambiguous? ± Lenoxus (" *** ") 21:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

The cartoon is very dated but is not so much about cricket as a comment on the English public school system. "Cocked" in this context would mean "mishit" rather than merely "struck". A "blighter" is not someone the kid dislikes as such but he does mean a rival or opponent; the word is often used ironically between friends (e.g., "lucky blighter"). I agree about the confusing use of "gathered" as that would normally mean "fielded" in the sense of picking the ball up. If it is caught, then nearly everyone would say "caught". It does seem that in this instance the kid was out caught in the gully from a mishit or badly timed shot. Hope that helps. ----Jack | talk page 23:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I get it now, thanks. ± Lenoxus (" *** ") 23:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Questions/suggestions

  1. "Mankad" says - Now banned, it is named after Vinoo Mankad ....

But as told in Run out the bowler can still run the non striker out before he reaches the final delivery stride.

  1. Rain rule - a controversial rule that was used in the 1990s before the Duckworth-Lewis method to determine the runs that a team chasing needed to score if rain interrupted play.

Isn't it a generic term for all the pre-DL rules ? It is just that the Australian version was the most cricticised one.

  1. Zooter (Aus. informal) a leg-break delivery.

According to Flipper (cricket), it is a variation of the flipper which, IMHO, is more correct.

  1. Carry the bat -an opener who bats without getting dismissed after the team innings is declared closed.

Ambiguous. 'innings is closed' (no need for 'declared') should apply only for one day matches

Are the terms 'mixed bag' and 'orange' commonly used ? Is there a 'silly-mid-wicket' - usually it is only short midwicket. Tintin 08:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The definitions of Draw and Tie should be modified to reflect the fact that a Draw can take place with scores level. An example of this was the 1st test between England and Zimbabwe in Harare at Bulawayo in 1996.

Currently, the entries read:

  1. Draw: a result in timed matches where the team batting last are not all out, but fail to reach their opponent's total. Not to be confused with a tie, in which two sides' scores are equal.
  2. Tie: the (very rare) result in which the two teams' scores are equal. Not to be confused with a draw, in which the scores are not equal.

I would suggest the following:

Draw: a result in timed matches where the team batting last are not all out, but fail to exceed their opponent's total. Not to be confuses with a tie, in which the side batting last is all out with scores level.

Tie: the (very rare) result in which the two teams' scores are equal and the team batting last is all out. unsigned comment by Ordinary Person

I would like to refer to the comment below - Be bold. If you are wrong, then someone might revert your edit, and THAT's when you go to talk to argue your case. But it's a more precise definition, and I've added it in. Oh, and do sign your comment with four tildes like this: ~~~~~ so we know who you are Sam Vimes 09:42, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
I've edited all your suggestions into the article, as I agree with them all. Please be bold in updating pages! Mixed bag and orange I haven't heard, but hey, if someone uses them commonly, that's fine. They may be common terms in India or something. And I've heard silly midwicket being used, so I think that's okay. -dmmaus 09:11, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


What is everyone's experience with using dip to describe the swing of the ball before pitching and swing to indicate that after pitching? I've never ever encountered a distinction between swing before pitching and after and am pretty sure Darren Gough used to bowl in-swinging yorkers, not in-dipping! I don't want to delete material without a discussion (ie the whole concept of dip), but I'm certainly thinking of changing swing to be first and foremost the lateral movement of a medium or fast ball in the air and having the presend definition as a uncommon variant. Is this a geographic difference in terminology (I'm UK)? Dh219 15:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Dip is not the word. Dip is the ball pitching shorter than where it would have landed if it had followed the normal path after leaving the bowler's hand. This usually happens when the bowler imparts overspin to the ball. Leg spinners who bowl good flippers and some offspinners are the ones who usually make the ball dip. It is not sideways movement. Tintin 16:23, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
agree - dip is topspin, not swing.ElectricRay (talk) 17:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Ah - I actually took the plunge and changed this - as the user above says, everyone refers to in-swinging yorkers, so to say an inswinger is only an in-swinger if it 'curves' before pitching, would be mis-leading, wouldn't it? --Gavinio 11:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Good call, Gavinio. Be bold. -- GWO
Ah, thanks - never sure about etiquette really - anyway - I'm happy about that edit, I'll have a look at another. While we're here, has anyone, ever seen written evidence of an 'in-dipper' being used? I've played cricket for 15 years, and never heard of it, but I'm loathe to delete it. I'll happily take someone's word for it, but at the moment, if just feels wrong. --Gavinio 21:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
This Google search [2] suggests that its not commmon, but not unknown. I've never heard but, I presumed it was an Aussie thing. -- GWO
Agreed - Uncommon, but not made-up! It looks to be more based around India and Pakistan, judging by your web-search (with 93 results, compared to c10k results for "in swinger"). If this is supposed to be comprehensive - then it is! -- Gavinio

Cow Corner

"the area of the field (roughly) between deep mid-wicket and wide long-on. So called because few 'legitimate' shots are aimed to this part of the field, so fielders are rarely placed there - leading to the concept that cows could happily graze in that area."

Feilders are often placed at Cow Corner at all levels of cricket including higher levels of the game. For instance in the slog overs in limited over cricket this feilding position would be quite common even more so to an off spinner.164.143.240.33 13:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Fully agree with the above here. It is simply nonsense that "few shots are played to cow corner". In most amateur levels of cricket that's where most shots are played - that's the natural place for an agricultural slog of the ball. I suspect it's called cow corner because it's where farmers would hit the ball.ElectricRay (talk) 16:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Onefer (etc)

I think we need to include the x-for terms, as these are used quite regularly both in casual conversation and by commentators. this would add significantly to the list, however. Inclusions would be:

  • one for (pronounced "onefuh") -- batting side has lost one wicket
  • two for (pronounced "twofuh") -- batting side has lost two wickets

...

  • nine for (pronounced "ninefuh") -- batting side has lost nine wickets

What does everyone else think? -- Vermifuge 10:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC), Australia

Not sure I quite agree - isn't it a reference to a given bowler's performance? eg "I got a fivefer today" (ie Five wickets for twenty five runs etc". Personally I've never heard a onefer, or any more than a fivefer. ElectricRay (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Chinese cut

My understanding of a Chinese Cut (which happens to be my signature shot) is that the ball is generally hit between the batsman's feet anywhere behind square on the leg side. The shot described here sounds more like a variation on that than an, ahem, classical Chinese Cut - or even just an inside edge. Am I wrong about this?Edjack 14:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Agree - batsman drives on the off, gets inside edge and it squirts between batsman and leg stump to go down the leg. ElectricRay (talk) 17:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Chest-on

The definition of 'chest-on' seems to be the same as the one for 'side-on'. Edjack 15:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Walk: "Generally considered to be sporting behaviour though increasingly rare in international cricket." Rare, yes - but increasingly so? This might imply it used to be common. In the absence of hard numbers on this, might it be wise to omit 'increasingly', or at least qualify it somehow? Edjack 16:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

phrases

what about phrases that have their roots in cricket. Here in India, phrases like second innings, hattrick, gone for a six, bowled him over etc are used quite often —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.141.68.72 (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hit them for six and being bowled over are both commonly used in England too. Don't forget to sign your posts. SGGH ping! 13:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Interestingly, we also have the phrase "bowled over" here in the US. I am not sure if this came from cricket or from bowling (10 pin). We also use "it isn't cricket" on occasions. Wschart (talk) 20:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Glossary of cricket terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:39, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Cricket Slang Term - Jaffa

Currently the uncited suggestion is that it comes from the Jaffa orange.

This sounds a bit unlikely to me and suggest, without any substantiation whatsoever, that it possibly, and more feasibly, comes from the practice of young boys rolling Jaffas, (see Wikipedia entry.) under the seats of picture theatres during the 'boring' bits of the film - usually the quiet, kissing scenes.

This was quite a common schoolboy prank in Australia, certainly in Sydney, in the 1950's.

Jaffas were bigger than they are now (more in the box too.)and on the bare wooden board floors of that time they made a very satisfying rumble all the way down to the front of the sloping floor of the theatre. The noise was very audible in the aforementioned quiet parts with often more than one Jaffa on the go at the same time. Theoretically, if you did get caught, you risked being thrown out so it was considered to be a very daring and 'cool' thing to do by the culprit's peers. The ushers would come rushing down with their torches (flashlights) to try to catch the culprit but of course by then the Jaffa was well away from it's release point. I doubt anyone was ever punished.

The sense of a well played, admired and unplayable shot is much the same.

Australian cricketers of the '60's and 70's would have grown up in this era and been well aware of this antic even if they hadn't actually done it themselves. I's no great stretch to imagine them applying the analogy to the cricket pitch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.32.231 (talk) 06:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Screamer

I've seen 'screamer' being used as a term for a catch by short leg or a bowler that required a lot of reflex and luck, e.g. http://www.cricket.com.au/news/travis-head-australia-india-test-tour-number-six-spot-allrounder-pakistan-odi-series/2017-01-11 there is a video captioned with "Head removes Marsh with a screamer". The same term was used on cricinfo or cricket.com.au to describe Handscomb's or Maddinson's catches in the recent Australia - Pakistan test series. Do you think it should be added to the list? Ptok-Bentoniczny (talk) 07:31, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Another term I've heard was a 'blinder' to describe a catch after a dive. Ptok-Bentoniczny (talk) 07:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't think it's a unique term to cricket though - simply a term which can mean something good. It's used in (association) football as well, for example. Generic terms like this without a specific cricketing usage probably don't belong here imo. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glossary of cricket terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Glossary of cricket terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:18, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Glossary of cricket terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

No mention of the common name (indeed in my experience the only name) for a cricket ball, 'corky'?

None of the wikipedia articles pertaining to cricket mention that the ball is universally referred to as a corky.

Am I simply going mad, or is this a colloquialism confined to my local area? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.27.210 (talk) 13:57, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


No mention of what your local area is but in Sydney, Australia, cricket balls made out of cork were common in the 50's and 60's. These were much cheaper than expensive 'six stitchers' and more within the pocket money reach of kids in the 1950's. Painted red when new, this coating soom wore off exposing the bare cork. They were used for street and back yard cricket as, not only were they cheaper, they were also hurt a lot less if you got hit with one.

I recall them being usually known as 'corkers' but 'corkies' is also a a highly likely variation and consistent with the Australian habit of dropping a syllable and then addiing an 'ie' or 'y' ending to shorten words. (Eg: biscuit - bickie. Truck driver - trucky.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.32.231 (talk) 06:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


Derek Gabrovo Kricket Klub Bulgaria. As a boy player in late 50's and 60's. Lads always called a normal leather cricket ball a CORKY. I was born and raised in the unique part of England, born in Derbyshire, close to Cheshire, Yorkshire, Staffordshire borders and twenty miles from LCCC Old Trafford. Why corkies? Lost balls found in the village stream invariably swelled and burst the seam. Peel the leather away and the central part was possibly 'miles' of cotton. The cotton tightly wrapped around the inner sphere of cork. It never occurred to me that Corky was a local name. There was also fake cricket balls made of extremely hard rubber which had very little bounce. They could still cause physical injury just as a Corky could! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.118.79.145 (talk) 14:56, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

String of Ducks

I seem to remember Dean Jones, of Australia, mentioning in cricket commentary once that a string of four ducks was referred to as an Audi. This article [3] in "The Sydney Morning Herald" implies that Audi was a nickname given to Mark Waugh and then to Jones after both had scored four ducks in a row.

Can anyone shed some light on this?

I also seem to recall that Jones carried on and said that the next number in the sequence of ducks was an Olympic (ie five circles or ducks). But this might well have been Jones just filling in time and joking.--Perry Middlemiss (talk) 06:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

May I just ask for clarification? Not trying to be a wise man but can you score a duck? Surely to score you must have at least one run next to your name in the score-book. Now having made myself sound a daft lad I will google score, duck, zero etc. VIVA Cricket! Derek Admin. Gabrovo Kricket Klub. BULGARIA! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.118.79.145 (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes you can score a duck. Your score is what gets entered in the record book, and becomes part of your cricketing history. Akld guy (talk) 19:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Add "howler" as a link to "Sawn off" or similar?

Can we add "Howler" to the list of terms? The meaning is well understood on several prominent cricketing websites to mean a poor decision by an umpire. 150.101.178.86 (talk) 07:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

"Howler" is a common English slang term which means "a bad mistake". I would argue that it's not exclusively a cricketing term, but is found in general terminology. See, for instance, the Wiktionary entry. Darorcilmir (talk) 14:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glossary_of_cricket_terms/Archive_1&oldid=1188378751"