BBC News reports that the word 'out' is to replace the word 'wicket' in the new city-based cricket competition that starts in July, the reason being a desire to attract a new, younger batch of supporters to the sport. 'A fine spell of bowling from Bloggs with 5 outs for 26'. I wonder whether this was dreamt up by those who brought us 'Tearjerker' and the like as part of the BBC's increasingly desperate attempts to recruit new, younger listeners. Viewed in purely economic terms, this doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me - aren't we oldies the ones with the greatest disposable income?
-
-
Whatever tosh the BBC use, cricket fans etc will still use 'wickets'.
Thus digging an even bigger ditch between cricket fans than before.
Deeper now than ever: what with the chuffing, self-advertising Tufnell, non-stop stats, and the effort to turn TMS / cricket into a sort of comedy show.
Football coverage on BBC Radio 5Live etc is magnificent - mix of real technical insider / expert awareness, and fun but always with informed exposition, while cricket coverage has become a sadly depleted joke / musical hall formula. -
The BBC is navigating dangerous waters. The risk of war with the planet Krikkit is not to be dismissed. As to "batsman" transitioning to "batter", given the behaviour of Mustafa Bashir, might the male variety not be referred to as "batterer"?Originally posted by DracoM View PostComment
-
Surely the male should be the batterim with female the batterer!Originally posted by Bryn View PostComment
-
... I think batterim is the masculine plural - cf seraphim, cherubim, sephardim, ashkenazimOriginally posted by cloughie View Post
.Comment
-
No in this case - a batter(h)im and a batter(h)er! Or to be LBGT+ correct there maybe could be a batterthem, or should it be batterwe.Originally posted by vinteuil View PostComment
-
.
... batterwe we leave it there, perhaps
.Comment
-
Some batterers are betterer than others.Originally posted by vinteuil View Post
Perhaps bowlers should be renamed 'outchasers' or something similar.Comment
-
Better still if the powers that be hadn’t made this crass attempt to mess up the terminology.Originally posted by vinteuil View PostComment
-
"Out" isn't formally a noun, thought the Americans use the word thus in Baseball. Maybe that's the tenuous reason?
Having said that, the word "wicket" is confusing. In cricket, it can also mean the stumps-plus-bails, or the excessively mowed line between the wickets/stumps.Comment
-
... ah, the ins and outs of the English language!Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View Post
But of course we shd retain as many of the traditional forms as possible : necessary shibboleths to baffle the americans and other outs.
.Comment
-
I can't understand why the use of wicket, as in taking a wicket and getting someone out, would be so difficult for a newcomer to cricket to grasp. The word will still often be heard in the uses described by Alpie above. There are so many common phrases: e.g. leg before wicket, third wicket stand, out hit wicket, wicket-keeper, wicket-taker, three wicket victory, wicket maiden etc.
The whole issue might of course be a publicity ruse.Comment
-
... have to say - apart from leg-before-wicket and wicket-keeper - I have never encountered any of those! (sheltered childhood)Originally posted by gurnemanz View Post
whereas -
The hope, I spose, is that da yoof will think it wicket, man
(groundskeeper coat on... )
.Comment
-
Cricket vocab is akin to a religious language, and 'batter' surely counts as blasphemy?
Comment
-
Or a mixture of flour and beer for frying fish!Originally posted by ardcarp View PostCricket vocab is akin to a religious language, and 'batter' surely counts as blasphemy?Comment
Comment