What's new

Cricket cliches that bother you?

Mamoon

Mamoon

ATG
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Runs
103,664
Post of the Week
12
I will start with a few off the top of my head.

1. “Matchups”
This is the new annoying buzzword in cricket but it doesn’t mean anything and it not a new concept either.

For example, it is known knowledge and it has been known for 50 years that it is better to use an off-spinner against a left-handed batsman but for some reason we have to use the matchup word now.

Most matchups are myths anyway. If you have an average off-spinner and a world class leg-spinner, you should play the leg-spinner against left-handed batsmen. It is not that complicated.

2. Commentators praising the batsman for being smart every time they rotate the strike after a boundary
It gets extremely annoying and cumbersome to see commentators rinse and repeat this generic stuff with almost no exception. You can predict it with 100% certainty.

3. Commentators stating that the batsmen meant it when an edge goes to the boundary
Most of the time they don’t. It is a genuine edge.

4. Australia’s mental toughness
Australia since 2007 has been like any other top team. Not mentally tougher or weaker than any other top team but the 1999-2007 PTSD is too hard to overcome.

5. Pakistan’s unpredictability and fast bowling
Pakistan is predictability mediocre and loses to the top sides 90% of the time. Its fast bowling has also been strictly average for very, very long.

6. Historic records, i.e. X team has not lost on this ground for 35 years so they have an edge
Again, records established across different eras mean nothing unless the same set of players are playing. Pakistan won’t have an edge over a team in Karachi just because Imran and Miandad’s teams made NSK a fortress.
 
A few spring to mind:

One minute down, next minute up.

Pakistan are the most unpredictable/dangerous side in any tournament.

Pakistan are the dark horses in any tournament.

Never write-off Pakistan
 
The commentary also. Same words and phrases every grew up listening to now being repeated by every English commentator.


When a fielder runs after a boundary shot. Incredible show of commitment 🤣
 
Pakistan drop a catch... Come on exceptions when they catch it :ROFLMAO:

Sorry had to put that in...
 
Technics 1210 said:
A few spring to mind:

One minute down, next minute up.

Pakistan are the most unpredictable/dangerous side in any tournament.

Pakistan are the dark horses in any tournament.

Never write-off Pakistan
Click to expand...
Should add, these do not bother me, but do indeed bother others!
 
Match ups are not a buzz word. Match ups are basically how a player will do against a certain player or type of player.

For example Hafeez Vs left armers.

Anyways, OP made this thread to use it as another opportunity to bash Pakistan. So its a Pakistani bashing thread no.102 by OP.
 
Major said:
Match ups are not a buzz word. Match ups are basically how a player will do against a certain player or type of player.

For example Hafeez Vs left armers.

Anyways, OP made this thread to use it as another opportunity to bash Pakistan. So its a Pakistani bashing thread no.102 by OP.
Click to expand...
Matchup is exactly that - a buzzword. It used by people to make themselves sound smart.

It has been utilized for decades and decades but some genius decided to give it a fancy name now.

This word was introduced in cricket 2-3 years back to explain something that has been in play for decades.

Besides, most matchups are myths anyway. If you have Shane Warne in your team you won’t prefer Hafeez over him because the batsman is lefty.
 
Technics 1210 said:
What else do you expect from Mr. Chat GPT? The entire OP is AI generated.
Click to expand...
Cricket, like any sport, has its fair share of cliches. While some are timeless and add to the charm of the game, others can become repetitive. Here are a few cricket cliches that some people find bothersome:

  1. "Form is temporary, class is permanent." This cliche is often used when a seasoned player is not performing well. It's a bit overused and doesn't always hold true.
  2. "The bowler is putting the ball in the right areas." While it's important to maintain line and length, this phrase can be overused in commentary and lacks depth.
  3. "The ball is doing a bit." Commentators often use this when there's some help for the bowlers from the pitch, but it doesn't offer much insight.
  4. "It's a game of glorious uncertainties." This cliche is true of all sports and doesn't add much to the analysis.
  5. "That's a good toss to lose." This is often said when conditions favor the team batting first. It can be misleading, as winning the toss also has advantages.
  6. "Cricket is a gentleman's game." While cricket has a rich history and tradition, it's not free from controversies and conflicts. This cliche can oversimplify the reality.
  7. "They are taking it one ball at a time." While a sound strategy, this phrase is used so frequently that it's become cliched.
  8. "Cricket is a religion in [country]." While cricket is immensely popular in many countries, the analogy to religion is overused.
  9. "He's playing with a straight bat." While important for a batsman, this cliche doesn't provide much insight.
  10. "He's got a great cricketing brain." This is often used to describe a captain or player with good tactical skills, but it lacks specificity.
Remember that cliches are part of the charm and tradition of the game, and they often help to convey the passion and excitement that fans and commentators have for cricket.
 
asfandyar said:
Cricket, like any sport, has its fair share of cliches. While some are timeless and add to the charm of the game, others can become repetitive. Here are a few cricket cliches that some people find bothersome:

  1. "Form is temporary, class is permanent." This cliche is often used when a seasoned player is not performing well. It's a bit overused and doesn't always hold true.
  2. "The bowler is putting the ball in the right areas." While it's important to maintain line and length, this phrase can be overused in commentary and lacks depth.
  3. "The ball is doing a bit." Commentators often use this when there's some help for the bowlers from the pitch, but it doesn't offer much insight.
  4. "It's a game of glorious uncertainties." This cliche is true of all sports and doesn't add much to the analysis.
  5. "That's a good toss to lose." This is often said when conditions favor the team batting first. It can be misleading, as winning the toss also has advantages.
  6. "Cricket is a gentleman's game." While cricket has a rich history and tradition, it's not free from controversies and conflicts. This cliche can oversimplify the reality.
  7. "They are taking it one ball at a time." While a sound strategy, this phrase is used so frequently that it's become cliched.
  8. "Cricket is a religion in [country]." While cricket is immensely popular in many countries, the analogy to religion is overused.
  9. "He's playing with a straight bat." While important for a batsman, this cliche doesn't provide much insight.
  10. "He's got a great cricketing brain." This is often used to describe a captain or player with good tactical skills, but it lacks specificity.
Remember that cliches are part of the charm and tradition of the game, and they often help to convey the passion and excitement that fans and commentators have for cricket.
Click to expand...
The point was not about clichés, and I agree with every word you have posted above. The point was the intent behind the OP.
 
Yes. Many annoying and inaccurate cliches.

It is because most modern day commentators are not good commentators. Previous decades had better commentators.
 
Regardless of the result it will be good chase. Off course want Australia to win.
Lets see what Babar can produce today.
 
“There’s very little margin for error”.

Seriously? We would never have known without the commentator telling us.
 
When they say you can't bowl there to X batsman, when any batsman would have liked that kind of a freebie.
 
Carrom ball

The most overated delivery and indian media loves to go crazy as if its the doosra being bowled.

Its just a delivery that comes out of the hand slowly and sometimes it spins
 
Most Indian commies about pace.
The faster he bowls the faster he goes to the boundary. Line and length is key

Lol!!
 
Major said:
Carrom ball

The most overated delivery and indian media loves to go crazy as if its the doosra being bowled.

Its just a delivery that comes out of the hand slowly and sometimes it spins
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is a cliche as such. It’s just a commentary on a genuine variation and not many bowlers can bowl it.
 
“It’s up in the air…and down the fielder’s throat”. Feels like the fielder is eating the ball.
 
"We(Pakistan) are the most talented cricket nation in the world"
 
Number of times the word “matchup” was used by commentators before 2021: 0

Number of times it is used today: once every 3 overs

The funny thing is that matchups have been in play for as long as professional cricket has existed, but it is only in the last two years that commentators, fans and analysts collectively decided to give it a catchy name and talk about it every 3 overs.
 
Another one:

Every time a catch is dropped, you will always have one commentator state that you can’t drop these at this level.
 
What are commentators suppose to do? 😂😂.

If a catch Is dropped and they say you can't drop these at this level.

What are they suppose to say?

Oh no a catch got dropped, good it's common to drop them at this level?

Let Commentators comment lol. They aren't trying to analyse each and every single detail. Their just commentating for fun. That's their job, entertainment.

So when they say the batsmen was smart and are overhyping a bat, it's usually to entertain the crowd.

Not everyone is an analyst and soends time over analysing commentator comments 😂😂
 
kron said:
Most Indian commies about pace.
The faster he bowls the faster he goes to the boundary. Line and length is key

Lol!!
Click to expand...
Ain't it true though, lol? Atleast Rauf would agree :p

Having said that, pace is very much required along with line and length. Not necessarily extreme pace, but > ~137 kph atleast.
 
Mamoon said:
Another one:

Every time a catch is dropped, you will always have one commentator state that you can’t drop these at this level.
Click to expand...
yup, really hate the captain obvious.

whats your opinion on the commentators that go gaga over carrom ball which is a nothing delivery
 
"We were 10 15 runs short."

This is as absurd as it sounds i.e. implying that the chasing team would have got themselves into a tangle and lost the match if they were chasing 10 runs more? This cliche is only used by Pakistani cricketers who don't understand what it means.
 
Catches win matches. A term that got famous either from ICL or IPL.

Catches dont really win you matches, its bowlers that create you chance that win matches
 
Energy said:
"We were 10 15 runs short."

This is as absurd as it sounds i.e. implying that the chasing team would have got themselves into a tangle and lost the match if they were chasing 10 runs more? This cliche is only used by Pakistani cricketers who don't understand what it means.
Click to expand...
ah yess, i agree with this.

Its not used by Pakistani only but by every captain. Every losing captain says this assuming that 10-20 runs would had won them the game. The approach of the other team would had been different.

Sometimes from a psychological point of view a low score plays in your favor aswell. Like if the target is 320, than the other team will come in attacking, but for a 270 target, teams often start off slow.
 
mominsaigol said:
What are commentators suppose to do? 😂😂.

If a catch Is dropped and they say you can't drop these at this level.

What are they suppose to say?

Oh no a catch got dropped, good it's common to drop them at this level?

Let Commentators comment lol. They aren't trying to analyse each and every single detail. Their just commentating for fun. That's their job, entertainment.

So when they say the batsmen was smart and are overhyping a bat, it's usually to entertain the crowd.

Not everyone is an analyst and soends time over analysing commentator comments 😂😂
Click to expand...
There are two issues with cricket commentary:

1. Most commentators would be fit for radio, i.e. they don’t provide any insight or any context. If I’m watching on TV, I don’t need Wasim or Waqar to tell me that the batsman has hit a cover drive off the front foot. I can see that with my own eyes.

2. Most commentators follow a script. They use the same dialogues over and over again. There is nothing insightful at all.

To answer your question, if a catch is dropped, tell me why it was dropped. What could the fielder have done better, what was wrong with his positioning, his anticipation or if some other factor contributed to the dropped catch. Don’t tell me that it should be taken at this level because I already know that.

The purpose of TV commentary is to add value not to recap what viewers have already seen. The purpose of radio commentators is to help the listeners create a visual image which is why you need to tell them that the batsman has hit a beautiful cover driver off the front foot for four.

There are only a handful of commentators out there who provide genuine insight and can make thought-provoking analysis. For example, Harsha, Ian Bishop, Mark Nicholas, Sangakkara etc. There are probably a couple more but I can’t recall them right now.

I would add Nasser Hussain to this list but he talks absolute generic nonsense when it comes to Pakistan.
 
Srinath_cricket said:
Ain't it true though, lol? Atleast Rauf would agree :p

Having said that, pace is very much required along with line and length. Not necessarily extreme pace, but > ~137 kph atleast.
Click to expand...
Yea for sure. 135 to 145 is more than enough if you have skills and line length.

Bounce especially.

Rauf is brainless.
 
Mamoon said:
There are two issues with cricket commentary:

1. Most commentators would be fit for radio, i.e. they don’t provide any insight or any context. If I’m watching on TV, I don’t need Wasim or Waqar to tell me that the batsman has hit a cover drive off the front foot. I can see that with my own eyes.

2. Most commentators follow a script. They use the same dialogues over and over again. There is nothing insightful at all.

To answer your question, if a catch is dropped, tell me why it was dropped. What could the fielder have done better, what was wrong with his positioning, his anticipation or if some other factor contributed to the dropped catch. Don’t tell me that it should be taken at this level because I already know that.

The purpose of TV commentary is to add value not to recap what viewers have already seen. The purpose of radio commentators is to help the listeners create a visual image which is why you need to tell them that the batsman has hit a beautiful cover driver off the front foot for four.

There are only a handful of commentators out there who provide genuine insight and can make thought-provoking analysis. For example, Harsha, Ian Bishop, Mark Nicholas, Sangakkara etc. There are probably a couple more but I can’t recall them right now.

I would add Nasser Hussain to this list but he talks absolute generic nonsense when it comes to Pakistan.
Click to expand...
That's fair.
 
Mamoon said:
There are two issues with cricket commentary:

1. Most commentators would be fit for radio, i.e. they don’t provide any insight or any context. If I’m watching on TV, I don’t need Wasim or Waqar to tell me that the batsman has hit a cover drive off the front foot. I can see that with my own eyes.

2. Most commentators follow a script. They use the same dialogues over and over again. There is nothing insightful at all.

To answer your question, if a catch is dropped, tell me why it was dropped. What could the fielder have done better, what was wrong with his positioning, his anticipation or if some other factor contributed to the dropped catch. Don’t tell me that it should be taken at this level because I already know that.

The purpose of TV commentary is to add value not to recap what viewers have already seen. The purpose of radio commentators is to help the listeners create a visual image which is why you need to tell them that the batsman has hit a beautiful cover driver off the front foot for four.

There are only a handful of commentators out there who provide genuine insight and can make thought-provoking analysis. For example, Harsha, Ian Bishop, Mark Nicholas, Sangakkara etc. There are probably a couple more but I can’t recall them right now.

I would add Nasser Hussain to this list but he talks absolute generic nonsense when it comes to Pakistan.
Click to expand...

Also add Pommie Mbangwa.
 
Mamoon said:
I will start with a few off the top of my head.

1. “Matchups”
This is the new annoying buzzword in cricket but it doesn’t mean anything and it not a new concept either.

For example, it is known knowledge and it has been known for 50 years that it is better to use an off-spinner against a left-handed batsman but for some reason we have to use the matchup word now.

Most matchups are myths anyway. If you have an average off-spinner and a world class leg-spinner, you should play the leg-spinner against left-handed batsmen. It is not that complicated.

2. Commentators praising the batsman for being smart every time they rotate the strike after a boundary
It gets extremely annoying and cumbersome to see commentators rinse and repeat this generic stuff with almost no exception. You can predict it with 100% certainty.

3. Commentators stating that the batsmen meant it when an edge goes to the boundary
Most of the time they don’t. It is a genuine edge.

4. Australia’s mental toughness
Australia since 2007 has been like any other top team. Not mentally tougher or weaker than any other top team but the 1999-2007 PTSD is too hard to overcome.

5. Pakistan’s unpredictability and fast bowling
Pakistan is predictability mediocre and loses to the top sides 90% of the time. Its fast bowling has also been strictly average for very, very long.

6. Historic records, i.e. X team has not lost on this ground for 35 years so they have an edge
Again, records established across different eras mean nothing unless the same set of players are playing. Pakistan won’t have an edge over a team in Karachi just because Imran and Miandad’s teams made NSK a fortress.
Click to expand...

Yes, Shaheen and Naseem are "STRICTLY AVERAGE YAAR".

Pakistan has superior head to head against almost all top sides in all formats but "LOSES 90% OF THE TIME YAAR".
 
You know what bothers me a lot recently, Pakistanis believing Indian bowlers are automatically inferior and slower to ours. Recent history shows that not to be the case.
 
owenhcricket said:
Yes, Shaheen and Naseem are "STRICTLY AVERAGE YAAR".

Pakistan has superior head to head against almost all top sides in all formats but "LOSES 90% OF THE TIME YAAR".
Click to expand...
Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, I would assume not.

Shaheen at his best is not average but he doesn’t have a plan B and these days he is rarely at his best because he has lost place.

Naseem has almost never been at his best. He doesn’t take enough wickets and his record in Test cricket against the major sides is absolute shambles.

He is quite ineffective in T20Is. The only format he has actually be potent in is ODIs so overall he has been average so far. His reputation and face value exceeds his actual output and contribution to the team’s success.

Overall, the pace attack of Shaheen, Nadeem and Rauf is average and there is enough body of work across formats to decide this conclusion but they get overhyped because of the cliche that Pakistan is a land of fast bowlers.

As far has historic head to head is concerned, it is only relevant when you are looking at teams from a historic perspective. Otherwise, the only people who care - or talk - about historic head to head are those who don’t have a present to talk about or a future to look forward to.

For example, West Indies still enjoy a very decent head to head record against most teams because of their past dominance in the 70’s and 80’s but it means nothing because they are a borderline minnow today.

Pakistan have not made a single ODI World Cup final in 24 years. It has only won 2-3 ODI series against the top sides (full strength) since 2005.

In Limited Overs, Pakistan has been pretty much the same as West Indies in the last 20 odd years but the only difference is that West Indies fans are not loud or enough in number to drive a narrative, build perception and romanticize mediocrity as unpredictability.

I’m actually overselling Pakistan with the 90% figure. In reality, it is probably closer to 95% if you look at the performances against the top teams in white ball cricket when they are not fielding their B and C teams.

In Tests, Pakistan have been slightly better but still strictly mediocre.
 
Major said:
yup, really hate the captain obvious.

whats your opinion on the commentators that go gaga over carrom ball which is a nothing delivery
Click to expand...
Not sure about that one because I haven’t seen carrom ball get excessive coverage since Ajantha Mendis burst onto the scene in 2008.
 
Another practice that needs to disbanded: asking captains to justify their decision of batting/bowling first. You get the same answer every single time from every single captain.

If you are batting first it is because it is a good pitch and you want to put runs on the board, if you are bowling first it is because either the pitch has moisture and you want to exploit it or dew will come into play.

Asking this questions adds zero value to the viewer’s experience. Just ask the captain what he’s going to do without asking him why when you already know why.
 
Mamoon said:
“Batsmen win you matches, bowlers win you tournaments”

What crapola.
Click to expand...
This one I believe still true - May be scale has changed from 200 to 300, but most of the games in this WC has been won by bowlers - either they have inflicted a collapse to make it easy for batsmen, or have defended chase able targets. Apart from SAF games, which are one sided bar one (that was also won miraculously by Dutch spinners), but these games were set up by bowlers or defended by bowling
BD-AFG, IND-PAK/BD/AUS/NZ
NZ-ENG, AUS-SRL, AFG-ENG, SRL-NED, NED-SAF …. and I believe I’m missing few.
 
Mamoon said:
I’m actually overselling Pakistan with the 90% figure. In reality, it is probably closer to 95% if you look at the performances against the top teams in white ball cricket when they are not fielding their B and C teams.

In Tests, Pakistan have been slightly better but still strictly mediocre.
Click to expand...

I can't be bothered to reply to all the other nonsense you posted, as per usual it's a load of self loathing spewing from your confused mind BUT I just had to respond to this which made me actually laugh out loud.

I've noticed on here that you often change the goalposts with so many of your posts when you get called out...much like here, so you went from "Pakistan lose 90% of matches to top teams" to adding the conditions "in white ball cricket" and "not fielding their B and C teams". Even then your hatred doesn't hold any water.

Was it England's C team they beat in CT2017?
Was it SAs C team in CWC 2019? The same goes for NZ and the other victories Pakistan had.

Which C teams did Pakistan beat on the path to the semi and then the final of the T20 world cups in 2021 and 2022?

Please don't divert and answer the questions.
 
kron said:
Yea for sure. 135 to 145 is more than enough if you have skills and line length.

Bounce especially.

Rauf is brainless.
Click to expand...
True. In Indian conditions (in LOIs and first class) the pace bowlers are just cannon fodder. I don't like it one bit but that's how it is. This is the reason we've produced very few good pace bowlers, historically. Even from age level cricket all we get is flat phattas. So, pace bowlers just try to make sure they don't go for runs, trading their speed for line and length. It is easier to accustom to flat pitches once you're 18/19 because you're mature enough to handle.. but not when you're 10 or 12.

BCCI of late has done a good job in creating good bouncy pitches in recent times for ranji trophy.

I do hope this opens the vision of lot of Pakistanis as well -- as bowlers in IPL are often ridiculed, but even very good bowlers will disappear here if they miss it by centimeters.

My point deviates from the topic of the thread, but yeah just my 2 cents.
 
owenhcricket said:
I can't be bothered to reply to all the other nonsense you posted, as per usual it's a load of self loathing spewing from your confused mind BUT I just had to respond to this which made me actually laugh out loud.

I've noticed on here that you often change the goalposts with so many of your posts when you get called out...much like here, so you went from "Pakistan lose 90% of matches to top teams" to adding the conditions "in white ball cricket" and "not fielding their B and C teams". Even then your hatred doesn't hold any water.

Was it England's C team they beat in CT2017?
Was it SAs C team in CWC 2019? The same goes for NZ and the other victories Pakistan had.

Which C teams did Pakistan beat on the path to the semi and then the final of the T20 world cups in 2021 and 2022?

Please don't divert and answer the questions.
Click to expand...
Even minnows can cause upsets in tournaments. It is one-off game and weird things can happen.

South Africa have lost to Netherlands in back to back tournament games but Netherlands will stand no chance of toppling South Africa in a series because the stronger team would always prevail over the course of a series.

Check Pakistan’s bilateral record against the top sides in ODIs over the last 15-20 years. Absolute shambles.

In Test cricket, Pakistan has a 100% losing record in Australia (not a single draw) since 1999. Even the infamous Law of Averages is helpless when it comes to Pakistan’s mediocrity in Australia.

No Test series win in any major country for God knows how many decades. Multiple thrashings at home.

If this is your idea of a strong team then someone rightly said that when a team becomes mediocre, the fans also become mediocre.

In bilateral T20Is, teams hardly play their full-strength sides so a relative comparison is difficult to establish.

I don’t need to shift goalposts to prove that Pakistan is a pathetic team and has been a very long time and there is nothing unpredictable about them.

Fans like you who are at liberty with reality are the reason why there is no accountability and no improvement. This delusional mindset is not helping Pakistan because the first step towards improvement is to recognize that we are not good enough and then to dive deep and analyze why we are not good enough.

Only then can we take corrective measures and drive improvement. Unfortunately, our fans, our board and our media refuses to accept that we are not good enough and hence it is stuck in this endless loop of mediocrity.

Congratulations because this is what fans like you deserve.
 
I do think people sometimes lose sight of the fact that commentary is not exclusively designed for experienced viewers of the game. Their only job really is to promote what's on show no matter what nonsense is happening. Everyone has a first time for hearing a cliche or buzzword after all. Fundamentally all commentary is flawed by design.
 
Mamoon said:
I will start with a few off the top of my head.

1. “Matchups”
This is the new annoying buzzword in cricket but it doesn’t mean anything and it not a new concept either.

For example, it is known knowledge and it has been known for 50 years that it is better to use an off-spinner against a left-handed batsman but for some reason we have to use the matchup word now.

Most matchups are myths anyway. If you have an average off-spinner and a world class leg-spinner, you should play the leg-spinner against left-handed batsmen. It is not that complicated.

2. Commentators praising the batsman for being smart every time they rotate the strike after a boundary
It gets extremely annoying and cumbersome to see commentators rinse and repeat this generic stuff with almost no exception. You can predict it with 100% certainty.

3. Commentators stating that the batsmen meant it when an edge goes to the boundary
Most of the time they don’t. It is a genuine edge.

4. Australia’s mental toughness
Australia since 2007 has been like any other top team. Not mentally tougher or weaker than any other top team but the 1999-2007 PTSD is too hard to overcome.

5. Pakistan’s unpredictability and fast bowling
Pakistan is predictability mediocre and loses to the top sides 90% of the time. Its fast bowling has also been strictly average for very, very long.

6. Historic records, i.e. X team has not lost on this ground for 35 years so they have an edge
Again, records established across different eras mean nothing unless the same set of players are playing. Pakistan won’t have an edge over a team in Karachi just because Imran and Miandad’s teams made NSK a fortress.
Click to expand...

Point number 2 is especially made by oldies like Gavaskar and Rameez who had pathetic strike rates. In this day and age if you hit a boundary and put the bowler under the pump, you have to keep going and pile up more pressure and runs
 
asfandyar said:
Cricket, like any sport, has its fair share of cliches. While some are timeless and add to the charm of the game, others can become repetitive. Here are a few cricket cliches that some people find bothersome:

  1. "Form is temporary, class is permanent." This cliche is often used when a seasoned player is not performing well. It's a bit overused and doesn't always hold true.
  2. "The bowler is putting the ball in the right areas." While it's important to maintain line and length, this phrase can be overused in commentary and lacks depth.
  3. "The ball is doing a bit." Commentators often use this when there's some help for the bowlers from the pitch, but it doesn't offer much insight.
  4. "It's a game of glorious uncertainties." This cliche is true of all sports and doesn't add much to the analysis.
  5. "That's a good toss to lose." This is often said when conditions favor the team batting first. It can be misleading, as winning the toss also has advantages.
  6. "Cricket is a gentleman's game." While cricket has a rich history and tradition, it's not free from controversies and conflicts. This cliche can oversimplify the reality.
  7. "They are taking it one ball at a time." While a sound strategy, this phrase is used so frequently that it's become cliched.
  8. "Cricket is a religion in [country]." While cricket is immensely popular in many countries, the analogy to religion is overused.
  9. "He's playing with a straight bat." While important for a batsman, this cliche doesn't provide much insight.
  10. "He's got a great cricketing brain." This is often used to describe a captain or player with good tactical skills, but it lacks specificity.
Remember that cliches are part of the charm and tradition of the game, and they often help to convey the passion and excitement that fans and commentators have for cricket.
Click to expand...

A few of them are describing the conditions and the way a bowler or batsman is playing. I don't know what you'd replace "The ball is doing a bit with". Sometimes it does and other times it doesn't. When it does you have to say that. Same goes for "He's playing with a straight bat". I don't know what you're going to replace this sentence with if the batsman is indeed doing that. Not all batsmen do that. Also, the sentence "It's a good toss to lose" makes a lot of sense and indicates that the pitch conditions are a little unknown and the captains don't really know what to do if they win the toss so they're happy to let the other captain decide.

These are cliches, to be sure, but they're very useful.
 
Bhogle used to suck up to Harbhajan, like he does with other Indian players now. He would often say, whenever Harbhajan was useless, which was most of the times - "Harbhajan is a kind of bowler who if he picks one wicket, takes wickets in bucketful". That became a cliche with zero substance or reasoning. In 190 innings Harbhajan bowled, he took 2 wickets or less in 113 innings i.e good 60%. In 111 innings out of 190, he took 1-3 wickets. So the entire logic of him turning things around by picking up a wicket was created out of thin air. They all contributed in making a maha ordinary bowler look great.
 
There should be option to watch matches with just stadium noise on.
 
Mamoon said:
Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, I would assume not.

Shaheen at his best is not average but he doesn’t have a plan B and these days he is rarely at his best because he has lost place.

Naseem has almost never been at his best. He doesn’t take enough wickets and his record in Test cricket against the major sides is absolute shambles.

He is quite ineffective in T20Is. The only format he has actually be potent in is ODIs so overall he has been average so far. His reputation and face value exceeds his actual output and contribution to the team’s success.

Overall, the pace attack of Shaheen, Nadeem and Rauf is average and there is enough body of work across formats to decide this conclusion but they get overhyped because of the cliche that Pakistan is a land of fast bowlers.

As far has historic head to head is concerned, it is only relevant when you are looking at teams from a historic perspective. Otherwise, the only people who care - or talk - about historic head to head are those who don’t have a present to talk about or a future to look forward to.

For example, West Indies still enjoy a very decent head to head record against most teams because of their past dominance in the 70’s and 80’s but it means nothing because they are a borderline minnow today.

Pakistan have not made a single ODI World Cup final in 24 years. It has only won 2-3 ODI series against the top sides (full strength) since 2005.

In Limited Overs, Pakistan has been pretty much the same as West Indies in the last 20 odd years but the only difference is that West Indies fans are not loud or enough in number to drive a narrative, build perception and romanticize mediocrity as unpredictability.

I’m actually overselling Pakistan with the 90% figure. In reality, it is probably closer to 95% if you look at the performances against the top teams in white ball cricket when they are not fielding their B and C teams.

In Tests, Pakistan have been slightly better but still strictly mediocre.
Click to expand...
I agree with most of what you've said but are you not being harsh when you say that Pakistan has been pretty much the same as West Indies in Limited Overs in the last 20 odd years? Pakistan has wiped the floor the Windies in almost every series across all formats in the last 15 years at least if I recall correctly. Can't speak on beyond that as I did not follow cricket then. Correct me if I'm wrong on that. But it does seem that there's a clearly superior team between the two.

Overall you make a lot of sense. Pakistan has been overhyped and sometimes it seems justified because of their performances in ICC tournaments when they manage to topple top teams somehow. But they are at least the 5th or 6th best team overall in the last 20 odd years. They've beaten SA, WI, SL, and NZ just enough to warrant being the frontrunners in the tier below India, England, and Australia. Then the tier BELOW them come the West Indies, Bangladesh, Afghanistan etc. Imo it's harsh to label Pak and WI as equivalent
 
Mamoon said:
Even minnows can cause upsets in tournaments. It is one-off game and weird things can happen.

South Africa have lost to Netherlands in back to back tournament games but Netherlands will stand no chance of toppling South Africa in a series because the stronger team would always prevail over the course of a series.

Check Pakistan’s bilateral record against the top sides in ODIs over the last 15-20 years. Absolute shambles.

In Test cricket, Pakistan has a 100% losing record in Australia (not a single draw) since 1999. Even the infamous Law of Averages is helpless when it comes to Pakistan’s mediocrity in Australia.

No Test series win in any major country for God knows how many decades. Multiple thrashings at home.

If this is your idea of a strong team then someone rightly said that when a team becomes mediocre, the fans also become mediocre.

In bilateral T20Is, teams hardly play their full-strength sides so a relative comparison is difficult to establish.

I don’t need to shift goalposts to prove that Pakistan is a pathetic team and has been a very long time and there is nothing unpredictable about them.

Fans like you who are at liberty with reality are the reason why there is no accountability and no improvement. This delusional mindset is not helping Pakistan because the first step towards improvement is to recognize that we are not good enough and then to dive deep and analyze why we are not good enough.

Only then can we take corrective measures and drive improvement. Unfortunately, our fans, our board and our media refuses to accept that we are not good enough and hence it is stuck in this endless loop of mediocrity.

Congratulations because this is what fans like you deserve.
Click to expand...
Well said. Harsh but this is the reality we are facing.
 
Mamoon said:
Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, I would assume not.

Shaheen at his best is not average but he doesn’t have a plan B and these days he is rarely at his best because he has lost place.

Naseem has almost never been at his best. He doesn’t take enough wickets and his record in Test cricket against the major sides is absolute shambles.

He is quite ineffective in T20Is. The only format he has actually be potent in is ODIs so overall he has been average so far. His reputation and face value exceeds his actual output and contribution to the team’s success.

Overall, the pace attack of Shaheen, Nadeem and Rauf is average and there is enough body of work across formats to decide this conclusion but they get overhyped because of the cliche that Pakistan is a land of fast bowlers.

As far has historic head to head is concerned, it is only relevant when you are looking at teams from a historic perspective. Otherwise, the only people who care - or talk - about historic head to head are those who don’t have a present to talk about or a future to look forward to.

For example, West Indies still enjoy a very decent head to head record against most teams because of their past dominance in the 70’s and 80’s but it means nothing because they are a borderline minnow today.

Pakistan have not made a single ODI World Cup final in 24 years. It has only won 2-3 ODI series against the top sides (full strength) since 2005.

In Limited Overs, Pakistan has been pretty much the same as West Indies in the last 20 odd years but the only difference is that West Indies fans are not loud or enough in number to drive a narrative, build perception and romanticize mediocrity as unpredictability.

I’m actually overselling Pakistan with the 90% figure. In reality, it is probably closer to 95% if you look at the performances against the top teams in white ball cricket when they are not fielding their B and C teams.

In Tests, Pakistan have been slightly better but still strictly mediocre.
Click to expand...
Even the aaane do series we won in 2012 india played the likes or dinda and bhuvaneshwar in bowling lol.

Moment they got rid of dinda in the third game and brought in shami we lost.

Rohit batting at 6 etc.

India found their perfect combo and that actually paved way for them to win the Champions Trophy a year later because they ended up dropping non performers and developed the right combo.
 
Only two cliches fed up with

Pakistan has the best bowling attack

Pakistan are very unpredictable side
 
When people refer to Ramiz Raja as "Rambo"
The guy had an average of 32 with a SR of 63, literally the opposite of Rambo
 
Cryin Out Loud said:
“There’s very little margin for error”.

Seriously? We would never have known without the commentator telling us.
Click to expand...

Margins for error increase and decrease with the conditions and quality of batsmanship. So that one makes sense, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rana
Who is Hijab Zahid and what are her credentials to do commentary/broadcasting in Pakistan cricket?
Replies
10
Views
359
umerz
U
FearlessRoar
"We apologize that we didn't give you the result that Pakistan deserves": Shan Masood
Replies
53
Views
1K
Savak
Savak
U
Pakistan Cricket lacks visionaries and thinkers
Replies
45
Views
1K
MenInG
MenInG
N
The hypocrisy regarding pitches in England vis a vis Indian pitches...
Replies
1
Views
149
Ahmed216
A
The Bald Eagle
"I won't say that we have misread the pitch, but I would say that the pitch didn't behave how we wanted it to": Azhar Mahmood
Replies
25
Views
835
RidiculousMan
RidiculousMan
Back
Top