This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The exceedingly bizarre vandal who thinks Stuart Clark bowls like Curtly Ambrose (has s/he watched much cricket, I wonder) is back. Could someone other than me revert please, as I've lost my sense of humour with this one. --Dweller (talk) 16:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
He's been back. Someone else reverted (thanks) and I have indefblocked the sock. I am considering autoblocking the IPs used... presumably if this causes problems it'll be raised through the usual channels. Any wise words from more experienced admins? --Dweller (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there everyone. Since we know have a lot of people writing about Australian cricket biography articles [I counted five people who have written FAs or GAs on Australian cricket in this year - a total of 5FAs and 9GAs], and since some people (like myself) tend to work offline or in sandboxes with a book for a few hours and then upload in a large chunk (so it seems), I have created this subnoticeboard type thing, so that people can write down what major expansions they are working on, so that there won't be instances of people spending 5-10 hours writing and collecting information which is then duplicated. It has happened before at WP:GAC that two people spent an hour or so reviewing an article and then had an edit conflict and posted two reviews on the same article among other things. Of course, this shows a good sign that the Australian cricket biography scene is doing well. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Bill Davies
Two Glamorgan cricketers, one Bill Davies (cricketer, born 1906)(here) and Bill Davies (cricketer, born 1901)(here). Same team, same name, but a long time has passed since I did anything of this sort. These article titles okay with y'all? Bobo.21:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
There was a saying that if you hollered down a pit in Derbyshire a fast bowler would come up, ready to play first-class cricket. Presumably if you hollered down a pit in Glamorgan a Bill Davies would come up, similarly oven-ready. ;-) Johnlp (talk) 13:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
This was speedied a couple of days ago on the grounds that it didn't say what the team was, only what they had done. I didn't notice until now since I'm really not able to keep up with WP at the moment for non-WP reasons, but I was a little bit surprised. I've recreated it, though I'm out of practice at editing and it's not a very well-written article.
To be honest I can't remember what the original article said, and as I'm not an admin I can't look. I have recreated it, though, on the grounds that the team played four times at List A level (Red Stripe Bowl 2002-03) and thus seems notable enough for an article of its own. I wasn't sure about categories, as Category:West Indian first class cricket teams doesn't apply to a LA-only side.Loganberry (Talk) 02:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
The next step to the FT on The Invincibles is Barnes. TRM and I are already hard at work on his article and Blnguyen's added it to his to-do list, once he's cleared his current work. Others' participation welcomed. Please can someone check that the info box is the right version. Ta. --Dweller (talk) 12:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I've created a dreadful stub article for Keith Johnson. I suspect he will be the greatest impediment to reaching FT to if you're not already chiming in at Sid Barnes, anything you can add to KJ's article will be terrific. --Dweller (talk) 13:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Chris Harte's book includes the same group taken by a different photographer who must have been standing just to the left and his photo clearly shows Lindwall, Loxton and Tallon. It seems that your C and F are red herrings, probably journalists, who were not in the party. Chris Harte has identified all the players and the manager. They are, from left to right, using your locator:
A-Lindwall, B-Toshack, C-not in party, D-Bradman, E-Loxton, F-not in party, G-Ring (definitely not Johnston or Loxton), H-Miller, I-Hassett, J-Bill Johnston, K-Ian Johnson, L-Tallon, M-Keith Johnson, N-Morris, O-Saggers, P-Barnes, Q-Brown, R-Hamence, S-Harvey, T-McCool.
I suggest that the image page or talk page thereof includes a (permanent, to avoid archiving problems?) link to this discussion, to help explain how the identification was undertaken. --Dweller23:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Namibia, South African team?
I've had to revert twice today an addition to the Namibia national cricket team article that says they're a South African first-class team. I've reverted it as whilst they do play in South African domestic cricket, they can't really be called a South African team. For starters, they're not even South African. We don't call Ireland and Scotland English teams, and we'd be mad if we called Canada a West Indian team for their brief foray into West Indian domestic cricket. Am I in the right here?Andrew nixon (talk) 21:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I'll settle for that as a compromise, though I still think it is inaccurate. The Namibia national team and the team that plays in South African domestic cricket as Namibia are not really the same team, as they are entitled to pick overseas players in South African domestic cricket, eg. Tatenda Taibu last season, and Jacques Rudolph's brother this year, both of whom can not represent the Namibia national side. Andrew nixon (talk) 22:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Dougie Brown it was, yes, but that was a slightly more obvious one, I merely regret not discussing that at the time. Do as you wish, I guess with Rudolph's only appearance being in domestic competition, this is different to actually representing the side in a match where both teams represent a Southern African or otherwise international country. Bobo.18:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Not surprising. The match series section is a mess and should be removed: it is one of those things that once started can never be finished. The article should be about the concept of The Ashes in terms of the origin, the "legend" and the trophy. The only series that are truly relevant to the concept are 1882, 1882-83 and 1903-04. We need to be very clear about the scope and the theme of the article. Matches and series other than those three should be out of scope, including even the Bodyline series.
Hi. I've replaced the seemingly defunct CCOTM advert (it's still there, just hidden) with an ad for the FT drive, lovingly based on Blnguyen's excellent World Cup one. I've done this because so many members of the WikiProject are helping either at the Sid Barnes or Keith Johnson articles, that it seems there's some consensus for this being a WikiProject task.
The ad's still perhaps too big (so's the general Project to-do box, for that matter) - no ownership here, so please feel free to edit it.
In a similar vein, User:SGGH and I are considering England's 2005 Ashes success for another Featured Topic, seeing as Colly, KP and Tresco are already FAs, it seemed a good place to continue collaborating. If anyone else is interested, let us know (or if you think it is a bad idea...! (We're looking at the King of Spain at the moment.–MDCollins (talk) 23:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
We need something to hold onto - the urn keeps slipping away. At least you don't have the highest Test wicket-taker :-) And no to Pratt. see: 2005 Ashes winners nav box!
What do people think about the paragraph that someone has added entitled "A competition in crisis?"? It seems POV to me. I'm not sure that it's true that its popularity has declined further in recent years. I don't think that attendances are notably lower now than they have been for the past several decades. Of course it is effectively subsidised by hand-outs to the counties from Test Match receipts, but that is nothing new. JH (talk page) 18:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
POV, in my view. And even if true, there are assertions here that need sourcing (and how are we going to measure popularity anyway?) Johnlp (talk) 21:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
There is a Civil Service cricket team article already for the UK one. I'd be inclined to wonder whether the Irish club, with only 43 members, meets notability criteria. But it should probably be renamed along the lines suggested anyway. Johnlp (talk) 14:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to the considerable efforts of a number of members of this WikiProject, the Sid Barnes article is close to ready for FAC listing.
Before we go there, we ought to have a Peer Review. And before we do that, the remaining {{cn}} tags really need to be dealt with. I'd appreciate it if you could take a peek at the article and help deal with them.
I just decided Sachin Tendulkar should be an FA. I've done quite a bit of work on the article recently, but I was hoping someone with experience in writing an FA could help me because the article's loaded with unnecessary information and personal views and referring to people by first names etc. Thnaks. Darrowen (talk) 05:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Photograph identification
Hi all. I need some help identifying the people in this image of the 1930 Australians in England, in particular Archie Jackson. In the back row, I have Wall third from the left, a'Beckett fourth, Hornibrook fifth , Hurwood, sixth and Grimmett seventh. In the middle row, I have Fairfax, Ponsford, Richardson and Woodfull first, second, third and fourth from the left respectively and Bradman and Kippax second and third from the right. Seated I have McCabe on the left. Please add any you can find. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk11:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Stop looking, I found a copy of the photo with names in a book on my shelf! Jackson is second from the left in the back row. Thanks, Mattinbgn\talk12:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I can easily recognise Jackson and Oldfield but some of the less famous players not at all. I've got a couple of photos of Kippax batting but still can't make him out on the team photo. Which is he? --The Ghost | séance07:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I am currently working on Warwick Armstrong and I am looking for suitable images for the article. In particular there is a Punch caricature of Armstrong drawn by Frank Reynolds and titled "The Lion Tamer" that would be ideal. The picture shows Armstrong being asked for his autograph by a "British Lion" . It appeared in Punch on 24 August 1921. I would be most appreciative if anyone could find or create an electronic version of this picture or at least be able to point me in the right direction to find one myself. Thanks, Mattinbgn\talk13:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
There was a suggestion many months ago on WT:CRIC that an article about schools cricket should be created, but it didn't happen. There is a lot of information in the main sources about schools cricket so I've decided to make a start but so far I've only gone up to 1700.
The main significance of schools cricket is in the 19th century because of its impact on the universities and thence of the "Gentlemen", who were vital to cricket's continued development until Test matches and the County Championship began and were established.
The new article is therefore one that will grow substantially and obviously any additional ideas and contributions are very welcome. --The Ghost | séance07:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
That's a worthwhile, but very large, project - especially as it hasn't been restricted to English or British schools. (I recall reading that matches between the leading schools in Colombo attract large crowds and massive media coverage.) I had considered writing an article on Eton v Harrow, but never got around to it. JH (talk page) 17:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a very good point that has occurred to me too. I need to think about the scope of this especially with the essential overlap into university and amateur cricket. I have a lot of notes that I want to write up and I think I'm going to have to turn this into a historical article about English amateur cricket in general, the schools being the source of all amateur talent. Schools cricket worldwide probably requires its own category. Watch this space. --The Ghost | séance07:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I've done some more work and have retitled the article as History of English amateur cricket, which is what its scope amounts to. I expect it will have to be done as a series like the Test cricket history that was started a few years ago. If anyone can help with something that is admittedly very ambitious, ask your local medium to contact me. --The Ghost | séance13:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Didn't get your question. Are you looking for details about the people or the artist ? We have a lousy article done by yours truly for Fuller Pilch, there is none yet for Box. If the question is about the artist, BlackJack is the area expert. Tintin15:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Just trying to upload the files under the right name. But I did explain meself a bit too little. They'll be up in the next couple days. Adam Cuerdentalk18:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
If you look at this site there is more about the Thomas Box picture and its artist Charles J Basebe. Mind you don't do a google on Thomas Box only without mentioning cricket because you get pages and pages of Thomas the Tank Engine! --The Ghost | séance07:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I think Barnes was excluded because he'd played so few innings. From memory, the list was based on Cricinfo's list of top averages of all time* which has a minimum entry level of 20 innings - and Barnes played 19. (*less players still playing today). The rationale for excluding current players was that most (not all) Test players suffer a marked decline in their last years, making comparisons even more invidious than they already are. --Dweller (talk) 10:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Are these are Bombay/Mumbai situations whereby there's one category and Chandra Sarwate, for example, is classed as a Mumbai cricketer even though there was no Mumbai team until 1996.
1. Northerns was called North Eastern Transvaal from Dec 1937 to April 1971; and then Northern Transvaal to April 1997 when it becmae Northerns. I would merge all of these as Northerns.
2. Orange Free State was the name from Jan 1904 to April 1995 when the word "Orange" was dropped, so that is a straight continuation and the categories should be merged as Free State.
3. Similarly, Gauteng was called Transvaal from April 1890 to April 1997 so that was a straight name change – merge as Gauteng.
4. KwaZulu Natal, same again. It was called Natal from Dec 1889 to April 1998; rename as KwaZulu Natal.
Sid Barnes is shortly to go to Peer Review. Thanks very much to all who've helped it develop 900% according to Blnguyen's figures! Which article does the WikiProject want to collaborate on next? It should be a relatively short hop to get Don Bradman to FA. Alternatively, there's the main article? Thoughts welcomed. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Keith Miller I think. That's the only core XI player who hasn't had a start on. Phanto is working on Hassett and Johnson on his computer I think. All the other core XI players are already past 15k. Also Miller was larger than life, so there is all the stuff about his clashes with officialdom, his RAAF service, in addition to the bags of runs and wickets. Lindwall already looks like it will be 75k, I have only covered about 1/3rd of his Tests and it is already 46k, and Miller was more colourful than Lindwall. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, I think we will need a separate article for the actual Tests. There were 34 matches all up. If you look at Arthur Morris, teh WR run chase in the Fourth Test already takes one paragraph, and that is one day's play. Especially as these Tests were pretty iconic, not even to mention the tour in general. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
The project guidelines include: "disputed Team score format: Adopt the consensus style of writing in the host country of the tournament, i.e. 1/141 or one for 141 for matches in Australia, and 141/1 or 141 for one for most other countries. Use slashes when shortening scores. The alternative view is that we should be consistent throughout all articles and use the style used in all countries other than Australia." This is something that the article on the 1948 tour notably doesn't do, as it appears to use the Australian convention throughout. Changing it would be a long and tedious taks, though. JH (talk page) 18:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
It should be changed because the tour was in England and 7/522 is inappropriate. The English say 522-7. If you want this to be the main article in a star topic you have got to get that sort of detail right. Tedious, yes, but someone should do the necessary. Forget about Oz, you were in the old country in '48 (and didn't we know you were!?) --The Ghost | séance19:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I have a further point. You really do need to make the references more presentable. Having Allen or Harte, p.999 umpteen times is bad presentation. --The Ghost | séance19:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Presumably, we're OK with scores in the Sid Barnes article being presented in the Australian form? I actually footnoted it on the first occurrence to explain. --Dweller (talk) 10:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
It's funny - I've never heard or read the term "Mankaded" till I saw it here. Could this be a googly/Bosie thing that different parts of the cricket world use different terms for something? Or is it that the term is/was used commonly in England and somehow passed me by? --Dweller (talk) 10:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
'To be "Mankaded" is to be run out by the bowler when backing up too far (named after Vinoo Mankad who did same to Bill Brown in the Indians 1947/48 tour of Aus).' Taken from here. Schumi555 (talk) 13:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Technically, a Mankad is to run out the non-striker while he is backing up without giving him a warning. There is an unwritten protocol that if the non-striker is leaving his crease before the bowler delivers, then the bowler should stop in his delivery stride, point to the batsman as out of his crease and then say "if you do it again I'll run you out". Where this protocol came from is anyone's guess. It is a matter of opinion whether Mankad's actions were sporting or not, which is the crux of the matter.
Phanto282 (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
The point always overlooked is that it is really the non-striker who is trying to gain unfair advantage by backup too soon. Tintin13:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Not always. RS Whitington wrote: "Brown was run out by Vinoo Mankad at the bowler's end when he left his crease before the ball had been released. In an earlier game on this same ground Mankad had run out Brown in the same fashion.[3] On that occasion he gave the batsman a warning before running him out. This time there was no warning but Mankad was absolutely within his rights. Brown was unintentionally but illegally gaining ground." Bradman also agreed that Mankad was right. It was the lack of warning that caused controversy and led to the term "mankaded"; it's a bit like appealing for handled the ball when the batsman bends down & picks up the ball & returns it to the bowler, which leaves him vulnerable to an appeal. Both of these circumstances happened in the Australia-Pakistan Test in Perth 1978-79[4](as well as Rodney Hogg being run out in the previous Test while he was "gardening" the pitch, a la WG Grace/SP Jones). Moral of the story: stay in your crease and don't pick up the nut.
Phanto282 (talk) 14:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I think the moral is that if you run out a batsman who's injured or gardening or has thrown the ball back to you, your name is going to be mud because you're clearly showing contempt for the spirit of the game. Nick mallory (talk) 11:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
WG "Muddy" Grace [5]. List of Mankads in Aus 1st class cricket: J Huddlestone (Vic) by J Kinloch (NSW)[6] 1861-62; SWG Campbell (Vic) by N Thomson (NSW) 1866-67 [7]; Brown twice by Mankad 1947-48; IR Redpath (Aus) by C Griffith (W Indies) 1968-69 [8]; Sikander Bakht (Pak) by AG Hurst (Aus) 1978-79.
Phanto282 (talk) 23:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been through all the reports of the county matches on the 1948 tour. I've hopefully improved the standard of the English, and have removed things like references to a side batting first as "opening the batting". (As I understand it, that idiom is only used in the context of opening batsmen, not when referring to a team.) JH (talk page) 10:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
According to the series, Jardine did that in a schools' match. Lord Harris then mentions to a fellow spectator that the same thing happened in a University match in some year and he (Harris) was the captain who instructed the bowler then. The latter part (Harris' involvement in a Mankading incident) seems to be fact, not fiction. Tintin13:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I think Stephen is right that the term is not widely known in England, but it is certainly well known in Australia. In my opinion, Brown should have learned his lesson and there should never have been any complaints about Mankad's action. Backing up is tantamount to gamesmanship and I think a guilty batsman should be run out immediately without any warning whatsoever. After all, the wicketkeeper would not warn the striker about leaving his ground, would he? --The Ghost | séance22:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I've heard it used in club cricket in the North. It would be VERY bad form there for the bowler to do it without warning, the second time around it would be fair enough though if the batsman was obviously taking the p*ss. It's one of those etiquette things, as a batsman I run between the fielder and the stumps if a run out's on and no-one's going to appeal for obstructing the field but if the ball hits me then I'm not going to try and pinch an extra run even though there's nothing in the rules to stop me. The law was (stupidly) changed recently meaning a bowler can't mankad someone once he's got into his action, giving a non striker carte blanche to be halfway down the pitch every ball. Thankfully batsman have more sense, or an ingrained desire to keep their ground, than to exploit that as it's clearly against the spirit of the game. Nick mallory (talk) 11:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Wasn't that changed to stop a bowler retrospectively appealing if he accidentally flicks the bails off during delivery, i.e. thus preventing the non-striker being run out by the bowler (without intent)? (Just passing comment)–MDCollins (talk) 23:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so. If it was, it shouldn't have been. You don't have to appeal do you? As it stands the law is allowing the non striker to steal three yards before the bowler's let the ball go and that's against all logic and the spirit of the game, just as running out a batsman poleaxed by a bouncer would be. Trying to legislate every inch of the game is fraught with difficulties and shouldn't be done. Going against the spirit of the game is itself against the spirit of the game. Nick mallory (talk) 00:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, there was a rotten change to the rule so that the bowler can't Mankad once they start the delivery hop, so basically now in the slog overs of ODIs the batsman can steal 2.5 metres when the bowler jumps. It's a horrible disgrace. [They might as well make batsmen immune to LBW outside off stump, these pro batting legislators] They don't run out of their crease in Tests though because if the ball is straight driven and the bowler stops it then the non-striker is about 5m out of the crease and it is an easy run out.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
..are needed. If anyone can get a scanner and "Australian criccet:1918-1948:the Bradman Years" by Jack Pollard in one place (I can't since the library doesn't allow the book to be taken out and there isn't a scanner), there is a picture of his actual delivery in 1946-47 in australia (it's PD). Any other Pd pictures also welcomed.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
For heaven's sake, Sri Lanka declaring on 499 and bowling out England for 88 before the close of the third day, is this really happening? Tell me it's just a nightmare. What the french connection united kingdom is going on out there? I don't mind losing but we're not even pretending to compete. I wonder what Ramps is thinking right now? Nick mallory (talk) 05:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I saw a good joke somewhere that the England team needs to find a new Fairy Godmother so that they don't keep missing the ball! --The Ghost | séance07:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Going by a hardcopy photo in Pollard's Australian Cricket: The Game and the Players, it certainly looks like him. Good find! -- Mattinbgn\talk11:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I think it is him too but do we have any biographical material concerning his military career? If he was a pilot officer and he was in New Guinea in 1943, then that would clinch it. --The Ghost | séance07:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
He was certainly a Pilot Officer, ending the war as a Flight Lieutenant. Interestingly, the WWII Nominal Roll entry on McCool has his date of birth as 19 December 1916 while we and cricinfo have it as 9 December 1916. --Roisterer (talk) 08:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Important historical artifact
Contrary to all previous research on the matter, the cream jacket was not a visionary stroke of genius from Kerry Packer [9]. Archaelogists are working on the sartorial implications as we speak....
The FAC has brought up a request of an additional picture of Barnes, to accompany the "Later life" section of his article. Obviously, it would be ideal if this were from his later career as a writer. Can anyone help? Perhaps a book jacket might be a useful addition, as well as a portrait? --Dweller (talk) 10:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
There are plenty of good photos of his later years in the biography from Smith. There are two problems: 1. I don't have access to a scanner, although I may be able to get to one on the weekend; and 2. I am not sure what the licencing requirements will be. The images certainly will not be public domain. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk03:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I have the Smith book but not currently on me. If possible, it would be great to have the photo of him in sunglasses where even the casual observer can tell he was under a lot of mental strain. --Roisterer (talk) 04:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
That was exactly the one I was thinking of! I will try and scan and upload it later this week if someone can give me a hand with the fair use requirements. -- Mattinbgn\talk04:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I have the picture in another Pollard book: Australian cricket 1948-1995. Unfortunately, the printing of the book is quite poor and I am unsure how a scanned image will come out. I will give it a shot this evening and see how it goes. Who is the keeper in the background? -- Mattinbgn\talk00:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Sid Barnes at FAC
I'm soliciting non expert comments from the USA WikiProject (I thought that was a clever idea... so far, no bites <sigh>) but an expert review at FAC would also be useful from one or more of you. Please be as vicious as you like. --Dweller (talk) 14:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
In view of possible conflict of interest given that I am a member of this project and the philately project, I do not think it is ethical that I should in effect "canvas" by placing a notice on those two project pages. It is a matter for the wider membership. This maxim also applies to bids for adminship and consistency is needed.
All keeps and given that the controversy that started it all is over, the rogue editor having been banned from the site indefinitely, I am archiving this in the spirit of "move on". --BlackJack | talk page20:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Twenty20 International on Player Infoboxes?
I think it's time that Twenty20 Internationals (T20I) are included in the Template:Infobox cricketer biography infoboxes. Players should have these stats more than domestic stats are included. so if someone could come up ith a solution, maybe even to keep including the domestic stats on top of Test, ODI and T20I stats. We might have to add a fifth column for stats. This should probably be really considered. Also including debut T20I, last T20I and shirt number. Please have your say on this. Thanks everyone. Allied45 (talk) 07:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
The template allows you to have what ever stats you want, up to a maximum of four columns. (to keep it a reasonable size) I'd suggest for those players you have Tests, ODIs, T20Is, and First-class. Of course, for those players who have played a significant amount of internationals, domestic stats could be left of entirely. Andrew nixon (talk) 10:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with sny downgrading of any player's first class record. It's is very important, far more so than their twenty twenty statistics. Nick mallory (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Nick - 1st class stats must be preserved. If there's no room for both, do not include their T20I stats. --Dweller (talk) 11:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Why? We can have four columns with whatever headings we want, so if a player has not played international cricket, or has only played Twenty20 at international level, why not put Twenty20 stats on? Andrew nixon (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
What about a player like Jadavji Jesani, who played a Twenty20 International for Kenya in September, but has not played any first-class or List A cricket? Do we just leave his stats off? Andrew nixon (talk) 21:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Twenty20 remains trivial in statistical terms and would not add value. Much more experience is needed before that can become meaningful. --The Ghost | séance21:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that's a good enough reason to just leave it off. Take a player like David Hemp. His first three columns would obviously be ODI, First Class and List A. So why not put on his Twenty20 stats, which number 33 games, more than his ODIs? The columns are customisable for this very reason, surely? Andrew nixon (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Most Wanted Articles
This page [10] lists redlink names which are noted in other articles. There's a long list of tennis players there, could we generate one for first class cricketers? Every test player has an article but such a list might help sort priorities for the many first class players who don't. Nick mallory (talk) 01:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
There's a list at the head of this page. Some clever people who understand what they're doing may be able to transclude our list in that one? --Dweller (talk) 11:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Ah... scrap my other answer. It seems that list is automatically generated by counting redlinks. Anything we do to affect it would therefore necessarily be artificial. --Dweller (talk) 11:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I've created some templates with the hex values of official colours of the domestic cricket teams. I've added them to the category Category:Australian_cricket_colour_templates - that page also has a sample of their colours (some of the colours used were a bit off the exact ones used - compare old and new versions of Pura Cup to see the difference.)
I can see these fine, but I wonder whether colour-blind people would be able to read text inside such dark coloured boxes? Johnlp (talk) 09:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I am colour blind and I can see these OK. I tend to have more trouble with light on light and especially red on green and vice versa (It's not so good for seeing a red ball on a green field either!) -- Mattinbgn\talk09:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
The "light" ones can be made lighter if needed. At least if the colours need to be changed, it is only one template - the change will take effect through all tables it has been used. -- Chuq(talk)00:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've also made some SVG images and uploaded to commons. They are 2px x 3px and are designed to be used in place of flags - when set to 20px width they look like this: . -- Chuq(talk)00:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In what sense are these colours "official"? I would prefer to have the lighter colours a bit lighter - it is a good idea to have them as templates! I'm not sure about the map - the teams are state association representative teams, not simply clubs based in a particular city. JPD (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I sourced the colours from images from the official websites. Where it wasn't clear which exact colour was the main one or gradients were used (such as at http://www.nswblues.com.au/images/speed_blitz_blues_logo.gif ) I chose one which was most readable and least likely to be confused with other states. Notice at Ford Ranger One Day Cup I have also included the ACT Comets colour - yet another shade of blue! - which I sourced from the uniform of a player in a photo at cricinfo - not the best method, but the only one, from what I can find!
The light colours are brightened to 70% in The Gimp, I will try to adjust these later on today.
Good point about the states, but the state associations are strongly linked to their capital cities - HQs are there, and a majority of home games are played there. -- Chuq(talk)23:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm. I wouldn't describe them as "official colours", then. They are the colours currently officially used, but I don't think we should imply that this has been specifically decided. As for the map, I definitely wasn't trying to say that pointing out the relevant cities was actually wrong. I jsut wonder whether it would be better to use a map that gives an idea of the state-based nature of the teams. Maybe we could colour the states and indicate the location of the main home ground? JPD (talk) 14:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
They might not be "official" - but no less official than (Perth Glory) or (Hawthorn). My reasoning for creating them was that the state flags are (a) almost impossible to distinguish at such small sizes (b) represent the state (eg. the government), not the cricket team. I have just made them a single colour as that is enough to differentiate the teams, and I haven't used logos because there could be copyright issues.
The map - it uses a template which is designed to make it easy to modify locations/names without modifying the image itself. It doesn't have a facility for colouring whole areas. The map could be manually re-coloured? -- Chuq(talk)22:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
There is a variation between articles on the term Invincibles (or is The Invincibles and for that matter, Bodyline and Victory Tests) as to whether it is italicised, in inverted commas or just a proper noun. Is it worthwhile having a clear definition in the WP:CRIC style guide as to what is appropriate so that there is consistency across the board?
This is a style of writing/MOS issue, not a WP:CRIC issue. I'd italicise it, as an informal reference, rather than inverted commas which implies a quote of someone (note singular). It's not just a proper noun, as it's not the real name of the team. --Dweller (talk) 13:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Why would it be in anything other than capitals? I think italics would normally just be used for titles of books, films and the like. Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Stephen. The fact that it's not the "real" name of the team is irrelevant; it's still a proper noun. JH (talk page) 17:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I also agree with Stephen and JH. Italics confer some form of emphasis, but it isn't always clear to a reader what that emphasis is. Best done by other means if a specific form of emphasis is actually wanted. Convention (including old proofreading standard) is italics only for books, films, plays etc, though other Wikipedia Projects do use them for other things, as I found out when I wrote up RMS Strathaird for our Invincibles drive. Johnlp (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
I've posted a procedural nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Ferrini, and would welcome opinions on the matter, as I really can't make up my mind if this one's deletable or not and want to get a consensus. Generally, "represented his country" would be automatic notability, but does being a member of the national team of one of the weakest cricketing nations in the world qualify? Any opinions welcome... — iridescent14:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
A way to help our friends across the pond
One of our over-keen American friends placed a speedy delete tag on J Wyatt (Essex cricketer) which I introduced last night just before I went off to get well plastered. Andrew came to the rescue and removed the tag.
I thought a polite explanation of cricket notability might help our American friend and it occurs to me that something like this may be reusable. If you look at his talk page you will see that I've explained the various cricket match classifications and the fact that the Essex boys are the equivalent of the New York Yankees or whoever.
Mickey De Boer would be better rewritten from scratch; the deleted version had very minimal content and an inappropriate tone. I will ask the deleting editor about recreating the Akhtar Ayub article. The problem with the article was that it did not mention his F-C career at all. -- Mattinbgn\talk20:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Akhtar is restored with FC detail added. I agree that De Boer needs a rewrite—there's nothing in the deleted version worth salvaging. —Moondyne05:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The names for the Category:International cricket tours sub-categories are confusing. They refer to tours of countries which could be series in the country or of tours by the countries national team. In their descriptions they refer more clearly to tours in the countries. I propose renaming them all to tours in country Y. Ansell 21:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
"To" sounds better than "in" now that I think about it. To is actually used in some of the descriptions already now that I look closer. I chose "in" mainly because all of the individual series articles seem to be named "Country X in Country Y in Year ZZZZ-AA" Ansell 21:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, WP isn't supposed to be a soapbox, but I just have to say that this match was about disgusting as Italy v Australia in the 2006 FIFA World Cup (and the final as well...). And, as per usual so it seems, sport seems to attract a disproportionate amount of rabid arm-chair nationalists [with a disproportionate amount of fat people who obviously did nothing to advance the state of their countries] jumping up and down triumphantly. Especially the players, coaches and "non-core" sportsfans who are jumping up and down in the streets with their new found interest in sports...........anyway, I'm off to lock these pages....In June 2006, Fabio Grosso was similarly vandalised with pictures of deep sea divers etc. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The difference with the Centenary Test article is it was written years after the event - an article on the SCG Test is still a bit newsy for my liking, but perhaps time will tell whether it has long-term encyclopaedic value. Apart from the umpiring and the Harbhajan/Symonds controversy, it was a fantastic match though and I enjoyed listening to almost the whole lot on the radio while camping on the beach with the kids.30°13′37″S114°59′49″E / 30.227°S 114.997°E / -30.227; 114.997 3 wickets off 5 balls at the very end by a non-bowler was heartstopping. The tension reminded me of the second Ashes Test at Edgebaston in 2005.
Regarding articles on single matches, we have Australia in South Africa, 5th ODI, 2006 which was notable for statistical reasons. Crystal balling, lets say the BCCI cancels the tour. That would be article-worthy and perhaps the Test article could be merged into it. But I'm getting ahead of myself ... —Moondyne02:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but Benazir Bhutto assassination was also newsy. Personally I think this Test might still be notable in a few years time. There should be more articles on single Tests, if people are willing to expand them and there was something rather unusual about them, eg Calcutta 2001, Headingley 81, Tied Test, WC99 Tie, Headingley 48 (Australia chased 404 in 2.5 sessions) and a few others like the Adelaide Bodyline Test - there were whole textbooks written about Bodyline and we could get 10k-15k of GA/FA out of the Woodfull-Warner incident just by itself. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm currently reading The Hapless Hookers by Frank Tyson, about the West Indies in Australia in 75/76. In his report on the 2nd Test, he notes that after Holding had bowled six deliveries (of an 8 ball over) he limped off. Tyson then notes that over was called and the next over begun (Tyson doesn't seem surprised by this situation). As I had always been of the understanding that if a bowler is injured during an over then another bowler has to finish the over. Does anyone know of why the umpire would call over rather than require another bowler to finish Holding's over? --Roisterer (talk) 12:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Maybe they forgot the rules? Or it could be that there was a playing condition at the time that said if six balls are completed of an eight ball over, it can be called over if the bowler is injured. Andrew nixon (talk) 12:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The Law 24 Over in the 1947 Code only says this : "A bowler shall finish an “Over” in progress unless he be incapacitated or be suspended for unfair play. He shall be allowed to change ends as often as desired, provided only that he shall not bowl two “Overs” consecutively in one innings. A Bowler may require the Batsman at the wicket from which he is bowling to stand on whichever side of it he may direct." In the 1980 Code this becomes "If, for any reason, a bowler is incapacitated while running up to bowl the first ball of an over, or is incapacitated or suspended during an over, the umpire shall call and signal "dead ball" and another bowler shall be allowed to bowl or complete the over from the same end, provided only that he shall not bowl two overs, or part thereof, consecutively in one innings." Tintin12:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg
Image:HawthornDesign.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
. -- Chuq (talk) 00:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
(Perth Glory) or 
(Hawthorn). My reasoning for creating them was that the state flags are (a) almost impossible to distinguish at such small sizes (b) represent the state (eg. the government), not the cricket team. I have just made them a single colour as that is enough to differentiate the teams, and I haven't used logos because there could be copyright issues.
