Story of Cricket Essay Example for Free

Story of Cricket Essay At Old Trafford in 1956 Jim Laker produced one of the most famous individual performances ever in a Test Match, and one which will surely never be repeated. It was hardly surprising then, following that 19 for 90 in the Ashes deciding fourth Test, that publishers rushed to sign up the man who had enthralled the nation, and it was Frederick Muller Limited who secured the rights to publish Lakers autobiography. In the 1950s Mullers were one of the leading publishers in that field also, at various times, publishing books in the names of Colin Cowdrey, Trevor Bailey, Tom Graveney and Bill Edrich. Today there is no trace of the companys imprint, although its lineage can be traced through to current publishers Random House. In time Laker was to become a respected commentator and author in his own right but his three early books for Muller were ghost written. One, Over to me, that was published in 1960, was to cause a considerable furore, but the books were, generally, no more satisfying than similar books which appear today. The first book to appear bearing Lakers name appeared in early 1957 and was entitled Spinning Round the World. There is nothing remarkable about the content of the book and there are no compelling reasons for anyone to seek out a copy today, however there is one fascinating chapter, the final one, where Laker looks forward in order to speculate as to what cricket in the year 2000, forty three years on, might be like. The purpose of this article is to have a look at Lakers approach in order to see just how accurate or otherwise his predictions were and then for the writer to try and project the game forward again, this time, less ambitiously, to 21 years hence. To understand Lakers vision of the future it is necessary to know a little about the man himself and, more importantly, something of the state of the game when he made his predictions. Although Laker played his county cricket for Surrey, he was a gritty Yorkshireman. After leaving Surrey he also played briefly for Essex as an amateur but he was, throughout his Surrey career, a professional with all the typical attitudes and values of the northern professionals of that time. As far as the game itself was concerned England was very much the centre of the cricket world and the only country where there was a full time professional structure. Seventeen First Class counties would compete each year for the County Championship playing 28 three day games apiece. Only around half a dozen of them ever had any realistic aspirations to winning the title and there was no other domestic competition, so many games had little by way of a competitive edge. Overseas players had to acquire a residential qualification before they could play county cricket, and a decision to do so would end their international careers, so while there were overseas players in the English game they were not the top stars and English crowds only saw overseas Test players when they toured with their countries every few years. Test cricket was televised, but in grainy black and white, so in order to see the game properly supporters had to turn up at the grounds. In 1957 the English game was run by the MCC then, as now, a private club for gentlemen, and a similar organisation, the Imperial Cricket Conference, ran the world game. The abolition in the English game of the division between amateur and professional was, by 1957, inevitable but it was to be another six years before the distinction was finally consigned to sporting and social history. As far as the international game was concerned Test cricket had the great battles between England and Australia but for many years every other contest had been some way behind both in competitiveness and importance. South Africa had beaten England, in South Africa, on three occasions and once, in 1935, had defeated England in England but only once had they achieved even a draw in a series with Australia and, prior to 1952/53, had won but one Test against their Southern Hemisphere rivals. New Zealand in those days had never beaten England in a single Test and India had only ever won one match against England and that against what was effectively a second XI in 1951/52. Australia had only played New Zealand once, in a game so one sided they did not play them again for almost 30 years, and they had never been beaten by India. Only West Indies, who had comfortably beaten England in England in  1950, had changed the order of things and even they had failed to trouble Australia. In 1957 Pakistan had been the most recent addition to the family of Test playing nations and they had proved competitive, a great fast medium bowler, Fazal Mahmood, spearheading them to Test victories over England and Australia but the team as a whole was young and inexperienced and it was to be another 30 years before Pakistan would reach the top of the tree. It is also worth bearing in mind that in 1957 there was only one touring side to England each summer. Then, as now, Australia visited every four years as, since the war, had South Africa. There were therefore only two slots in the four year cycle for the other tourists and the 1950s saw nine years between New Zealand tours, eight years between Pakistani visits and seven years between those of India and the West Indies. A Test series then was four, or more usually, five matches. There were, of course, no one day internationals and the tourists would also play each of the 17 First Class counties once, and in the case of Yorkshire, Surrey and Lancashire usually twice, as well as a number of other First Class fixtures. Laker gave us two alternative visions of the future, one of which he was at pains to point out was not serious, but which is, when looked at overall, perhaps the most prescient. Laker saw the first Ashes Series of the 21st century as consisting of ten Test matches, his rationale being the extra funds generated by the ultimate form of the game. He saw the final Test still taking place at The Oval, and while the lifts to take ticket holders to their seats and the waitress service that Laker envisaged for spectators have not actually come about, the vast improvement in spectator comfort that he predicted has. As to the game itself Laker described players having numbered shirts and bowlers being allowed to make liberal use of substitutes to enable them to leave the field for a break after each spell. He also saw batsmen being allowed to take breaks within their innings, giving captains an American football style dilemma as to how best to arrange their batting order. It is certainly an interesting concept that a Paul Collingwood could be sent out to steady the ship after a couple of quick wickets fall only for him, having done so, to be able to take a rest while Andrew Fintoff comes out to blaze  away safe in the knowledge that if he falls early Collingwoods war of attrition can resume. Laker also predicted the increase in scoring rates in Test cricket which recent generations have delivered. We have not seen the ten ball overs that he foresaw, nor a rule that a batsman must score off at least three deliveries in each ten ball over or face a penalty, but we have seen the shortening of bou ndaries, albeit that has not gone as far as the complete standardisation at 60 yards that Laker felt the future would bring. Having set out that vision of the future Laker then took a step back, decided that the MCC and ICC were far too reactionary to countenance such changes and went on to outline a rather more conservative set of suggestions the majority of which have proved to be accurate. First and foremost Laker foresaw, although it was not difficult at the time, that the old order of the game, run as it was in large part by grandees and great industrialists, would have to change, and that former players and professional businessmen would have to have a hand in the running of the game. Irrespective of ones views on how those individuals who have found themselves in positions of power have performed there is no doubt that the game is much more professionally run than in the 1950s. As far as players are concerned, and Laker was only considering the English game here, he foresaw the dismantling of the archaic system of residential qualification for counties and predicted the dawn of the overseas player and a system of players transferring between counties and, which must have seemed farfetched at the time, the very recent concept of players going out on loan from one county to another. He also predicted, if not in so many words, the arrival of central contracts. As far as the laws of the game are concerned there has been little change since the 1950s and Laker did not anticipate anything revolutionary nor did he consider it necessary. This was a time when, despite its having been in the game for more than twenty years, the new LBW law that we have today was still controversial. Surprisingly, given that he was an off spinner, Laker was in favour of returning to the old rule whereby a batsman could not  be out LBW to a ball pitching outside the off stump, although it is clear it was not something that he expected to happen. One change that the following years did see, and which Laker considered essential, was the abolition of the old back foot no ball law which, at a stroke, eradicated the problem with fast bowlers dragging that was, by the time it changed, in 1969, a serious problem. Laker still believed, and this was the only feature he took from his unacceptable vision, that boundaries would become standardised. He deplored a state of affairs whereby a batsman could be caught in the deep on one ground and play an identical shot for six on another and keenly felt the inequity of this. Again this is perhaps surprising from a man who was a spin bowler and who spent many of his playing days on the wide open spaces of Kennington Oval with its long boundaries. Perhaps looking back to the controversies of the previous year Laker also foresaw a ground inspection panel to regularly inspect test and county grounds with a view to avoiding wickets being under prepared or otherwise unfit for the First Class game. Lakers final prediction was that the laws, or playing conditions, would contain provision for a fixed number of overs to be played in a day and that, after a number of gradual moves towards it, is now something we are used to. That it took so long to arrive is surprising and it took an infamous act of gamesmanship on the part of Brian Close, which cost him the England captaincy for the 1967/68 tour of West Indies, to secure the first move with the immediate introduction of a rule that 20 overs must be bowled in the final hour of a county championship match. The most significant development that Laker did not foresee, and indeed none of his generation did, was the introduction of single day matches with a limitation of overs to both sides, and to anyone looking back on the latter part of the 20th century that development must be viewed as the most significant step taken in the games evolution. Historically, a knockout cup between the First Class counties was mooted on a number of occasions,  initially as long ago as 1873, without any consensus ever being reached. What was usually discussed was a competition consisting of standard First Class matches, however no satisfactory mechanism for resolving the problems thrown up by drawn games was ever worked out. The possibility of one day cricket was considered, at some length, towards the end of the Second World War when the MCC was preparing for the resumption of the First Class game but was, effectively, dismissed out of hand. Two reasons were cited, firstly that a game of cricket limited by time or overs would be detrimental to the art and character of the game and, secondly, that captains would be encouraged to concentrate on preventing the batting side from scoring rather than from dismissing them. As the counties finances lurched from crisis to crisis in the 1950s discussions about a cup competition continued but it was not until 1961 that it was finally decided that a 65 overs per side cup competition was to be launched and as a result in 1963 the Gillette Cup was born and the rest, as they say, is history. So how will our great game look in 2030 as I approach my three score years and ten? I believe, like Jim Laker, that the game is fundamentally sound and little will change, at least insofar as the Test, First Class and List A versions of the game are concerned. There will, inevitably, be changes in the way that the game is umpired, and I have little doubt that in 2030 all potentially contentious umpiring decisions will be made instantly by technology and that the on-field umpires role will become a management function rather than a judicial one. I see little change to the laws of the game in prospect, although following the retirement of Muttiah Muralitharan and the hard line stance the Australians have decided to take on the doosra, I can certainly see that particular delivery being outlawed and consigned to history. I also expect the heartfelt plea put forward recently by Swaranjeet to result in the remit of the match referee extending to pitch preparation to ensure that the sort of tedious cricket that we saw for a large part of Englands series in the Caribbean earlier this year is not repeated. As for the domestic game in England I cannot see the 18 county structure  being dismantled but, given the success that central contracts have had in raising standards, I do think the amount of cricket played will inevitably and properly reduce so that players, and young and inexperienced ones in particular, have the opportunity to finely hone their skills in the nets rather than in match conditions. The above being said my expectation of the 20/20 game is that that will change considerably in the next 21 years. 20/20 will still be cricket but I believe there will be law changes that will remove it even further from the First Class game and I do think it will develop along the lines of the future that Jim Laker did not like the look of. I believe that LBW will end as a mode of dismissal in 20/20. It is far too complicated a law for casual viewers of the game and with it will be abolished the leg bye thereby, the legislature will say, adequately punishing the batsman for failing to lay bat on ball. I can also see greater rewards for batsmen who hit the ball further into the crowd and that we will end up with boundary eights and, perhaps, tens, as well as the traditional fours and sixes. I also believe, given the investment that some teams will make in the biggest names, that there will be an opportunity for batsmen to stay at the crease notwithstanding that they are dismissed and that captains will have to decide whether they want their star batsman to leave the crease or whether, on pain of a forfeit in terms of runs, they wish to leave him out there in place of a lesser batsman. I do not expect to be overly enamoured of this game as it changes but it will still be easily recognisable as cricket and as well as attracting a new audience to the game it will, I believe, spread the game around the world. I foresee that 20/20 cricket will feature in the Olympics in the near future and that it will be embraced by other nations in a way that the First Class game never will. In the 2030 20/20 World Cup I see the USA and Canada in particular providing strong opposition to the traditional test playing nations.

Crossing the Line in Faulkners Barn Burning Essay -- Barn Burning Ess

Crossing the Line in Faulkner's Barn Burning   Ã‚  Ã‚   The American author Joyce Carol Oats, in her Master Race, wrote that "our enemy is by tradition our savior" (Oats 28).   Oats recognized that we often learn more from our enemy than from ourselves.   Whether the enemy is another warring nation, a more prolific writer, or even the person next door, we often can ascertain a tremendous amount of knowledge by studying that opposite party.   In the same way, literature has always striven to provide an insight into human nature through a study of opposing forces.   Often, simply by looking at the binary operations found in any given text, the texts meanings, both hidden and apparent, can become surprising clear.   In William Faulkner's famous short story "Barn Burning," innate binary operations, especially those of the poor versus the rich and the society versus the outsider, allow the reader to gather a new and more acute understanding of the text.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The most important binary operation in Faulkner's masterpiece is the projected idea of the rich versus the stark reality of the poor.   Throughout the entire work, the scenes of the Snopes family are constantly described in detail and compared to the richness that appears abundant around them.   For example, at the very beginning of the story, the young Colonel Sartoris Snopes is described as "small and wiry like his father" wearing "patched and faded jeans" which are later described as too small (Faulkner 1555).   This poor child, with his tattered clothing, bare feet, and scared-to-the-bone look is juxtaposed against the wealth of the Justice of the Peace's borrowed courtroom--its "close-packed" shelves filled with cans of food, aromatic cheese, and "the silver curve of fish"--th... ...lty, or even the normal versus the audacious.   But, the entire story seems to be focused on two: those of the poor versus the rich and society versus the outsider.   Those two operations allow for, and even demand, a different reading of the text giving us a young Colonel striving to break out of his limitations and become the opposite of what he was.   In the end, Faulkner allows him to succeed.   After his father's death, the young man runs through the woods, forever leaving his family.   The text ends with the powerful line, "he did not look back" (Faulkner 1566). Works Cited Oats, Joyce Carol. "Master Race." The History of Dramatic Theory  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   and Criticism. Ed. John Dukore. New York: Harper Collins,   Ã‚   1992. Faulkner, William. "Barn Burning." The Heath Anthology of American Literature. Ed. Paul Lauter. 3th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1998. 1554-66.

Portrayal of the Gods Essay

Gilgamesh was an historical king of Uruk in Babylonia, on the River Euphrates in modern Iraq. It revolves around the relationship between Gilgamesh, who has become distracted and disheartened by his rule, and a friend, Enkidu, who is half-wild and who undertakes dangerous quests with him. In the epic of Gilgamesh and in the lives of the Mesopotamian the gods where portrayed as self-serving arrogant beings. These beings created the human race as slaves for the gods and so a human in the view of an early Mesopotamian had better do what the gods said if they wanted to live a happy life. We see gods that that do not really care about the lives of the Mesopotamian. The Mesopotamian could not depend on the safety of a strong government. The lack of a strong government was caused by many different factors and one of the main factors that brought about a weak government in the land of the Mesopotamia, was the lack of a reliable food source. The unreliable food source was due to the lack of a reliable source of farmland. Moreover, this lack of farmland was due mostly to the ever-changing rivers that surrounded the early civilizations that believed in these harsh gods. These peoples could not depend on a predictable flood pattern from the Tigris or the Euphrates. This fact above all, is the reason that the view of mean uncaring gods came about for the lives of these early people. One year a village could be right next to the Tigris but in the next year, they’ll be a mile away from the river thus destroying the type of economy that the village had in the previous year. Living with this, the people of the early civilizations blamed this hardship on the gods. These people did not think that the gods were all bad though, but just thought that they did not care about human existence because, as they believed, humans were created by many gods and for the sole service of these gods that created them. We conclude that these gods are always out to get the humans in whatever endeavor they may take up. Gilgamesh and Enkidu learn all too well that the gods are dangerous for mortals. Gods live by their own laws and frequently behave as emotionally and irrationally as children. Piety is important to the gods, and they expect obedience and flattery whenever possible. They can often be helpful, but angering them is sheer madness, and a character’s reverence for the gods is no guarantee of safety. He is rich in religious symbolism. Religious rituals in Mesopotamia involved sacrifices, festivals, sex, dream interpretation, and shamanic magic. The walls of Uruk symbolize the great accomplishments of which mortals are capable. The epic of Gilgamesh differs markedly from that of the Judeo-Christian tradition, in which God is both a partner in a covenant and a stern but loving parent to his people. The covenant promises that people will receive an earthly or heavenly inheritance if they behave well. The Judeo-Christian God represents not just what is most powerful but what is morally best, humans should aspire to imitate him. These differences are noteworthy because Gilgamesh also shares certain common elements with the Judeo-Christian Bible. The bible and Gilgamesh are written in both languages. In Oedipus Tyrannus, it talks about the Ancient Greece where a lot was not understood; science was merely an infant and everything that happened was explained as an act of the gods or fate. Gods were the pinnacle of power; existing since the dawn of time. They were immortal, omnipresent, and omnipotent. Different gods had different personalities. In this sense, the gods were anthropomorphic. Having such mastery of the world would enable them to control man’s behavior. Fate is the idea that people’s lives are predetermined and that no matter what is done, fate cannot be changed. With the gods it was used to explore events that seemed unexplainable. It is clear that a betrayal of the god’s dominance resulted in Laius and Jocasta’s education. Oedipus is the victim of both fate and circumstance. Apollo is the God behind the nebulous conspiration involving Oedipus. Oracular god hides what he reveals through his oracles. Here is evidence of the Greek theories, which contempt for the gods leads to pain and suffering. As a result he is punished in a way that is more severe than even death. There is also the fact of knowing that his mother is suffering terrible pain. In the embattle of Oedipus, fighting for his own life, the god is present as an old prediction, inescapable for sure, but acting as background for the development of facts, or better, for the discovery of what had already happened. Oedipus experiences great grief when he looks back and realizes how much he has fallen from his former perch of power. This end is not only ironic but also cruel. Arachne was so apt at weaving that she challenged the god Athene to a contest. Oedipus certainly is not one without flaws. His pride, ignorance, insolence and disbelief in the gods, and unrelenting quest for the truth ultimately contributed to his destruction. The tragedy brought this evolution in the way of analyzing the relationship between the Greek gods and man, giving the latter more freedom of action. When Oedipus was told that he was responsible for the murder of Laius, he became enraged and calls the old oracle a liar. He ran away from his home, Corinth, in hopes of outsmarting the gods divine will. Like his father, he also sought ways to escape the horrible destiny told by the oracle of Apollo. The chorus warns us of man’s need to have reverence for the gods, and the dangers of too much pride. â€Å"If a man walks with haughtiness of hand or word and gives no heed to Justice and the shrines of Gods despises, may an evil doom smite him for his ill, starred pride of heart. If he reaps gains without justice and will not hold from impiety and his fingers itch for untouchable things. When such things are done, what man shall contrive to shield his soul from the shafts of the God? †(pp. 452). Finally, the Greeks are warned that the only way to happiness is through humility and respect towards the gods. In the book â€Å"Monkey† by Wu Cheng, Sun Wukong, realized that despite his power over the monkeys, he was just like them, and was not beyond mortality. His determination to find immortality made him to travel on a raft to civilized lands where he was made the disciple of a Buddhist. Through his travels, he was able to acquire human speech and manners. He established himself as one of the most powerful and influential demons in the world and traveled into the ocean where he got the weapons that suited him. Hoping that a promotion and a rank amongst the gods would make him more manageable, the Jade emperor invited Wukong to Heaven, where the monkey believed he would receive an honorable place as one of the gods. Instead, he was made the head of heavenly stables to watch over horses. He went against the gods when he discovered what he was doing, and proclaimed himself as the great sage, and teamed up with the most powerful demons on earth. Although the heavens recognized the title of the monkey, their attempt to subdue the monkey king was unsuccessful. Wukong’s indignation turned into open defiance when he realized that he was excluded from a royal meeting that included that god and the goddess. After stealing the empress Xi Wangmu’s peaches of immortality and the Jade Emperor’s royal wine, he escaped back to his kingdom in preparation for his rebellion. Finally he proved himself equal to the best of Heaven’s generals when he defeated the army of heavens. Conclusion In the three books, it’s evident that the gods were caring and if one goes against their will, there was a repercussion for that. The gods are the pinnacle of power who takes control of all the things in the world. Different gods have different personalities and deeds. Gilgamesh learns that the gods are dangerous for mortals. Gods live by their own laws and frequently behave as emotionally and irrationally as children. Piety is important to the gods, and they expect obedience and flattery whenever possible.

Henry Morton Stanley Explorer

Henry Morton Stanley was a classic example of a 19th-century explorer, and he is best remembered today for his brilliantly casual greeting to a man he had spent months searching for in the wilds of Africa: â€Å"Dr. Livingstone, I presume?† The reality of Stanley’s unusual life is at times startling. He was born to a very poor family in Wales, made his way to America, changed his name, and somehow managed to fight on both sides of the Civil War. He found his first calling as a newspaper reporter before becoming known for his African expeditions. Early Life Stanley was born in 1841 as John Rowlands, to an impoverished family in Wales. At the age of five he was sent to a workhouse, a notorious orphanage of the Victorian era. In his teens, Stanley emerged from his difficult childhood with a reasonably good practical education, strong religious feelings, and a fanatical desire to prove himself. To get to America, he took a job as a cabin boy on a ship bound for New Orleans. After landing in the city at the mouth of the Mississippi River, he found a job working for a cotton trader, and took the man’s last name, Stanley. Early Journalism Career When the American Civil War broke out, Stanley fought on the Confederate side before being captured and eventually joining the Union cause. He wound up serving aboard a U.S. Navy ship and wrote accounts of battles that were published, thus beginning his journalism career. After the war, Stanley got a position writing for the New York Herald, a newspaper founded by James Gordon Bennett.  He was dispatched to cover a British military expedition to Abyssinia (present day Ethiopia), and successfully sent back dispatches detailing the conflict. He Fascinated the Public The public held a fascination for a Scottish missionary and explorer named David Livingstone. For many years Livingstone had been leading expeditions into Africa, bringing back information to Britain. In 1866 Livingstone had returned to Africa, intent on finding the source of the Nile, Africa’s longest river. After several years passed with no word from Livingstone, the public began to fear that he had perished. The New York Heralds editor and publisher James Gordon Bennett realized it would be a publishing coup to find Livingstone, and gave the assignment to the intrepid Stanley. Searching for Livingstone In 1869 Henry Morton Stanley was given the assignment to find Livingstone. He eventually arrived on the east coast of Africa in early 1871 and organized an expedition to head inland. Having no practical experience, he had to rely on the advice and apparent assistance of Arab slave traders. Stanley pushed the men with him brutally, at times whipping the black porters. After enduring illnesses and harrowing conditions, Stanley finally encountered Livingstone at Ujiji, in present day Tanzania, on November 10, 1871. Dr. Livingstone, I Presume? The famous greeting Stanley gave Livingstone, â€Å"Dr. Livingstone, I presume?† may have been fabricated after the famous meeting. But it was published in New York City newspapers within a year of the event, and it has gone down in history as a famous quotation. Stanley and Livingstone remained together for a few months in Africa, exploring around the northern banks of Lake Tanganyika. Stanleys Controversial Reputation Stanley succeeded in his assignment of finding Livingstone, yet newspapers in London roundly mocked him when he arrived in England. Some observers ridiculed the idea that Livingstone had been lost and had to be found by a newspaper reporter. Livingstone, despite the criticism, was invited to have lunch with Queen Victoria. And whether or not Livingstone had been lost, Stanley became famous, and remains so to this day, as the man who found Livingstone. Stanleys reputation was tarnished by accounts of punishment and brutal treatment meted out to men on his later expeditions. Stanleys Later Explorations After Livingstones death in 1873, Stanley vowed to continue explorations of Africa. He mounted an expedition in 1874 that charted Lake Victoria, and from 1874 to 1877 he traced the course of the Congo River. In the late 1880s, he returned to Africa, embarking on a very controversial expedition to rescue the Emin Pasha, a European who had become a ruler of part of Africa. Suffering from recurring illnesses picked up in Africa, Stanley died at the age of 63 in 1904. Legacy of Henry Morton Stanley There is no doubt that Henry Morton Stanley contributed greatly to the western worlds knowledge of African geography and culture. And while he was controversial in his own time, his fame, and the books he published brought attention to Africa and made the exploration of the continent a fascinating subject to the 19th-century public.