The Laws of Cricket Explained | Narrated by Stephen Fry! | Lord's
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 05. 2024
- Stephen Fry narrates a series of videos on the laws of cricket.
Subscribe to Lord's: czcams.com/users/LordsCric...
Web: www.lords.org
Facebook: / homeofcricket
Twitter: / homeofcricket - Sport
I know all the rules but still listened for Stephen Fry's narration. Such a Delight 😄
Exact opposite. I don't know even know anything about the basic rules of cricket and this is all gibberish to me and somehow Stephen Fry makes it interesting anyway.
not rules but law :D
@@whateverreally1347 yup me too i dint even knew byes and leg byes
Wtf is he talking about. Cricket is a pile of nonsense?i think u guys make up the rules as u go along and no two games have the same rules.u guys should make the game more professional like baseball and have the same rules every game, I bet more people would watch it.
@@Mynipplesmychoice who did you give your brain to? I mean, what are you talking about?
Stephen Fry has such an easy to listen to voice and going along with one of my favourite sports is a wonderful match. It is therapeutic.
Stephen Fry could read anything, and I would still find it wonderful.
And yet, we actually have him reading entertaining rules for Cricket, and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. We are too lucky.
You can't even read your own birth certificate, infantile coward.
How about the Philadelphia Phone Directory?
@@DieFlabbergast He'd find a way.
I could listen to Stephen Fry read the rulebook cover to cover and be enthralled form start to finish.
Same lol
Same
Agreed
Stephen Fry - a national treasure
As someone who has watched cricket for 35 years, even I learnt some things. The rationale behind allow leg bye attempts was really interesting.
Wtf is he talking about. Cricket is a pile of nonsense?i think u guys make up the rules as u go along and no two games have the same rules.u guys should make the game more professional like baseball and have the same rules every game, I bet more people would watch it.
@@Mynipplesmychoice Haha. OK, Yank. We understand that you don't do well with complexity. Keep it simple over there.
@@dannyarcher6370 don’t we’ll with complexity. Nfl football is more complex but way more understandable. That’s why it’s growing in the UK and the only people who play cricket are the people you enslaved in India and forced them to play it back in the day to get your “jollies” off.
@@Mynipplesmychoice Firstly, rugby is far more complex than stop-start 19th century pitched battle-style gridiron. Also, you are comparing apples with peanuts.
Secondly, The Indians seem to love their national religion.
Thirdly, we don't say "jollies" where I'm from as I'm no Pom either.
American football is not hard to understand. As a yank who lived in the UK for 5 years, decades ago, cricket totally captivated me. It still does and I'm still learning, when I can watch it. Welcome to the world, dude, cricket is going to be in the 2028 Olympics.
I've been listening to Stephen Fry's Sherlock Holmes podcast since a week. He is a fantastic voice artist.
Damn right
I'm a fan of anything he's in. I've been binge watching QI clips on CZcams mostly because he's the host!
I'm an American that's trying to learn as much about cricket as possible. I downloaded the MCC app and this video really helps, too. It's a very informative video and listening to Stephen Fry is always a pleasure.
Very nice explanation. Thank you sir.
This video was very useful for me thank you Stephen fry
What excellent animated graphics on the blackboard - very nice job.
Respect to the umpires who have memoried all of this and gives quick decition after seeing all criteria
I’d love to sit and watch cricket with Stephen Fry. That would be awesome
Fantastic videos for this, perfectly explanatory
Such a beautiful video 👍
He was amazing in the movie V for Vendetta
I know nothing of cricket but would so love to learn !
Best cricket explanation
very useful video. much appreciated
I love that we call these Laws and not rules.
I love this Game.
David Gower should have done this video. One of the greatest batsmen of his generation and just as eloquent as Stephen Fry.
His voice is shriller.
Hear, hear!
More non cricket watching people know Stephen fry , may be they want to promote the game to the people who don't know what cricket is .
Plz tell me some body i have confusion.
If in a event of a cricket if a team will remains absent from the ground at the match day then will the other team get both of 2 points or not? Plz answer me as soon as possible.
@@NoorHassan-bi6bl it would just get postponed
To those of us that do not know cricket, this is hysterical! It is not clear how you could learn this game if you only start to try as an adult. Like trying to learn Finnish or Hungarian. Really its very funny.
I learned the laws from watching explanation videos, its not that complicated really.
Less than one season of IPL and bouncing questions off my Caribbean wife, and I've learned a huge majority of the rules. You'd have to be soft brained to not pick up rules by watching, if you're genuinely interested anyway.
I would love to play but live in Las Vegas where summer heat is oppressive. I wish we had an indoor pitch we could use.
In Asia, we play at a higher temperature but I can understand how it feels in usa.
The obvious answer for devoted cricket follower would be, MOVE
Nice video 👌. Thanks for sharing. Bi joined you
You should do another one on "In", "out" and "not out", and why there is no "not in", unless you are umpiring W. G. Grace.
It sounds like the entry for "Cricket" in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
Got recommended after Bairstow's controversial dismissal😅
is the batsman is out when the ball first touches the body of batsman(leg chest or anything else except his gloves) and then to bat and the fielder catch it
I didn't expect this to be a non-fiction video. It took me about twenty minutes to realize it wasn't a joke.
23:51 are there provisions about how to put the wicket down after all 3 stumps are already down?
Generally all stumps dont down by ball
Then u have to remove the stumps completely ..
Yes. Hold a stump at the location where the wicket is normally placed and hold the ball in the same hand in order to put down the wicket.
Per the Laws of Cricket, a fielder is allowed to put back one or more of the stumps in its original position in order to put down the wicket.
A stump must be replaced and then pulled or knocked out whilst in contact with the ball.
I love Tommy😂
Wow
I watched it till the end
It just feels like something written in hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy.
He is ‘M’ in Doctor Who s12
15:37 i have never understood why the batsman's attempt to play a shot has any bearing on whether or not he's dismissed lbw. batsmen get out caught all the time, even when trying to avoid the ball altogether, the ball just tickling the bat or glove on the way through; and stumped, or even run out, just by wandering from his crease at the wrong time; and bowled too, when they shoulder arms. it's to the bowler's credit that he can fool a batsman into thinking he's safe, then, TIMBER! so, why does lbw get singled out?
do you actually know the meaning of lbw
lbw means leg before wicket
it is a practice in which batsman tries to protect his stumps without taking any risk of getting caught
when these things became very popular then this law was made
its cricket and it has no rules it has laws
just imagine a case
you are continuously bowling on stumps line to either bowl out the batsman or get some edge
but the witty fellow is covering the stumps by his legs and leaving the ball to avoid risk of giving edge
would you enjoy that
i have experienced it in gully cricket
in fact all indians have this experience
@@sudhanshu1396 then he should be out lbw, whether or not he attempts a shot.
It's because cricket is a batsman's game, rules are biased towards batsman
If the ball pitches in line with the stumps then you're out whether or not you play a shot.
the underarm no ball made me laugh as I grew up and actually watched a match were it was used - the bowler Trevor Chappel was told to ball an under by the then Australian captain Greg Chappel yes brothers - the controversy of this may be why it is not allowed in a game today -
2 of my favourite things: Stephen Fry and Cricket. Soupy Twist
Sir Will " I will shatter the hell out of you" comes under level 4 offence?
So if a fielder catches (according to laws 19 and 33) the ball with his leg crossing the boundary the batsman won't be out and he will get then 6 runs?
Brother Where Are u from???.
If the fielder crosses the boundary *and touches ground with their foot or other body part* while contacting the ball, then it will be 6.
Strangely, the ball doesn't have to hit the batsmen's leg for it to count as a leg-bye.
Just an example recently in the T20 Blast, where the batsmen ducked but the ball hit the batsmen's gloves, yet the runs still counted as leg-byes.
Shouldn't it be counted as runs if the ball hit the batter's glove (assuming it was still holding the bat)?
@@arandomperson3840 it should have, but for whatever reason the umpire signaled leg-bye.
@@666kingdrummer that was probably a wrong decision I don't know of any rules where a leg bye will be given when the ball hits the batsman's gloves...it would be added to his own score
Who are to two heathens who disliked this!!!
Dislike bots to keep up with the algorithm
What exactly happens if a batsman knocks out the stumps on the bowler's side??
Normally nothing, but if the bowler gets a touch on the ball on its way to the stumps on the bowler's side, the non-striking batter would be run out if they are out of their ground when the stumps are broken.
@@cricketexplained8526 Oh, okay. So if a wicket happens, the non-striker is out, but only if they're out of their ground
@@georgedoty-williams2085Yes. It is therefore possible to be out without facing a ball from a bowler.
@@cricketexplained8526this is called diamond duck 🦆
this was more interesting than the game itself lol
Cricket don't have rules, It's has the LAWS
22:34 - so if a fast bowler bowls a no ball, the wicket keeper standing back cannot run out the batsman if he wasnt attempting a run? I thought all run outs were allowed on a no ball
Run outs are allowed in a no-ball. Stumpings are not. So, if a batter misses a fast ball, while being out of their ground, if the batter chooses to not run and back up, the wicket keeper cannot stump the batsman out. However, if the batter attempts a run and then decides against it, the out then would become run-out, and therefore can be affected in a no-ball.
I now have great sympathy for Honor Harrington and Michelle Henke.
Well all Indians know them but this is perhaps the most complete one
OMG quite complicated! But so quintessentially English! And I hasten to add, quite reasonable.
Who gets credited with making the catch in the even of 5:10?
The second fielder.
The catcher is the person who completes the catch.
Many years I was fielding in the slips and caught a ball one-handed (right hand) but the slip fielder to my right also caught it, simultaneously, with his left hand; I'm still baffled as to who that is credited to. In fifty years of cricket I have never seen or heard of it occurring elsewhere.
@@rocketrabble6737 Wow, that is truly a one in a million moment there. Glad neither one of you dropped it lol. Probably saved you at least two runs!
Cricket was of course invented by Monty Python in 1972.
thought i had a dirty monitor
Never having watched a cricket match nor do I know anything about cricket, however I find it all but impossible to grasp. I'm from the USA and we have baseball, basketball, golf, hockey, soccer and football but, nothing with rules that are so difficult to learn or understand. Cricket laws appear to be overly complex, somewhat arbitrary and not fan friendly. I know that there are many fans who may disagree with me but, for the life of me, I can't imagine how the game was ever invented and enough interest generated to entice fans to want to watch or players to play. To each his own, I guess!
It's one of those things that make sense when you play the game. I understand that they can seem complex, but if you play them game, they'll all make very intuitive sense. It's putting intuition into words that make it seem complex.
Im from the USA too, and I usually recommend this video for anyone trying to learn cricket, it does a pretty good job of explaining the game in layman's terms. czcams.com/video/EWpbtLIxYBk/video.html
Lord's video is made for people that already have a basic understanding of the game, so it helps to start from the beginning and than come back to this one once you "crack the code" so to say.
If you can grasp the all the detailed rules of basketball you should have no problem; the full baseball book of rules stretches out to almost 200 pages. I followed live-streamed baseball games on British television in the 90s but I still find the queries about unusual situations in baseball completely bewildering. Watching a game of cricket with someone experienced, and who knows not to overwhelm you with too much detail early on, would solve the problem very easily. There are also a lot of 'Cricket explained for Americans' videos on you tube but I think you need more than one because they don't all cover the basic things you need to know. Match highlights are not always helpful because they are editing out so many of the things a beginner needs to see; Indian IPL game highlights can be even less helpful because there is so much razzmatazz going on around it.
Children find the basics of cricket very easy when they start playing (it helps they are not distracted by knowledge of baseball); they get the more complicated stuff later. American friends have said it can be difficult picking up baseball when young.
I'm an American sports novice and I find this no less befuddling than the vast array of positions, plays, and penalties in Football...
Stupid Yank question, if you don't mind: How do people watch one-day or test cricket? I mean, I know Stephen Fry is probably rich enough to have that kind of spare time, but who else can afford to watch all five Ashes test matches? That's like dozens of hours of cricket.
Love T20, though.
Test has more reputation
Its a fair question. A test match is the most prestigious form, but five days as a spectator are a lot. While some people definitely do this, maybe taking a holiday from work commitments to do so, others will only attend a single say in person but observe the match via TV or radio while completing other tasks. You can even follow detailed analysis online in your browser while sitting at your work desk, or on your mobile.
@@BryanLikesCandy It's only for the purists really. The T20 format is better suited for those who havn't grown up on cricket and are more used to matches that last a few hours at most.
I love all forms of cricket and go and watch any types as I can
Watching test matches in person is very expensive, but on a TV platform you can get a *whole* Ashes series for roughly 50 GBP.
Is on the line a wide ball ??? Assuming he has off stump guard
Line belongs to the umpire. It's Umpire's discretion.
No ball is applied even when ball is bouncing above his shoulder 😎
If I’m not mistaken that would be given as a wide
@@dannywestern831 if the ball directly lands above the batsman’s waist then it’s a no ball. The word wide explains itself as the ball landed too wide for the batsman to hit.
@@dannywestern831 after 2 over shoulder balls ,it is counted as no ball. I think he missed this
Over the head standing upright is a no ball.
Some playing regs change this to a wide, or as a legit ball, but the LAWS say it's a no ball.
@@pranavgandhar4604 “The umpire shall call and signal No ball for any delivery which, after pitching, passes or would have passed over head height of the striker standing upright at the popping crease.” This is what Law 21.10 states. Yes, many playing conditions, especially in T20s, change this rule, but the Law states that a ball passing above a striker’s head is to be called “No Ball”.
20:52 not an "unfair" advantage, but a fair advantage. the batsman breaches no law by leaving the crease early, so it's not unfair. he's taking a headstart, nothing more. it would be unfair only if there was no way to stop him. there is a way: run him out before the delivery.
Headstart is an unfair advantage
@@omgate4729 headstart is an advantage. it is not against the laws, and everyone is allowed to do it, so it is not unfair.
@@vladtepes97 and mankading is also not against the law
@@omgate4729 precisely.
By unfair he does not mean according to the rules but according to the spirit of the game
Anyone here after the second Ashes test?
The ball was indeed still live, and Bairstow was out of his ground
21 onward for Ravichandran Ashwin haters!!
ashwin eripapa gadu ponting rocks ashwin shocks
3:47 -- there can not be three batsmen, gone are the days of a substitute runner.
There can still be runners in non-ICC matches, depending on the playing conditions applicable. It is only the ICC playing conditions that have disallowed the use of a runner, not the Laws of Cricket.
There can be 4... (if both batsmen are injured)
I thought if the ball didn't reach the player, it would be a dead ball, not a no ball?
5:32 law#23
9:02 #41
11:02 #20
12:42 #33
14:14 #36
16:10 #37
And we thought the umps in the states had the ability to change an outcome lol🙈
Glad they still use batsman with these videos rather than that PC american nonsense they do now.
Well Bro Term batter was always in use but less frequntly as compared to batsmen.
When its come to Fielder or Bowler u sometimes will hear commentators saying Fieldsman instead of fielder Bowlsmen instead of bowler.
@@AsadAli-bz2zj No, it was only used in american contexts. Before the PC nonsense, I never heard "batter" ever in cricket. And its always been fielder or bowler for the same reasons.
exactly wtf is up with changing the terms that has always been used historically?
@@ishtiyakahmed9861 and most women cricketers were fine with batsmen.
My favorite sports complaint: That's not Cricket, it's not even Baseball!
The “royalty” of cricket showing Stephen Fry in the thumb nail but not in the actual video is laughable. As is advertising the little blue book after every rule. I’m a bit pipped.
Ok where is pokoyo?
This is a sit up and take notice piece for our English friends!! Believe it or not,cricket has its origins in Ireland!! In the nineteenth century,a game called Kattie began to be played in South Eastern Ireland in counties such as Wexford. It was a primitive type of cricket. When the Irish joined the British Army, they took this sport with them when they were shipped abroad to countries like India, Ceylon, Pakistan and Australia where cricket is popular today! The British Army built on the game of kattie,changed the rules,the bat,etc. Many cricket terms come from the Irish language,such as over,wicket and duck. Cricket is a growing sport in Ireland and the national team in recent years has beaten some big names,like England,West Indies and Pakistan!
So how do you explain the fact that the first Duke cricket balls were made in Penshurst, Kent, in 1760, and the patent for the six seam ball was granted in 1775?
Unfortunately for your comment we were playing cricket centuries before that that. The first, organised game for which there is a surviving record was in 1694, that doesn't mean it was the first game but the first one that someone made the effort to record on paper and it survived. There were laws banning cricket (and football) being played on Sundays in the late 14th century for which players could be fined; on the grounds that they should be practising the long bow.
This is why the reigns of this beautiful sport should stay with the English.
Why?? Just because the MCC wrote the Laws doesn't mean all matters of international cricket should be the English' total and final jurisdiction. That's why the International Cricket Council isn't located in London anymore.
Stephen Fry...the voice of God ?
CRICKET IS CRICKET WITH GENTLEMANSHIP ONLY NOT WITH LAWS. EVEN WITH PERMISSION under Law of Cricket when ever INCIDENTS HAPPENED WITH OR AGAINST, THE GENTLEMANSHIP, it Appears as Cricket BUT NOT. Some where in Our HEART SEARCHES AND KNOWS VERY WELL THAT GENTLEMENSHIP THE CORE OF CRICKET IS MISSING. 💋🏏💌
Hence we need laws,. and it will be there for sure. That's fine WHAT NOT FINE IS THAT : TO WIN THE MATCH, KILL THE HUMANITY AND JUST GO WITH PLAY . ANY OTHER GAME OR PLAY IS OK. NO REGRETS AS WELL. BUT CRICKET IS NOT GAME OR A PLAY. CERTAINLY NOT WITH SUCH ACTS. OR PATERN OF BEHAVIOURS.
I am 1st
Mohammad Hasnain I couldn’t give any shits
Well done but no one cares 😂😂
"He or she" invariably sounds awkward or worse. "He" can refer to a person of non-specific gender- you can look it up. It's the English language, which has rules and this is one of them. I'm not making a case for misogyny, just rationality. Sexism is in the attitude, not the deed.
The true betty preferentially level because coffee steadily destroy aboard a special great-grandfather. periodic, drunk police
No introduction ☑️
no context ☑️
every possible situation in which the rule you’ve just learnt could be misinterpreted ☑️
Two unskippable adverts every 2 minutes ☑️
Perfect CZcams explanation video.
1.25x speed 😎
This is to change the law of batsman out. If the ball come straight from the bat to stumps without touching the ground the batsman is out . It is like clean balled . If the ball come to the stumps after hitting the ground and the batsman is at home when it happens batsman is not out.
FIRST ❤❤
Well done but no one cares 😂
3am anyone?
25 minutes! Couldn't he do a 5 minute precis?
He could have done 3 hours and still not covered them all.
you can take over 800 wickets throwing the ball
However it only has to pass the umpires and the ICC's opinion, not yours!
Its called LAWs of cricket. As if they will arrest you if you dont follow it. Even worse, they deduct money from your banks 😂😂😂
So Stephen calls the genders he or she and the writing in the video shows his/her. I bet that’s going to piss off some youth.
I think I'll stick with rugby.. More fun and less insane rules.
so, the guy who throws the ball can't in fact throw the ball. What the hell is that.
In bowling u cant throw the ball u must bowl With Straight arm while in Fielding u can throw the ball.
Cricket *bowlers* *bowl* with minimal elbow straightening. So yes, cricket *bowlers* are banned from *throwing* as baseball pitchers do.
The bowlers delivery is illegal if he bends his elbow while delivering the ball as it gives the bowler an unfair advantage of speed.
Repeated "his or her" is so irritating. Just say "they" or "their".
They're 'rules' not laws. Jesus!!! how these people love to pretend it's a unique game. Knocking a ball about with a bat does not become a noble enterprise because people with funny accents do it
All sports and games are unique, because they are not identical. I've never heard anyone say cricket is unique in character purely because we say "laws" rather than "rules".
@@cricketexplained8526 Yes. I know all games are unique. That's EXACTLY why none is ESPECIALLY unique.
Cricket belongs to a group of 'bat and ball' games. Those who want to elevate it to a higher undeserved level prefer LAW to RULEs I think because it gives them a sense of being somehow superior. The British took it everywhere they went and many people in those countries think they too can have a little bit of superiority if they play the game.
But its nothing but bat and ball (or 'balls) I should say.
It is too long and looks so boring for kids like me 😒
Wtf is he talking about. Cricket is a pile of nonsense?i think u guys make up the rules as u go along and no two games have the same rules.u guys should make the game more professional like baseball and have the same rules every game, I bet more people would watch it.
Dude, the rules are standardised and all written down. It's not cricket's fault if you don't follow.
what's blud waffling about? the laws of cricket have been there and being followed for centuries. I find it humorous that 'muricans find a way to blame cricket when it's them that do not understand the game.
Cricket is a boring game