Something is not cricket!
What do they mean?
What do they mean?
Not Cricket!
Generally it has nothing whatsoever to do with cricket or any other sport, although its meaning has its origins in a sporting context. Basically it means not playing according to the rules, not being fair and up standing in your assertions and/or actions...cheating in other words, being a wee bit sneaky and underhand...like many (sorry, I mean some) politicians you may well think.....
It is very much a British (mainly England English British) expression. I can't ever in my wildest imagination think an Amerian would ever use it...most of them have probably never even heard of it anyway.
It is very much a British (mainly England English British) expression. I can't ever in my wildest imagination think an Amerian would ever use it...most of them have probably never even heard of it anyway.
I'm sorry to say it, but that young cub Damian is quite wrong: it has everything to do with the game of cricket.
The phrase dates from the mid 19th century at least, and originates in the notion that a sense of fair play governs players' behaviour.
For instance, a fellow always knows if he has edged the ball, though it may not be apparent to the umpire or other players. If the ball is then caught behind, it is only fair to "walk", or give yourself out.
Since fair play is synonymous with cricket, that which is not fair play is naturally "not cricket".
Some of the young chaps don't quite play the game these days, I'm afraid. So cricket is sometimes very much not cricket. But that splendid fellow Gilchrist seems to know what it's all about.
All right, old boy?
The phrase dates from the mid 19th century at least, and originates in the notion that a sense of fair play governs players' behaviour.
For instance, a fellow always knows if he has edged the ball, though it may not be apparent to the umpire or other players. If the ball is then caught behind, it is only fair to "walk", or give yourself out.
Since fair play is synonymous with cricket, that which is not fair play is naturally "not cricket".
Some of the young chaps don't quite play the game these days, I'm afraid. So cricket is sometimes very much not cricket. But that splendid fellow Gilchrist seems to know what it's all about.
All right, old boy?
Gilchrist was a fool. He can walk when he's not given but should be, but he can't stay when gets out unfairly. It makes no sense for the batsman to be the only ones in this dilemma. Do bowlers ever "unwalk" a batsman? No!
Thankfully video replays are coming in, and far too late if you ask me.
Thankfully video replays are coming in, and far too late if you ask me.
Spoken like a true English gentleman, old bean.......I bow to your superior knowledge, Sir! I cannot comment on the rights and wrongs of cricket as I find that strange game to be the most amazingly effective cure for insomnia ever devised.
There I've said it, and now I suppose you are going to accuse me of making remarks that are definitely "not cricket"! I have a very good excuse - I'm Scottish....I prefer curling.
There I've said it, and now I suppose you are going to accuse me of making remarks that are definitely "not cricket"! I have a very good excuse - I'm Scottish....I prefer curling.
Cricket? Nobody understands cricket. You gotta know what a crumpet is to understand cricket!
As an American, I find this thread both confusing and hilarious---even though I'm pretty sure all the "Old bean"s and "Old boy"s are playing with our stereotypes of you guys.
JOLLY GOOD, PIP PIP AND ALL THAT.
JOLLY GOOD, PIP PIP AND ALL THAT.
No, we know the term "not cricket", even if we don't use it. Same goes for many terms and words that are British, or archaic, or uncommon, or some sort of specialized jargon -- we encounter them in reading or movies or other media and we file them away as tidbits in our heads.
Really? Where'd you hear 'not cricket?' I must not watch enough British media. Either that, or it flew by me so fast I didn't even get a chance to file it.
I have no idea where I first heard it, but it wasn't new to me, and since I can't pinpoint a particular episode, I've probably encountered it more than once. And I'm not a big anglophile or anything. It's just like "moor" or "fens" or "fells" or "brilliant" or "pipefitter": not words I would ever use myself, but ones I've encountered and recognize after a while.
It's also possible that this is an old phrase that's been in America for centuries, one that we don't just hear occasionally from a British person. Cricket was an extremely popular sport in the US up until the late 19th century. The first ever international cricket event was a match between Canada and the US. John Adams argued against our commander in chief being called, "president", famously writing that the word is for "fire brigades and cricket". Benjamin Franklin returned from one of his many trips to Europe with a first edition of the official rules of the sport.
As the British Empire grew, it only allowed countries within their commonwealth to compete in international events. So, with good old Yankee Pride, we didn't need the boring game and move on to baseball.
Just think, horror of horrors, perhaps it was Americans who spawned the phrase in the first place...
As the British Empire grew, it only allowed countries within their commonwealth to compete in international events. So, with good old Yankee Pride, we didn't need the boring game and move on to baseball.
Just think, horror of horrors, perhaps it was Americans who spawned the phrase in the first place...
As an Englishman I have to say this question came out of left field... even though I have no idea why thats less expected than coming out right field.
That's because you don't play baseball. In baseball, the runner sprinting for home plate cannot see the left fielder throwing the ball toward home; the left fielder is behind the runner.
Other explanations, probably apocryphal, allude to the left field being the wrong side to buy spectator tickers during a Babe Ruth game, or from the presence of a mental hospital in that general direction behind an old Chicago stadium. Or that in some ball fields, the left side of the field was bigger than the right, leaving the left fielder with more area to try to cover than the right fielder, and thus decreasing his chances of success.
Other explanations, probably apocryphal, allude to the left field being the wrong side to buy spectator tickers during a Babe Ruth game, or from the presence of a mental hospital in that general direction behind an old Chicago stadium. Or that in some ball fields, the left side of the field was bigger than the right, leaving the left fielder with more area to try to cover than the right fielder, and thus decreasing his chances of success.
As I've said before, most Scots would rather watch paint dry than sit still and watch a game of English cricket.
Most of the time all you see are twenty two blokes in white outfits, plus some very old geezer wearing a panama hat and a white coat, standing around in different locations on a vast expanse of neatly mown greenery looking bored out of their minds waiting for one of the blokes (called a bowler) holding a small but deadly hard as a rock red leather covered ball to stroll casually to the far end of the pitch, looking as if he has all the time in the world to do so, then slowly turn round and run like a bat out of hell towards three wooden sticks stuck in the ground at some place they call a wicket and then, with a weird over arm movement, sling the ball at twice the speed of a lightning flash towards another bloke at the opposite end holding a wooden bat some twenty two yards away trying his level best to prevent the ball smashing the wicket behind him into oblivion, which would, seemingly, render him "out", which would cause the funny old geezer in the panama hat to yell out: "Out!"
This is then the signal for the man holding the bat (called the batsman, surprise, surprise) to start his long, ever so slow and ever so languid casual stroll back to a large pavilion type structure beyond the boundary mark of the pitch, meeting half away another bloke also holding a bat who will take his place at the same wicket, by this time having been restored to its former glory, this replacement batsman also giving the impression that he has all day to saunter onto the field of play...and this bloody thing goes on for HOURS on end and can actually last for three or four days before any actual result can be determined!
Only in England could such a soporifically uninspiring game ever be devised! It's suits the national temperament of the Sassenachs! ;-)
No wonder cricket has never taken hold in Scotland!
It's now the 25th of January - it's Burns' Night tonight! Cock-a-leekie and haggis all round!
Most of the time all you see are twenty two blokes in white outfits, plus some very old geezer wearing a panama hat and a white coat, standing around in different locations on a vast expanse of neatly mown greenery looking bored out of their minds waiting for one of the blokes (called a bowler) holding a small but deadly hard as a rock red leather covered ball to stroll casually to the far end of the pitch, looking as if he has all the time in the world to do so, then slowly turn round and run like a bat out of hell towards three wooden sticks stuck in the ground at some place they call a wicket and then, with a weird over arm movement, sling the ball at twice the speed of a lightning flash towards another bloke at the opposite end holding a wooden bat some twenty two yards away trying his level best to prevent the ball smashing the wicket behind him into oblivion, which would, seemingly, render him "out", which would cause the funny old geezer in the panama hat to yell out: "Out!"
This is then the signal for the man holding the bat (called the batsman, surprise, surprise) to start his long, ever so slow and ever so languid casual stroll back to a large pavilion type structure beyond the boundary mark of the pitch, meeting half away another bloke also holding a bat who will take his place at the same wicket, by this time having been restored to its former glory, this replacement batsman also giving the impression that he has all day to saunter onto the field of play...and this bloody thing goes on for HOURS on end and can actually last for three or four days before any actual result can be determined!
Only in England could such a soporifically uninspiring game ever be devised! It's suits the national temperament of the Sassenachs! ;-)
No wonder cricket has never taken hold in Scotland!
It's now the 25th of January - it's Burns' Night tonight! Cock-a-leekie and haggis all round!