I thought, too, that it is illogical that a ground stroke behind the
diamond should be a no-ball, and yet, should that ball be in the air and
caught, the striker should be out. I thought it an odd example of
lenience to allow the batsman as many strokes behind the catcher as he
chanced to make. But the more baseball I see the more it enchants me as
a spectacle, and these early questionings are forgotten.
Baseball and cricket cannot be compared, because they are as different
as America and England; they can only be contrasted. Indeed, many of the
differences between the peoples are reflected in the games; for cricket
is leisurely and patient, whereas baseball is urgent and restless.
Cricket can prosper without excitement, while excitement is baseball's
life-blood, and so on: the catalogue could be indefinitely extended.
But, though a comparison is futile, it may be interesting to note some
of the divergences between the games. One of the chief is that baseball
requires no specially prepared ground, whereas cricket demands turf in
perfect order. Bad weather, again, is a more serious foe to the English
than to the American game, for if the turf is soaked we cannot go on,
and hence the number of drawn or unfinished matches in the course of a
season. A two hours' game, such as baseball is, can, however, always be
played off.
In baseball the pitcher's ball must reach the batter before it touches
the ground; in cricket, if the ball did not touch the ground first and
reach the batsman on the bound, no one would ever be out at all, for the
other ball, the full-pitch as we call it, is, with a flat bat, too easy
to hit, for our bowlers swerve very rarely: it is the contact with the
ground which enables them to give the ball its extra spin or break.
Pages:
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109