TAKING A PHILOSOPHICAL VIEW OF CRICKET. The Economist (April 25) had a fine obituary describing Richard (Richie) Benaud, a great cricket player (captain for Australia), and later a star commentator on cricket.
The last paragraph of the obituary is a wonderful statement of a sportsman’s view of his sport:
“Cricket… was above all a game of good and ill fortune. Pitches were ever-variable, from the dirt paddocks and bouncy concrete of his boyhood to the rain-spongy, quaint grass of England…. Weather and light were unpredictable. Players had on and off days, balls misbehaved, and umpires made weird decisions. It all had to be taken philosophically; for at the back of it lay the long, noble history he relished, beginning on English village greens ….”
I admire Benaud’s opinion. However, I am, as my family will attest, incapable of taking that view of baseball. I’m pretty good with bad bounces, but not very good with umpires.