Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: "The line belongs to the umpire"
117 views
Skip to first unread message
Dechucka
May 9, 2013, 10:43:25 PM5/9/13
to
<shgu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:53ba7136-6ece-48e0...@googlegroups.com...
> Anyone know the origin of this ridiculous statement the commentators make
> each time they look at a no-ball or a stumping? Why does the line belong
> to the umpire - aren't they supposed to be neutral/impartial? Why does the
> line have to "belong" to anyone?
It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
Dechucka
May 9, 2013, 10:46:52 PM5/9/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:VMCdnTCPNZJKwxHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
Howzzat
May 9, 2013, 11:00:29 PM5/9/13
to
On Thursday, May 9, 2013 7:46:52 PM UTC-7, Dechucka wrote:
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:VMCdnTCPNZJKwxHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> >
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:VMCdnTCPNZJKwxHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> >
> wrote in message
>
> > news:53ba7136-6ece-48e0...@googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Anyone know the origin of this ridiculous statement the commentators make
>
> >> each time they look at a no-ball or a stumping? Why does the line belong
>
> >> to the umpire - aren't they supposed to be neutral/impartial? Why does
>
> >> the line have to "belong" to anyone?
>
> >
>
> > It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
>
> > his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
>
>
>
> btw could you tell Howzzat he had exactly the same question
>
> >
Same difference :-) It was me logged in from a different account.
>
> > news:53ba7136-6ece-48e0...@googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Anyone know the origin of this ridiculous statement the commentators make
>
> >> each time they look at a no-ball or a stumping? Why does the line belong
>
> >> to the umpire - aren't they supposed to be neutral/impartial? Why does
>
> >> the line have to "belong" to anyone?
>
> >
>
> > It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
>
> > his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
>
>
>
> btw could you tell Howzzat he had exactly the same question
>
> >
Ramapriya
May 10, 2013, 8:58:33 AM5/10/13
to
On May 10, 6:43 am, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
> his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
Ravi Shastri especially comes up with phrases that I sometimes have a
>
> It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
> his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
problem with. He once described an attempted RO as 'near miss'.
Another occasion was when a batter was in his elements in an ODI and
was said to be 'in full throttle'. A near miss should imply a hit and
'in full throttle' actually means the exact opposite of what he was
trying to convey.
Or then again, it could just be me.
Ramapriya
Tweedle Dee
May 10, 2013, 10:11:15 AM5/10/13
to
-Cheers,
TD
jzfredricks
May 10, 2013, 3:04:08 PM5/10/13
to
On Friday, May 10, 2013 10:58:33 PM UTC+10, Ramapriya wrote:
> a batter was in his elements in an ODI
> and was said to be 'in full throttle'.
not entirely sure which one I prefer
> a batter was in his elements in an ODI
> and was said to be 'in full throttle'.
Mad Hamish
May 11, 2013, 11:38:10 AM5/11/13
to
Both phrases are pretty standard in English (although I don't know
what the distribution of them is)
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/near+miss
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/full+throttle
>Or then again, it could just be me.
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au
CaraMia
May 11, 2013, 12:22:10 PM5/11/13
to
On 5/11/2013 9:08 PM, Mad Hamish wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:33 -0700 (PDT), Ramapriya
> <d.ram...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 10, 6:43 am, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
>>> his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
>>
>>
>> Ravi Shastri especially comes up with phrases that I sometimes have a
>> problem with. He once described an attempted RO as 'near miss'.
>> Another occasion was when a batter was in his elements in an ODI and
>> was said to be 'in full throttle'. A near miss should imply a hit and
>> 'in full throttle' actually means the exact opposite of what he was
>> trying to convey.
>>
> Welcome to English. It's a somewhat illogical language
>
> Both phrases are pretty standard in English (although I don't know
> what the distribution of them is)
I agree. I dislike Shastri's commentary and overuse of cliches, but he
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:33 -0700 (PDT), Ramapriya
> <d.ram...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 10, 6:43 am, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It belongs to the Umpire because it doesn't belong to the batsman i.e. it
>>> his not his ground. Having said that is is a silly expression
>>
>>
>> Ravi Shastri especially comes up with phrases that I sometimes have a
>> problem with. He once described an attempted RO as 'near miss'.
>> Another occasion was when a batter was in his elements in an ODI and
>> was said to be 'in full throttle'. A near miss should imply a hit and
>> 'in full throttle' actually means the exact opposite of what he was
>> trying to convey.
>>
> Welcome to English. It's a somewhat illogical language
>
> Both phrases are pretty standard in English (although I don't know
> what the distribution of them is)
doesn't use the cliches in a wrong way.
A near miss is not a hit.
And his use of full throttle is idiomatically correct.
Ramapriya
May 11, 2013, 9:57:35 PM5/11/13
to
On May 11, 8:22 pm, CaraMia <c...@mia.com> wrote:
>
> I agree. I dislike Shastri's commentary and overuse of cliches, but he
> doesn't use the cliches in a wrong way.
> A near miss is not a hit.
> And his use of full throttle is idiomatically correct.
Indeed. Reminds me of the Airbus A350 project manager who'd once
>
> I agree. I dislike Shastri's commentary and overuse of cliches, but he
> doesn't use the cliches in a wrong way.
> A near miss is not a hit.
> And his use of full throttle is idiomatically correct.
described the upcoming aircraft as containing lots of ground-breaking
technology. He at least had it in him to smile when I wrote him to
advise avoiding use of that cliche in *anything* related to flight.
Ramapriya
Ramapriya
May 12, 2013, 1:45:13 AM5/12/13
to
On May 11, 7:38 pm, Mad Hamish
'ooooooooh that was a near hit' when a throw had missed the stumps by
a whisker; two very different terms to convey the same meaning :)
Ramapriya
<newsunspammel...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
>
> Welcome to English. It's a somewhat illogical language
>
> Both phrases are pretty standard in English (although I don't know
> what the distribution of them is)
>
> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/near+misshttp://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/full+throttle
Can't recollect who the commentator was but I've also heard the
>
> Welcome to English. It's a somewhat illogical language
>
> Both phrases are pretty standard in English (although I don't know
> what the distribution of them is)
>
> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/near+misshttp://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/full+throttle
'ooooooooh that was a near hit' when a throw had missed the stumps by
a whisker; two very different terms to convey the same meaning :)
Ramapriya
Mike Holmans
May 12, 2013, 4:30:11 AM5/12/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 22:45:13 -0700 (PDT), Ramapriya
<d.ram...@gmail.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
I suspect that whoever said it doesn't have English as his first
language. To these ears, "near hit" sounds like something that only a
non-English speaker would say in that context. I can only imagine
using "near hit" to describe something like a song (or perhaps some
other artistic work) which wasn't a total flop but didn't reach a high
chart position.
Without doing the research for a thesis on language, I suspect that
"hit", at least as a noun, implies success in most normal usages, and
that in most cases "near hit" is as weird as "almost pregnant".
Cheers,
Mike
--
<d.ram...@gmail.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
language. To these ears, "near hit" sounds like something that only a
non-English speaker would say in that context. I can only imagine
using "near hit" to describe something like a song (or perhaps some
other artistic work) which wasn't a total flop but didn't reach a high
chart position.
Without doing the research for a thesis on language, I suspect that
"hit", at least as a noun, implies success in most normal usages, and
that in most cases "near hit" is as weird as "almost pregnant".
Cheers,
Mike
--
Ramapriya
May 12, 2013, 5:25:59 AM5/12/13
to
On May 12, 12:30 pm, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I suspect that whoever said it doesn't have English as his first
> language. To these ears, "near hit" sounds like something that only a
> non-English speaker would say in that context. I can only imagine
> using "near hit" to describe something like a song (or perhaps some
> other artistic work) which wasn't a total flop but didn't reach a high
> chart position.
>
> Without doing the research for a thesis on language, I suspect that
> "hit", at least as a noun, implies success in most normal usages, and
> that in most cases "near hit" is as weird as "almost pregnant".
A 'hit' would mean that it's a noun, innit? If yes, 'near hit' would
>
> I suspect that whoever said it doesn't have English as his first
> language. To these ears, "near hit" sounds like something that only a
> non-English speaker would say in that context. I can only imagine
> using "near hit" to describe something like a song (or perhaps some
> other artistic work) which wasn't a total flop but didn't reach a high
> chart position.
>
> Without doing the research for a thesis on language, I suspect that
> "hit", at least as a noun, implies success in most normal usages, and
> that in most cases "near hit" is as weird as "almost pregnant".
imply a near success (of effecting an RO) :)
Doesn't sound right, for sure. 'He almost hit the stumps' would be
what I'd be inclined to use in such situations.
Ramapriya
(native Kannadiga)
Andrew Dunford
May 14, 2013, 8:06:13 PM5/14/13
to
"Ramapriya" <d.ram...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d6512a5c-4195-43c0...@pd6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
correct. Still doesn't make him a decent commentator.
Andrew
0 new messages