why a wet out-field matters in cricket but not in football?
By stardustcdsd
@stardustcdsd (1856)
India
July 30, 2012 5:13am CST
hi friends.i was watching the euro cup a few weeks back and there was one match the players played while raining.
dont want to get into foot ball at the moment.
simple thing is a football players pretty much spend the 90 minutes running from one end to another even if the field is wet while the cricket players who hardly runs for even 20% of the time he spends in the field,had to wait til the out-field is dry?
why?
because football players have bigger spikes on their soles?
or is there any other reason?
2 responses
@ram_cv (16513)
• India
31 Jul 12
One of the reason is the footwear. The Cricket footwear has shorter spikes which are also blunt. Football on the other hand has much longer spikes which are more pointed and can grip the ground better. Secondly, football does not have a specialist role such as a bowler who can really not bowl well if his landing foot or his run up is slippery and he is unable to concentrate on what he is bowling rather than whether he is slipping or not.
Cheers!
Ram
@aliqasim94 (255)
• Pakistan
30 Jul 12
My its not matter,Its about ICC rules and also because in football there is no pitch to play at,In cricket they have a pitch at which they play.If the pitch is wet then they cant play.Its my thoughts and can be false.
