University challenge

[777]

Much as I don't care about elephant football or camel vaulting.

I never knew camels could do that .

[Freaker]

Any way for a St Andrews fan outside iPlayer reach to view the episode?

Oh, and did they wear their gowns again?

[RedCelt69]

Ok then, why are you demoting cricket from a sport to a game? I'm no massive cricket fan but I wasn't aware there was a grey area surrounding it. I thought it was widely held to be a sport. Certainly looks like one to me, there's balls and bats and everything.

You don't have to be very athletic to play it, though, do you? It's basically baseball with all of the fun bits removed... that can go on for 3 days. And still be a draw.

I'm also not sure what's wrong with Scottish people being asked about a primarily English game, isn't it the point of the quizzes you mention to ask about esoteric things? Especially University Challenge in fact, it's rather known for it.

It wasn't just the one question. It was an entire round.
If it helps get my point across, imagine the same questions about shinty grounds (or any other obscure game/sport played exclusively in a part of the world other than England) being asked of an English university team... when their opponents are from that part of the world and might easily have ended up with that round of questions.

Steve's English; if there was a massive cultural divide on the subject of cricket, surely Steve (er... that is 'St Andrews, Hall') would be on the other side of it.

So 3/4 of the team get to twiddle their thumbs hoping that the only Englishman on the team is in the minority of his countrymen and actually keenly follows cricket?

[RedCelt69]

Any way for a St Andrews fan outside iPlayer reach to view the episode?

Oh, and did they wear their gowns again?

They didn't wear their gowns... and I believe an email floating around mentioned that it was being broadcast on BBC2 Scotland on Thursday?

[What?]

You don't have to be very athletic to play it, though, do you? It's basically baseball with all of the fun bits removed... that can go on for 3 days. And still be a draw.

5 days actually. I'm a Scottish St Andrews student with an interest in cricket, indeed it's one of the questions I got right.

Each to their own one could say.

[RedCelt69]

5 days actually. I'm a Scottish St Andrews student with an interest in cricket, indeed it's one of the questions I got right.

Each to their own one could say.

You are a rare creature, indeed.

[What?]

You are a rare creature, indeed.

I prefer special. In a non-patronising way.

[777]

Any way for a St Andrews fan outside iPlayer reach to view the episode?

Oh, and did they wear their gowns again?

Happy to download it from iplayer and email it to you.

[RedCelt69]

Any way for a St Andrews fan outside iPlayer reach to view the episode?

Oh, and did they wear their gowns again?

Happy to download it from iplayer and email it to you.

iPlayer content can only be played in-situ... afaik?

[777]

Any way for a St Andrews fan outside iPlayer reach to view the episode?

Oh, and did they wear their gowns again?

Happy to download it from iplayer and email it to you.

iPlayer content can only be played in-situ... afaik?

I just watched the episode on iplayer and there was an option to download it.

EDIT. Also have to download their player doodah as well.

Oh well, I'm an Arts student <blush>

[orudge]

Downloads still require you to authenticate against the BBC servers though, so if Freaker is outside the UK (which is my guess, otherwise I don't see why iPlayer couldn't be used), it wouldn't be much use, unfortunately.

[dac]

i refer you to the many questions i've heard on robbie burns on UC

I'm sure that in your mind there is some relevance between the point in hand (a fringe sport in one of the four British countries) and a literary figure. Now, if you'd compared it to the game of shinty, you might have had a point. Have there been many rounds on UC covering shinty? Or Gaelic football? Any English university teams sat struggling to answer questions on a sport that has little-to-no-following in England?

and i assure you people in england give as much of a fuck about him as you do about cricket.

Oh, well. So long as you assure me, that's OK then.

Ah, hang on... actually, no. It isn't OK. I don't need your assurance.

I grew up in England. Through the entirety of my time there (between leaving school and leaving England) I met 3 people who were keen followers of cricket. That's 3 people amongst all personal acquaintances and all work colleagues. Followers of football would run into the hundreds.

Not exactly a scientific test of the popularity of the "sport" in England, but it gives a rough idea of just how passionately the English follow cricket. I recently had a look to see if there were any reliable statistics about the game's popularity in England... without much success. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

And whilst you're at it, enlighten the quiz-compilers at the BBC.

I think part of the challenge of University Challenge is being knowledgeable about obscure topics, so if that's what cricket is then I don't see a problem! Wouldn't you be hard pressed to find questions for the show if they were required to be about topics which "hundreds" of your acquaintances were interested in?

[RedCelt69]

I think part of the challenge of University Challenge is being knowledgeable about obscure topics, so if that's what cricket is then I don't see a problem! Wouldn't you be hard pressed to find questions for the show if they were required to be about topics which "hundreds" of your acquaintances were interested in?

I'm tempted to say "see above"... if I'm not getting my point across, I'll try again.
For one team it is an obscure subject. To the other team it is an exponentially obscure subject as it involves a game (or sport, if you will) that is even more a minority sport than the minority sport that it is in the country that invented it. The quiz then becomes biased.

If that doesn't make my point for me... imagine a music round when one of the teams is from a school for the deaf. Oh, sorry, 3/4 are deaf.

Again, my ire isn't directed at University Challenge. It is a consistent theme throughout all quiz shows produced by the BBC - which is meant to serve all of Britain and not just a tiny minority of one part of it.

[DACrowe]

...if I'm not getting my point across, I'll try again.

I'm not sure the problem is a lack of clarity in the exposition; I think it's that most of us don't really think much of your point.

For one team it is an obscure subject. To the other team it is an exponentially obscure subject.

Okay, so as I'm following the argument is something like this; let's call the situation which exists when any body of knowledge which an ordinary, well-informed person (if you can find such a beast) would think someone from one national culture would be more likely to know than someone from another nation culture, a 'cultural gradient'. When a cultural gradient exists, which favours the English (or, presumably, favours the Scots, or the Welsh or the Northern Irish) in the case of a particular potential topic of questions you are saying that those questions should not be asked because it represents either a) a bias against the national culture on the bad side of the cultural gradient or b) the implicit unionism and/or Anglo-centrism/cultural-imperialism of the BBC/Granada Studios. That is the point, right? I understand it, I just think it's rubbish.

(a) British Universities have students from all over Britain, particularly the better ones. I was a Scottish student at an English University; Steve is an English student at a Scottish University.

(b) There are all manner of common-or-garden subjects with a cultural slant to them. English history is a popular topic for questions on University Challenge. Are you saying it's some kind of conspiracy against the Scots if they ask questions about e.g. Henry II which - presumably - 'the average English student' might be expected to know more about than the average Scot?

(c) I know next to nothing about whisky, my American flatmate knows far more than me. Does this mean a question about whisky is biased in my favour or hers? Should we evaluate questions on a case-by-case basis? Perhaps the teams should get to review the questions in advance of the quiz to ensure there is a fair distribution of 'cultural background' to each one.

(d) I don't think the production team from Granada studios have some kind of hidden agenda here. I've met them; they're nice. I worry that this sort of thing is what gives Scottish nationalism a bad name. What's so English about cricket anyway? We've a Scot in the thread who likes it. When you saw the episode you watched an Englishman (Steve) who has no interest in it identify the description of an Indian cricket ground as being in Bristol. That event was only possible because they're really into cricket in India, not everyone in England cares about the silly sport and Steve is just as capable of making an intelligent guess as to where a famous cricket ground might be as anyone from Scotland. The period of the British Empire exported the game of cricket throughout the globe to places where it's much more popular today (in the strict sense of popular, at any rate) than it is in Britain. It's a cultural product of the UK about which interesting questions can be asked and can, in principle, be answered by people who know nothing about cricket but are able to make intelligent guesses based on their knowledge of former British colonial territories.

At the end of the day it's a quiz show, meant to entertain it's audience. If its bias is slightly towards England cultural norms (something I'm neither confirming or denying), this is just a reflection of the fact that Granada Studios is in Manchester and there are approximately 10 times as many English people as there are Scots. I'm sure I speak on behalf of Granada Studios when I say I'm sorry if your feeling that one question about a predominantly English sport represented an unforgivable cultural bias hampered your ability to enjoy watching the St Andrews team give Somerville College an absolute pasting.

[RedCelt69]

I'm not sure the problem is a lack of clarity in the exposition; I think it's that most of us don't really think much of your point.

Once someone claims to speak for the majority, alarm bells start ringing for me. You're assuming an authority that you do not have. The majority are silent on this issue. Even if they weren't, the truth isn't democratic.

That is the point, right? I understand it, I just think it's rubbish.

Answer my point about the game of shinty. Put yourself in that position and ask yourself if you wouldn't feel that it is ridiculous to expect anyone outside of a shinty-playing country to know anything other than how to spell "shinty".

Quizzes (and, yet again, this isn't centred upon UC) ask questions about a collection of trivia that one might have accumulated over one's life. Who, other than a quiz-professional (a la the panel on "Eggheads") would ever be expected to know the intricacies of a sport like shinty? At the general-knowledge level, you might know that it is similar to hockey... and if the aforementioned BBC quizzes were to ask questions like "what game uses bales balanced on wickets?" then I wouldn't have a problem with it. They don't. They ask questions for which the answers can only be known if you have more than a passing knowledge of the game. Scots (with very few exceptions) do not have more than a passing knowledge of the game. Because, on the whole, they have better sense than to be interested in the tedious past-time.

(a) British Universities have students from all over Britain, particularly the better ones. I was a Scottish student at an English University; Steve is an English student at a Scottish University.

3/4 of the team were Scots.

(b) There are all manner of common-or-garden subjects with a cultural slant to them. English history is a popular topic for questions on University Challenge. Are you saying it's some kind of conspiracy against the Scots if they ask questions about e.g. Henry II which - presumably - 'the average English student' might be expected to know more about than the average Scot?

It isn't a conspiracy - it is cultural blindness. I also don't see it as being anti-Scot. I never implied it was Scotland versus England; merely a continuation of a policy that is widespread in the BBC which supposes that a minority English sport has the same level of following in the rest of the UK.

(c) I know next to nothing about whisky, my American flatmate knows far more than me. Does this mean a question about whisky is biased in my favour or hers? Should we evaluate questions on a case-by-case basis? Perhaps the teams should get to review the questions in advance of the quiz to ensure there is a fair distribution of 'cultural background' to each one.

?

(d) I don't think the production team from Granada studios have some kind of hidden agenda here. I've met them; they're nice. I worry that this sort of thing is what gives Scottish nationalism a bad name. What's so English about cricket anyway? We've a Scot in the thread who likes it. When you saw the episode you watched an Englishman (Steve) who has no interest in it identify the description of an Indian cricket ground as being in Bristol. That event was only possible because they're really into cricket in India, not everyone in England cares about the silly sport and Steve is just as capable of making an intelligent guess as to where a famous cricket ground might be as anyone from Scotland.

Scottish Nationalism? Seriously? I'm not a Scottish Nationalist. I'm just a cricket-hating Scot who is happy for cricket-loving people of any nationality to enjoy their favourite game... so long as I don't have to keep hearing about it.

The most popular participation sport in the UK is angling. Why don't we get announcements on the BBC news about e.g. Derek from Tyneside catching a 6lb pike? Not that I'm interested in such events, but it would at least be more understandable and justifiable than peak-time news broadcasts in the UK keeping us informed about the latest shenanigans of the England cricket team. It has little relevance inside England and zero relevance to the rest of the UK.

The period of the British Empire exported the game of cricket throughout the globe to places where it's much more popular today (in the strict sense of popular, at any rate) than it is in Britain. It's a cultural product of the UK about which interesting questions can be asked and can, in principle, be answered by people who know nothing about cricket but are able to make intelligent guesses based on their knowledge of former British colonial territories.

And there we have it. Cricket is a throwback to the days of Empire. You know why it is popular in former British colonies? Because the locals are better at the game than the English and it has always been a subtle way of saying "fuck you" to the Empire.

I'm sure that, had the Romans introduced a sport they were crap at to all of their provinces, the locals would have taken to it with gusto.

At the end of the day it's a quiz show, meant to entertain it's audience. If its bias is slightly towards England cultural norms (something I'm neither confirming or denying), this is just a reflection of the fact that Granada Studios is in Manchester and there are approximately 10 times as many English people as there are Scots. I'm sure I speak on behalf of Granada Studios...

Now you're a spokesman for Granada Studios? There's that appeal to authority again.

...when I say I'm sorry if your feeling that one question about a predominantly English sport represented an unforgivable cultural bias hampered your ability to enjoy watching the St Andrews team give Somerville College an absolute pasting.

<deep sigh> It. Isn't. Just. About. University shitting Challenge.

However - even if it were, it wasn't one question. It was a round of 3 questions. In the event, the St Andrews team's performance meant that it didn't matter. What if the scores had ended up as a near-tie? Those 3 incorrectly guessed answers might have made all the difference.

[Cricket lover]

I have read some absolute rubbish here. Cricket is certainly considered to be a mainstream sport in England, this is why it is covered extensively by media agencies such as, the bbc, sky, telegraph, times etc... To compare cricket to shinty is quite frankly ridiculous. Having had a cursory glance at the shinty wikipedia article it appears that is hardly played outside of the highlands. Cricket is still very popular in England, as demonstrated by the sell out crowds at all the ashes matches this summer. Furthermore cricket can be considered a global sport considering its great popularity in countries all around the world, including SA, NZ, Australia, West Indies, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and to a lesser extent in other countries. Granted this is unscientific but the majority of my male friends interested in sport have some kind of interest in the sport.

Furthermore, I think it is really rather unfair to claim that the England team is crap. The recent test win over Australia, in one of sport's oldest rivalries, and reaching the semi finals of the champions trophy would suggest the team is actually half decent.

[Billygoatgruff]

I sometimes wonder if Red Celt is just another troll. I f*cking hate trolls. Don't feed them children.

[RedCelt69]

I have read some absolute rubbish here. Cricket is certainly considered to be a mainstream sport in England, this is why it is covered extensively by media agencies such as, the bbc, sky, telegraph, times etc... To compare cricket to shinty is quite frankly ridiculous. Having had a cursory glance at the shinty wikipedia article it appears that is hardly played outside of the highlands. Cricket is still very popular in England, as demonstrated by the sell out crowds at all the ashes matches this summer.

It wasn't a comparison of numbers-of-followers. It was a comparison of two minority sports, each of which having little-to-no-following on the other side of the border. Saying that the ashes had sell-out crowds isn't very impressive given you're talking about one (albeit large) sporting venue. I'm sure that Cliff Richard can still get sell-out crowds at his performances - which proves nothing about his more-widespread appeal to the rest of the populace.

Furthermore cricket can be considered a global sport considering its great popularity in countries all around the world, including SA, NZ, Australia, West Indies, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and to a lesser extent in other countries.

Lots of sports can be considered global... and yet they don't get the air time that cricket does in the UK. What are the numbers of supporters in England, Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland? I'm genuinely interested to know. The point-at-hand isn't a question of whether it is global; rather, it is whether it is followed UK-wide to the level that the BBC's obsession of the game can be justified.

Granted this is unscientific but the majority of my male friends interested in sport have some kind of interest in the sport.

As already stated, and equally unscientific, my own experiences are that virtually nobody I knew in England were followers of the game. Rather than compare contradictory personal experience, how about we get some actual statistics? How many people attend cricket matches? What are the UK viewing figures for televised matches? Or (bizarrely) listen to matches on the radio?

Furthermore, I think it is really rather unfair to claim that the England team is crap. The recent test win over Australia, in one of sport's oldest rivalries, and reaching the semi finals of the champions trophy would suggest the team is actually half decent.

Whilst I'm happy to bow to your superior knowledge of the game, and despite my best efforts to blank-out cricket news on the BBC, the following information still managed to penetrate my filters: it has been several decades since England won the ashes... and Australia only lost because their team is particularly weak at the moment. In the history of the game (in my lifetime, at least) the England cricket team has been uniformly and spectacularly weak when playing all but the most obscure cricketing nations.

[RJSmith]

I quite often lurk around The Sinner and groan inwardly whenever I see a post by Red Celt as I know it'll be representative of the self-importance and general contrarian boorishness that puts me off posting on any forum let alone The Sinner. But in this one instance I thought I'd indulge myself in expressing what an utter clown you are making of yourself. There was one point that actually induced a genuine 'lol' such was its cluelessness; saying cricket isn't athletic and proceeding to even mention baseball in the same post did not lend much weight to whatever your general whinge was. I seem to recall you mentioning struggling to walk into town fast enough no? Well I'm not sure you'd last one session as a Test batsman or bowler then; pelting along your run-up to fling a ball at over 90mph accurately between 100 and 200 times a day? Twisting and moving your whole body to get out of the way of said 90mph ball or one turning sharply out of the rough? And that's not to mention fielding in the slips or keeping wicket, constantly having to leap either way requiring utmost suppleness and flexibility to latch onto a catch. As for baseball, have you ever actually been to a match? You know there's 9 innings right?

What is this if not an example of extreme athleticism? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WMEXP4G9sM

And although I care very little for your initial whine, for what it's worth I don't think anyone is taking the fact that you only met 3 people who followed cricket whilst growing up in England as anything but weak. Did you move around England at all? You certainly didn't come to either of the two disparate regions in which I've lived as the cricket clubs have generally shared the same popularity and personnel as the rugby clubs (or is that too much of a minority sport for you also?) and the biennial fervour of The Ashes has generated as much enthusiasm as any football world cup. Oh and also I think you'll find that the very first Ashes match this year was held in Cardiff, the capital city of Wales, a place where you have issue with the amount of cricket coverage. It was well received and well attended. Glamorgan CCC are an established, well followed cricket club and strangely, Welsh.

As I say, I don't really *care* particularly for whatever grievance you are trying to win people over to, but it might help that you don't bite off more than you can chew - you're a wally

[RJSmith]

Furthermore, I think it is really rather unfair to claim that the England team is crap. The recent test win over Australia, in one of sport's oldest rivalries, and reaching the semi finals of the champions trophy would suggest the team is actually half decent.

Whilst I'm happy to bow to your superior knowledge of the game, and despite my best efforts to blank-out cricket news on the BBC, the following information still managed to penetrate my filters: it has been several decades since England won the ashes... and Australia only lost because their team is particularly weak at the moment. In the history of the game (in my lifetime, at least) the England cricket team has been uniformly and spectacularly weak when playing all but the most obscure cricketing nations.[/quote]

Despite the risk of become habitualised to indulging myself and becoming like yourself, I thought I better post just once more as this accentuates the point of my last post. Don't even attempt to start on a cricketing debate if you have no clue! England won the Ashes in '05 you know! Granted before that it was Australia since the glory days of Botham, but why even attempt to make a comment like 'Australia only lost because their team is particularly weak at the moment', its ridiculous when you know nothing. If anything they're not weak now, they were just exceptionally strong before. If you knew who Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne are then you'd realise that, but once again I merely want to highlight what buffoonery it is to get yourself drawn into this and cover all your bases in aid of your initial crusade. England weren't so spectacularly weak against South Africa in the Champion's Trophy were they? Or would you not know if South Africa are an obscure nation or indeed what the competition is? Right I'm going to save myself now, I think you've coloured my inital post enough by yourself without my annotation.