[PCCL 2010] Call for Commentary

Well none of the words are mine so i guess its all right :p
 
Last edited:
I was talking about the things like '???....' and '.?.'
 
A total messy exaggeration i would say.Never mind.

Question marks were not repeated though :p
 
Having seen the commentary being used now there seems to be quite a few spelling mistakes and grammatical errors.

If its easy for you to post all the commentary used and me to make the odd changes and provided it doesn't give you extra work I'd be happy to go through and touch them up Sohum.

I know its probably not high on the priority list at the moment but if its easy to change them I don't mind going through them.
 
They're all text files but with a very preset format meaning that if anything goes out of line then the file won't be loaded. I have attached the text files here if you want to take a look at them. As long as you use notepad and use "tabs" in between parts of the line and not spaces, it should be okay.

I don't know how up-to-date the README is, btw.
 

Attachments

  • CommData0.txt
    19.8 KB · Views: 32
  • CommData1.txt
    10.1 KB · Views: 33
  • CommData2.txt
    3.2 KB · Views: 28
  • CommData3.txt
    1.5 KB · Views: 29
  • CommData4.txt
    4.8 KB · Views: 35
  • CommData6.txt
    4 KB · Views: 30
  • CommDataWBowled.txt
    4.9 KB · Views: 28
  • CommDataWLBW.txt
    1.7 KB · Views: 28
  • README.txt
    2.6 KB · Views: 27
Okay Doke. I'll definitely have a thorough look through them especially as I noticed a mistake by myself earlier :p
 
I've gone through them and touched up a few of them that had a few grammatical mistakes. Hopefully I haven't added any though :p
 

Attachments

  • CommData0.txt
    19.8 KB · Views: 32
  • CommData1.txt
    10.1 KB · Views: 34
  • CommData2.txt
    3.2 KB · Views: 32
  • CommData3.txt
    1.5 KB · Views: 33
  • CommData4.txt
    4.9 KB · Views: 29
  • CommData6.txt
    4 KB · Views: 31
  • CommDataWBowled.txt
    4.8 KB · Views: 29
  • CommDataWLBW.txt
    1.7 KB · Views: 29
  • README.txt
    2.6 KB · Views: 32
Just noticed that there's a mistake that I hadn't changed.

"absolutely beautiful shot from [striker}, classical cover drive for four."
 

Attachments

  • CommData4.txt
    4.9 KB · Views: 31
We still need more commentary. There are far too many duplicates at the moment. So keep posting guys.
 
Which category would that one fit into?


{striker} looks like he is having fun out there; that's a maximum.

{striker} hasn't got any plans tonight. Dot ball.
 
Singles

{seamer} puts all his effort into that short ball but {striker} has all the time in the world to hook that down to fine leg for a single.

Full and straight but blocked into the off side. The batsmen scamper a quick single to the annoyance of {bowler}

That ball almost sneaks through {striker}'s defences, but somehow he manages to keep it out and snatch a single.

Full bunger from {bowler} but {striker} cannot put it away to the boundary. A single is taken.

Jesus, that was quick. {striker} was grateful that ball didn't knock his head off and he happily runs down to the other end.

Slower ball from {bowler} which almost deceives {striker}. He checks his shot just in time and the ball rolls into the on side for one.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top