"Welcome to Tyrant's Gaming World - the ultimate destination for gamers of all genres! On this dynamic RU-vid channel, we explore, play, and review a diverse selection of computer games, ranging from adrenaline-pumping battles in Fortnite and Rocket League to epic historical warfare in Rome 2 Total War and the timeless strategic battles of Chess.
Our channel offers an exhilarating gaming experience that caters to a wide audience, whether you're a hardcore gamer or someone looking for casual gaming entertainment. With engaging gameplay, insightful reviews, and entertaining commentary, we aim to keep you hooked and entertained as we dive into the virtual worlds of some of the most popular titles.
Good portion of these hits were legal at the time but would be illegal now. Most specifically the helmet to helmet contact which was not illegal in the past as long as you didn’t lead with your helmet.
nah man you're wrong about all those catches. Absolutely not lucky. And he wasn't trying to catch it with his chest, the throw was a foot or two off target so he adjusted and made a great catch.
You can bump(touch) if both players are going for the ball. You can't bump or grab someone before the ball gets there unless you are also trying to catch the ball. Yes, there will be damage as you say. American football is the most physical sport besides fighting sports.
Offensive and defensive linemen can grab an opponent between the shoulder pads. No arms, legs, waist or facemask. I made a suggestion on another of your vids to go watch games at one of your great pubs that you have over there. I'm sure all of your questions will be answered.
This sport is so demanding on the body physically that if you played both defense and offense you will burned out within 15 mins. and players would be moving in slow motion. That's why you see players swapping out occasionally. Except for Quarterbacks who don't normally do a lot of running.
I love your interest in this great american sport. Don't let anyone dissuade you from watching the sport because of your lack of knowledge. This game has a lot of rules and you have to watch a ton of full games to get a full understanding of the game. There are plenty of us americans who may understand the game but still don't know all the rules. I've been to London once and love the pubs. With the sport gaining fans over there I suggest going to a nice pub that shows the games and watch them there. I'm sure all your questions can be answered. I subscribed to your channel and look forward to your future vids and seeing who you pick as your favorite team. My dream is that there will be an international league some day.
There is a saying in American football “keep your head on a swivel” you can get hit if you’re part of the play with or without the ball. You should always be looking for where the next contact is coming from.
Break the plain, that's the white line. All the ball has to do is literally touch it, even if it's the very tip of the ball. The orange pilon is part of the end zone
I'm sure you probably know this by now, but in case you don't, those little red things at the enzone are called pylons. They are positioned as a marker for what is still inbounds. So it's not so much that they're trying to touch the pylon but that the pylon is a way to know the player has crossed the end zone line if touched because in order to touch the pylon, the ball would have had to cross the plane of the end zone and equals a touchdown.
If both players are going full speed and they hit each other going at each other the collision is said to be the dame as a Pickup truck going 60 miles an hour towards a wall
Not sure why your trying to compare baseball to cricket? Both were based on a women’s game in England. Does cricket use stats to inform strategy on every pitch?
It does... but no less or more than Baseball. Arguably being 360 degrees in terms of fielder placement makes cricket slightly more tactical on each "pitch". Each fielder placed for a specific reason, for a specific "pitch", there are several million variations that could occur. Its comparable because its hitting a ball with a stick. Both have amazing heros, amazing games, subtle tactics. If you honestly believe baseball to be MORE complex (not equally) then, I'm happy to hear your thoughts. Other than that, thank you so much for watching and taking the time to comment. I genuinely appreciate you!
14:15 No one covered 3rd base because the defence was in what is known as a shift. This was used against batters who had a tendency to pull the ball. In this case, 3 infielders were positioned between first and second base and the only infielder on the other side was playing near second base, leaving 3rd base open. This tactic was recently banned by MLB to increase offence. Also you missed the best part of the last clip. The bat broke and hit the ball twice
Well, the gloves are because in baseball a hard hit ball can come at you at over 110mph. That, plus the incredible amounts of spin on the ball make it nearly impossible to catch barehanded, the glove is legitimately NECESSARY to play ball. And statistically speaking baseball is the single HARDEST sport to be succesful in, you have under .3 seconds to react to a ball going 100mph in order to hit it with a a fucking cylinder lol. That and a baseball is actually a lot more dense and harder than a cricket ball so its easier to catch a cricket ball thats not being hit with full force/strength and with a spherical bat (physics show this makes the ball move MUCH quicker and faster off the bat) leaving said bat going over 100mph. Id pay money to see someone try and catch a baseball leaving a bat over 100mph with their barehands, shit id pay to see professionals do that just so they can break all their fingers and hands lmao. All respect to cricket, but its not common in cricket to shatter your jaw, ribs, or hand by being hit with the ball going 90+ mph, it would just be way too dangerous to play without gloves and nobody would really be able to field anymore either. Batted ball averages and hits would probably go up like triple or quadruple the amount
There no difference in speed of the ball coming to the out fielder because of terminal velocity. No baseball fielder would stand 3 ft away from the batter either. I just don’t think that claim stands up. I think a good argument is actually the speed the ball is thrown at between fielders. There is usually only one throw to return the ball from the outfield to the wicket keeper.. in cricket where as in baseball it is legitimately thrown at high speed (higher than cricket) between the bases. However purely for catching.. off the bat? No way. Look at where short leg is fielding and tell me the ball isn’t hit at him as fast as any baseball.
Also! Thank you for watching and commenting. Just because I don’t agree, doesn’t mean I don’t hugely appreciate you taking the time to comment! I love baseball and can’t wait to watch more!
@@IamTyrant outfielders may be the only fielders who MIGHT get away with no gloves, but then making hard running catches becomes next to impossible; but they call 3rd base the hot corner for a reason - a righty pulls the ball on a line drive 110mph and you have less than a second or two to catch it, with only traveling 90feet terminal velocity hasn't affected it much yet so it's still traveling damn near 100mph. But yeah the throwing from fielders is probably a better argument in that case
@@Dezzyyy is there a video showing the ball is still travelling at 110 outside of the bases? I’d genuinely like to watch and react to that! Maybe learn something! Thanks 🙏 let me know.
The ball does not move just as quickly.....a baseball pitch is thrown harder and the ball leaving a round baseball bat is faster than a flat cricket bat. Proven fact you can confirm with a quick search.
Yeah but the cricket ball bounces… and that variety adds the difficulty beyond measure. Speed isn’t everything. Even the cricket bowlers at 95+ would never bowl a full toss (baseball pitch) because it would be expected to be hit out of the ground every single time. I accept the bats are thinner and it’s much harder to get a clean hit.. it’s not so much which sport as better but how they are different and how they are the same I’m trying to react to. Thanks for watching and commenting, it’s super appreciated!
@@IamTyrant a cricket ball bouncing slows it down if we are just talking speed......a baseball is thrown on avg faster than a cricket ball is bowled and from a shorter distance..... a cricket bat has considerably larger surface area. I appreciate the differences so nether is "better" than the other. The original point you made about the need/lack of need for a glove in baseball is principally flawed as the objective in baseball is to connect on the sweet spot rather than placing or deflecting the ball in cricket (at least from the perspective of a novice). It is not unusual for a baseball to be thrown 95-100mph and leave the bat at speeds up top 120mph (granted this isn't the norm). It is routine for balls to be struck at 100mph routinely in games. A glove is necessary. I've seen experiments where swinging a cricket bat at a baseball being pitched with full contact and the exit velocity is just not the same off the surface of a flat surface. A baseball leaves with more velo and travels further with a spherical bat.... Mind you this is with a full swing with the intent to hit as hard as possible. While watching cricket the technique does not appear to try to connect with full power every attempt.
At 4:53, the reason that moment was so special was because it was the first and only home run hit by the well-known pitcher Bartolo Colon, nicknamed "Big Sexy", just before his 43rd birthday having been in the league for around 20 years. Pitchers (Babe Ruth and Shohei Ohtani aside) are generally very poor hitters, and Bartolo was (in)famous for being particularly inept, despite being one of the most accomplished pitchers in the league during much of his very long career.
MLB suggestions longest homeruns best infield throws best outfield throws best infield catches best outfield catches best double plays best triple plays
I met Dick Butkus (Chicago Bears 1960's) back in the 80's. Most bad ass dude I've ever seen. 6'5", 285 lbs he looked every inch a total warrior. He could stop a running back with one hand and slam him into the ground so hard he'd knock the dude out. Offence's would engineer plays designed to avoid him. He hit so hard he would knock his own players out.
Has the sport become more technical and less physical in recent years a la European Soccer. They used to break legs for fun in the 80's and 90's but now everyone is "highly tuned machine" rather than player. Its not meant as a direct comparison as obviously AF has much bigger hits! but basically I'm asking if the game has changed from that point of view?
