Ragdoll Cricket

I’ve just burned a little too much time on a very silly game about a very English sport – but it’s a fine opportunity for a little good-natured competition between RPSites. It’s pretty much what you’d get if you shoved cricket into Sumo Tori Dreams – that same comedy-physics sense of drunken, incapable men unwisely attempting physical activity. Only in this case there is actual skill involved too.

I’m currently watching Twitter-friends warring over high scores: the number to beat is 255, apparently. Can you do better? Yeah, you – you with the face. I certainly can’t.

Yes, this is probably the first and only time we ever post about cricket.


  1. Feet says:


    I’m just as rubbish at this in real life you know.

  2. Dominic White says:

    Not too keen on this. While it has some of the same feel of uncontrollability as, say, QWOP, it feels unintentional – a lack of precision in the controls, rather than a hilarious, deliberately wonky challenge.

    Likewise, Sumotori dreams puts the player into the hilarious situation of having tenuous control over a near uncontrollable entity, and thus everything goes wrong in the best possible way.

  3. Feet says:

    I think it actually gets a lot right as a batting simulation, the top spin back spin, long and short bowls and so forth, the positioning of the feet of the batsman. And if they bowled this fast in real cricket I’d bloody well watch it!

  4. nabeel says:

    Nice, I lol’d.

  5. Schmung says:

    Yeah, the speed of the bowling is the major challenge. I managed a meagre 55 on my first attempt.

  6. born2expire says:


  7. Riotpoll says:

    If you hit the ball back too slowly the next one it bowlx at you can knock it away, and into the bit that makes you get caught.

  8. Pags says:

    Why can’t I play this using the Q, W, O and P keys?

    Also, 134. Wahooooooo.

  9. rob says:

    Is 255 the number to beat or are scores stored in 8-bit unsigned integers?

  10. Larington says:

    101 seems to be my limit.

  11. Zerrick says:

    50 at my first go, 89 after my fourth.
    I actually learned more about cricket then I ever knew about this complicated form of baseball (that still is the only thing I know about it).

  12. Marcin says:

    Which part is the actual score? I know nothing about these hit-ball-with-bat sports.

  13. Benzido says:

    It should be like QWOP – I made this one just before I made QWOP! You can try the original version at link to foddy.net – but it’s not as pretty as this licensed version.

  14. alset says:

    thanks a lot, that “game over” stuff was getting on my nerves

  15. Benzido says:

    By the way, the ACTUAL number to beat is around 4500 ;)

  16. The Poisoned Sponge says:

    For some reason the game has a split second pause just before I’m suppose to hit the ball, which is crippling my scores considerably. And the bloody ‘wahay!’ whenever you get out grates on my nerves.

  17. Pags says:

    Basts! I managed to knock a ball into the six only to have it slice another oncoming ball which appeared onscreen after I’d hit the first ball. Sliced ball ends up flying into the yellow&black zone and I lose a wicket. I say again, basts!

  18. Pete says:

    Haha this is great, as far as I can tell the controls are actually pretty good (in an intentionally difficult fashion). Seems to promote some pretty solid technique, too! On the downside, I made 21 on my first attempt…

  19. Thomas Lawrence says:

    Hilarious! I love the way I can have several balls on screen at once, creating at least one ludicrous scenario in which I hit one ball for four, and on the way it bounced into the oncoming delivery, which ALSO went for four.

  20. Radiant says:

    Why are PC games writers so pathologically opposed to sport?
    On one hand you boast about highscore competitions yet on the other it’s like a fear.
    Of what? Physicality? Beer? Crowds? Forgetting your PE kit and playing hockey in your chuddies?
    Pro Evo, Championship Manager and Brian Lara’s cricket are huge pc games. It just seems like such a shame to largely ignore the genre.

  21. Radiant says:

    Especially if it’s because you throw like a girl.

  22. Thomas Lawrence says:

    @Zerrick: Cricket is actually a simplified version of baseball, in my view. A lot of the apparent complexity of cricket is very superficial, stemming largely form the fact that roughly eighty percent of the terms used to describe the game are at least slightly silly.

    Some justification here. Most of the steps converting baseball into cricket are simplifications.

  23. Ginger Yellow says:

    I can beat that (although not the high scores – I haven’t topped 40 yet). I managed to hit a four which knocked the next ball for six.

  24. Ginger Yellow says:

    That comment was addressed to Thomas Lawrence (and all the other multi-ball players).

  25. Thomas Lawrence says:

    @Ginger Yellow: Having now played a bit more, balls hitting other balls is a relatively common occurrence. Haven’t yet hit a double-six, though.

  26. Pete says:

    @ Thomas Lawrence

    While I agree that cricket followers enjoy overstating the complexity and inexplicability of the game, I’d hardly call cricket simplified baseball. If we’re going to start summarizing eachother’s bat-to-ball sport, I’m pretty sure I could make baseball look incredibly simplistic. Like most great ball sports, cricket’s depth comes not from the number or complexity of the rules, but their interaction with player skill, and I’m sure the same goes for baseball. But come on, it’s pretty much a matter of: throw ball; hit ball; run around bases. (Plus a few simple rules regarding scoring and getting out.)

  27. Rei Onryou says:

    I don’t know how real cricket works, but my best score on this was 114. In my defence, the game is not suited to a track pad.

  28. Rob says:

    101, which I’ll take, 255 is just a bit too much to beat.

    @Thomas Lawrence
    Baseball’s complexity appears to stem largely from a superfluity of statistics; I’m unconvinced that’s better.

  29. Kua says:

    Bugger – I can’t go to bed until i’ve played this now and am begrudgingly satisfied i can’t beat the current high score. Meer, you bast, you big bad bast.

  30. Dan says:

    I got around 135.

    At one point though I did do an amusing ball juggle, and managed to hit the same ball three times.

    Anyone figured out how to reverse-sweep yet?

  31. MarkN says:

    @Thomas Lawrence re: “Cricket is actually a simplified version of baseball, in my view.”

    Say that again when you’ve managed to fully explain LBW to a layman, and then I might believe you.

  32. john t says:

    Christ, you lot will argue about anything.

    We will not.

  33. Kunal says:


    Have to disagree. Cricket is a more complex sport than baseball _precisely_ because of the relaxation of constraints such as allowing the bowler to pitch the ball wherever he likes, and allowing the batsman to hit the ball where he wants.

    At some point, an addition of rules/constraints will reduce the complexity of a game (think how heavily constrained a linear game like doom 3 is, versus the emergent possibilities of a game like spore)

  34. Kua says:

    156. Howzat Pags? Rawr.

  35. Kua says:

    “Anyone figured out how to reverse-sweep yet?”

    You just hit it with the back of your bat hehe. Not sure its more effective than the standard hit though.

    There’s some extremely sus bowling going on here too… I’ll get that West Indian umpire on the case. The one who’s too cool for school.

  36. Pags says:

    156. Howzat Pags? Rawr.


  37. Mo says:

    I got 149 on my third go, and then couldn’t top that for the rest of my 15min session. I got into a good groove, but just the one time.

  38. noony says:

    This and QWOP need to be combined, so you have to flail spastically between the wickets to earn runs. Could also make for some comically cack-handed bowling too.

  39. Pete says:

    Couldn’t stay away from it, my new best score is 163.

  40. Muzman says:

    I was on my way to a respectable score until I noticed the English flags and felt compelled to make a complete ball up of the whole thing.
    Ha Haa! Hahahaa ahah

    But seriously (well…) I got my first six when the ‘1’ run I was about to score bounced off the next ball into the air. I wish real cricket was more like that. Just use a machine or something.

  41. karthik says:

    “Yes, this is probably the first and only time we ever post about cricket”


  42. jonfitt says:

    102 on my second go. Got into a rhythm for a while.

  43. weegosan says:

    I got 80 from my first 2 wickets and then collapsed for 96. Even in computer games the English can choke like legends.

  44. Premium User Badge

    phuzz says:

    All this is giving me is flashbacks to that cricket game on the Amiga, alas the name escapes me.
    Anyway, I thought baseball was just a simplified version of rounders?

  45. JJ says:

    Fun! Reminds me of the deflect the balls part of one of my favourite games of all time IK+. link to lemonamiga.com

  46. Schmung says:

    I managed 114 last night, but I’ not sure how I’ll fare with the performance restricting cheapo-mouse on the office PC. Still plenty of time to find out..

  47. Pod says:

    phuzz: Brian Lara cricket? Or the other one which I can’t remember?

    This game would be 10000x better if the mouse was locked to the window somehow :( Still, it’s lots of fun.

  48. Scuzzeh says:

    I played the original on the QWOP website so have become a bit too good at this.

  49. JJ says:

    Hmm, sorry, that link didnt work. Try link to lemonamiga.com picture # 4

  50. ShardPhoenix says:

    This is pretty addictive. My high score so far is 137. It would be better if the pace of incoming balls was a bit slower though (maybe only bowl a new one after the previous one has left the screen), and if balls were removed after a couple of seconds of not moving/moving slowly. Also, sometimes the controls seem to get “stuck” a bit leaving me to get bowled.