Long term impact of 20/20

[Xuhaib]

I must say I am enjoying the tournament but there are few things to worry about I feel from a pure cricketing pov.

Gayle's knock against Aus was a treat to watch but T20 can actually destroy the charm of fast bowling. Imagine these lil kids watching the gamea fast bowler(Lee) runs from the 30 yard line and gets hit for a six 2 times in an over who would want to be a fast bowler and I must admit that for me hostile pacy fast bowling is one of the best sights in cricket.

So what other pros and cons can you see from 20/20 impacting the game in the long run and what steps should be taken to minimize the damaging aspects of 20/20.

[Scaly piscine]

Originally Posted by Xuhaib

I must say I am enjoying the tournament but there are few things to worry about I feel from a pure cricketing pov.

Gayle's knock against Aus was a treat to watch but T20 can actually destroy the charm of fast bowling. Imagine these lil kids watching the gamea fast bowler(Lee) runs from the 30 yard line and gets hit for a six 2 times in an over who would want to be a fast bowler and I must admit that for me hostile pacy fast bowling is one of the best sights in cricket.

So what other pros and cons can you see from 20/20 impacting the game in the long run and what steps should be taken to minimize the damaging aspects of 20/20.

Well Lee is a mediocre fast bowler at best, you wouldn't want kids emulating him anyway.

What they will try imitate is Malinga's slower curveball-esque full toss. Dilshan's ramp shot (expect it'll give dentists some extra business). Stump cartwheeling yorkers. All the reverse shots. Things like spectacular fielding, like the Mathew(s) fetch from over the ropes, diving one handed catches and run outs.

T20 creates so many moments and showcases a huge range of deliveries and shots that kids will bound to remember some of them and try doing them themselves. That will be good for cricket.

[Smith]

[andruid]

Originally Posted by Smith

Seriously doubt it.

[Shri]

Originally Posted by andruid

Seriously doubt it.

The 60 over ODIs died after the 50 over games were introduced. ODIs are probably going to suffer the same fate.

[andruid]

Originally Posted by metallics2006

The 60 over ODIs died after the 50 over games were introduced. ODIs are probably going to suffer the same fate.

IIRC, 60 overs cricket became 50 overs cricket. It was not killed/ or replaced by it.

[superkingdave]

Originally Posted by andruid

IIRC, 60 overs cricket became 50 overs cricket. It was not killed/ or replaced by it.

We carried on playing it in England for a while didn't we? At least 55 over cricket anyway

[Shri]

Originally Posted by andruid

IIRC, 60 overs cricket became 50 overs cricket. It was not killed/ or replaced by it.

Okay. Then T20 cricket will become ODI cricket. Technically, T20 games are over in one day. So, we could call it that.

[cover drive man]

The biggest problem I see with T20 is, it takes away the art of building an innings. Batsmen go on and if they dont start scoring quickly it can often damage there teams chances.

[andruid]

Originally Posted by metallics2006

Okay. Then T20 cricket will become ODI cricket. Technically, T20 games are over in one day. So, we could call it that.

Your missing my point. The reason 50 ov ers took precedence over 60 overs was they literally cahnged the inings length and 60 over cricket became 50 over cricket. T20 cr5icket is a whole 'nother format existing alongside 50 over cricket.

[Smith]

Waiting for the day this becomes a recurring habit, if the guy keeps on playing T20s.

[James_W]

Some of these switch-hit/reverse/Dilshan shots can be awesome to watch but it isn't something I want to see creep into the longer form of the game. Another thing is that bowlers coming through might be more attracted to T20 as there's more money so they may try to perfect bowling defensively, and find themselves unable to take wickets in the longer form as they don't know how to attack. Bad times.

[G.I.Joe]

What i'd like to see cricket do, and this applies to all forms, is to take a cue from baseball and have a no-score area behind the wicket.

[andruid]

Originally Posted by James_W

Some of these switch-hit/reverse/Dilshan shots can be awesome to watch but it isn't something I want to see creep into the longer form of the game. Another thing is that bowlers coming through might be more attracted to T20 as there's more money so they may try to perfect bowling defensively, and find themselves unable to take wickets in the longer form as they don't know how to attack. Bad times.

DWTA.

The new shots would present new challenges for captaincy and bowling in the longer form. Nonetheless I doubt they will be played as prodiguosly in test cricket, what5 with staying in and playing a huge innings having priority over scoring rates. Bowlers would also likey have to actually work on perfecting those high risk/high return deliveries (like yorkers) and generally give away less four balls as a matter if survival.

[Jono]

Originally Posted by G.I.Joe

What i'd like to see cricket do, and this applies to all forms, is to take a cue from baseball and have a no-score area behind the wicket.

So remove a late cut and fine sweep shot?

No thanks