Originally Posted by SJS
This is purely to make the "younger" (not really if it is 32 limit) lot win.
Thirty is a very good cut off. A player at 30 is probably more than halfway through his career.
It gives maturity to batsmen but makes the bowlers less fit (surely less fast) and the fielding side weaker too. Yes they would be more experienced, naturally.
Yep definitely. All we're saying is 32 would even it up a bit. You'd have Dravid, Ponting, Vaughan and Tendulkar Akhtar/Bond and Pollockjump over to the other side, but you'd still have Lara and Gilly to cause some damage for the 32+.
Here's a question. If we had it 32+, with those that I have already mentioned jumping into the other team (or just simply not being valid) who would be the replacements? Inzy? Martyn? Atapattu? Astle? Hayden?