Why Has 20Twenty Cricket Been A Success?

[Richard]

In my view all people have enough intelligence to make it to the top,all that is required is proper application of the brain and hard-work...Sheer intelligence is required only if you want to become an Einstein or Newton or something like that

All the stuff about children inheriting intelligence from parents is just crap...it doesn't even deserve a reply,dunno why I did.

Not quite true if biologists are correct in their summarisations, but I admire your stance.

 

[J.Coney]

wow i thought this was cricket forum? i havent read all the replys on here regarding intelligence or no intelligence, but i would like to say that any nation that has an obvious class system will always maintain a wide berth from richer or poorer people, however this is like cutting off your nose desprite your face. before rugby became professional nz all blacks were a big force in the game any one in nz could put on a black jersey if they had the talant we didnt give a rats ass about which school you came from or how elitess you were.

 

[J.Coney]

anyway i do want to talk about cricket. i have been putting together a propasol for an inventive and exiciting way to play cricket, i'll give you a breif run down, feed back would be appriciated.

both teams have 50 overs each to put together a score. however when the team batting 1st (team A.) lossers its 3rd wicket the teams swap, roles. the fielding team (team B). now bats. when they lose their 3rd wicket the teams swap roles again, if the orginal batting team (team A.)losers its 6th wicket they swap again if (team B.) losers it's 6th wicket, then team A. finishers it's remaining overs off with its last 4 batsmen, thus creating 3 seperate innings inside your alloted 50 overs.

example.
FOW Overs
team A. 3-89 14.4
team B. 3-108 17.5
team A. 6-177 39.1
team B. 5- 236 50 Innings complete.

In this example team B. nevr lost its 6th wicket. this leaves team A. 11 overs with 4 wickets in hand to win at a RR of 5.3
NB. the not out batsmen returns from the previous innings with the new batsmen. the bowlers are alloted 10 overs each. And all field restrictions are the same.

 

[Richard]

The more innovation you put into a game-form, the less it becomes recognisable as cricket.
Some people don't recognise basic one-day-cricket as "cricket".
I certainly regard "cricket" and "Twenty20" as two of different kinds.

 

[Swervy]

The more innovation you put into a game-form, the less it becomes recognisable as cricket.
Some people don't recognise basic one-day-cricket as "cricket".
I certainly regard "cricket" and "Twenty20" as two of different kinds.

mmmm...well you dont know your cricket then do you

 

[J.Coney]

i havent really changed the traditional game that much at all, instead of teams swapping over after an allotment of set overs 20 or 50 i changed it to a number of set wickets, so in theory there is no final set score until the last hour of play. 20 20 has tried to condense the game so it's packed with action, but if you just change the way teams have to go about creating a score and doing it 'so" theoretically at the same time this is where the action and excitment is. its kinda like soccer or rugby where one team could be attacking and the next defending inside an allotted time (80-90min). this is what my idea was based on teams attacking and defending inside their alloted overs. this can only be achieved by removing small allotments of wickets 3-3 then 4.

 

[marc71178]

I have to say that idea doesn't sound to me like it'd work - there'd be no building an innings or batsmen getting settled.

 

[GotSpin]

Sounds kind of stupid, and not a cricket match

 

[J.Coney]

I have to say that idea doesn't sound to me like it'd work - there'd be no building an innings or batsmen getting settled.

I find this the most weakest argument of the game but prefectely the most obvious, as we can not guage whether a batsmen would find it difficult to put together an innings in this sort of set up i can only assume that "it" is possible from batsmen that have accomplished an innings of substance that have been interrupted. examples as follow s.fleming a 100 odd in a rain affected world cup match, his innings was broken up into 3 sections due to rain he along with nz chased down a score of over 300. A.Flintoff in a knock out match returned the next day to score a 100. and i am sure there is plenty of batsmen who have scored an innings of substance due to a wide range of interruptions. Weather/ pitch invasion/ power cut (black out) and any way could'nt this be seen as a test of players mental resolve and character.

 

[marc71178]

With that sort of structure, fans would get lost easily, there would be no momentum and the game would become far far too complicated.

 

[Arjun]

It cannot promote the whole game, but can be used to get used to some key facets of the game, such as fielding, running, boundary-hitting, bowling to boundary-hitters, bowling at express pace for instance. They can make the pitches more bouncy and tennis balls can be used to make it faster.

 

[Richard]

mmmm...well you dont know your cricket then do you

Yes.

EDIT: WOW, you used instead of !!!!!!!!

 

[bestfriendh]

hi

the TOPIC WAS is 20-20 a success......ma answer is a HUGE UN AT THT........

wat i would like to see is 20-20 in da indian domestic scene.and i tell u we will get a big big crop of fine odi players as well as more money and audiences in domestic cricket here....this i can tell u coz the cricket crazy nation is actually takin a likin to 20-20......and if applies here would be A HUMUNGOUS SUCCESS......already got me excited........mumbai tigers vs punjab prowlers...takers anyun???

 

[Swervy]

Yes.

EDIT: WOW, you used instead of !!!!!!!!

full of surprises me

 

[J.Coney]

example.
FOW Overs
team A. 3-89 14.4
team B. 3-108 17.5
team A. 6-177 39.1
team B. 5- 236 50 Innings complete.

In this example team B. nevr lost its 6th wicket. this leaves team A. 11 overs with 4 wickets in hand to win at a RR of 5.3
NB. the not out batsmen returns from the previous innings with the new batsmen. the bowlers are alloted 10 overs each. And all field restrictions are the same.

complicated ahe! now i know how the english felt when they explained test cricket to the yanks in the late 18th century.


but i don't want to pull water up a hill with a rake, so thank you all for your feed back.

*all i ask is when you watch your next odi game note the fall of the 3rd wicket. On avg. this happens in the 17th over when batting first, then imagine the teams swapping roles (one thing will become immediatly obvious niether team as of yet does not know what the final score is to chase, and just because you bat first does'nt mean it's going to be your score).

 

[Richard]

full of surprises me

You seen my thread in OT, then?

 

[marc71178]

EDIT: WOW, you used instead of !!!!!!!!

And at the same time as bemoaning the posting in CC, you post this

 

[Richard]

Notice the "EDIT"?
Jesus...
Also notice the single post which is unnoticed until the thread is opened rather than the comments about tens of threads clogging-up the works.
In short, notice the irrelevancy of your above comment?

 

[marc71178]

Oh, so that makes it all the better?

 

[Richard]

Given that you've not been able to explain away the reasons I've shown why it is, yes, it does.