Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: 20Twenty Cricket in CG (maybe)

  1. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,912
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00
    How many 20Twenty games have u seen with 1/5th filled stadiums, i haven't seen too many. Why would u want to watch another sport when cricket is on, doesn't sound like ur a true cricket fan
    Only one team will be a home team, how long do the CG go for 10-14 days, how many games are you going to play. People watch the CG for sports they dont normally get the coverage for. Look at tennis and see how much players value Olympic medals never mind Commonwealth games.

  2. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00
    Sounds interesting but i can't see it getting off the groung unless the ICC seperate the Windies islands in their 14 different nations of 20Twenty Internationals in general.
    I'm not sure how that would help particularly, you'd then have 20+ teams in all probability. It would perhaps spread the game too thinly, but I do think it's important that the teams have their strongest players available especially in India. I'm sure the hosts would get full houses, but I have no idea what sort of crowds turn up for 2 foreign teams playing in India.
    National Scrabble Champion 2009, 8th, 11th and 5th in 2009/2011/2013 World Championships, gold medal (team) at Causeway, 2011 Masters Champion
    Australia’s Darren Lehmann is a ‘blatant loser’ insists Stuart Broad
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in public:
    Reply from mods to my prank bans in private:


    MSN - evil_budgie @ hotmail.co.uk

  3. #18
    International Coach biased indian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    office
    Posts
    11,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaly piscine
    I'm not sure how that would help particularly, you'd then have 20+ teams in all probability. It would perhaps spread the game too thinly, but I do think it's important that the teams have their strongest players available especially in India. I'm sure the hosts would get full houses, but I have no idea what sort of crowds turn up for 2 foreign teams playing in India.
    it will be more than what u will get any where else
    Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
    RIP Craigos

  4. #19
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Scallywag
    Only one team will be a home team, how long do the CG go for 10-14 days, how many games are you going to play. People watch the CG for sports they dont normally get the coverage for. Look at tennis and see how much players value Olympic medals never mind Commonwealth games.
    Well 3 group matches if their is 16 teams into 4 groups, plus S/F and Final and maybe Q/F, that 5 to 6 games. I don't get ur coverage story the fact the games would go for too long, remember 20Twenty games only go for 2 - 3 hours same as b-ball, football codes and shorter then baseball. If teams send their full strength sides then u will get crowds in India for two non home teams. Also if the top players turn up then the medals will be seen as achievements, that the problem with tennis, most top players don't go.
    The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)

    Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)

    RIP WCC and CW Cricket

    Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS


  5. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,912
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00
    Well 3 group matches if their is 16 teams into 4 groups, plus S/F and Final and maybe Q/F, that 5 to 6 games. I don't get ur coverage story the fact the games would go for too long, remember 20Twenty games only go for 2 - 3 hours same as b-ball, football codes and shorter then baseball. If teams send their full strength sides then u will get crowds in India for two non home teams. Also if the top players turn up then the medals will be seen as achievements, that the problem with tennis, most top players don't go.
    Thats 27 matches in total with the home team playing in a maximum of 5 leaving 22 games to be played without the home team being represented.

    Hey I could be wrong but I dont think cricket needs this sort of competition when we have people allready complaining that schedules are crammed at the moment.

    coverage of two games a day = 5-6 hours of cricket, not going to happen.
    Last edited by Scallywag; 26-03-2005 at 07:51 PM.

  6. #21
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Scallywag
    Thats 27 matches in total with the home team playing in a maximum of 5 leaving 22 games to be played without the home team being represented.

    Hey I could be wrong but I dont think cricket needs this sort of competition when we have people allready complaining that schedules are crammed at the moment.

    coverage of two games a day = 5-6 hours of cricket, not going to happen.
    You need this type of competition to grow cricket around the world, it would take 2 weeks max, not a big time out of the schedule. Why do u need full coverage of the group matches, do u have full coverage of group matches in the hockey, b-ball and football in the olympics aside from Australia games and even though games aren't always live. IMO the CG is just a stepping stone to the Olympics and i gather that must cricket fans would love to see it in the olympics if the teams send thier full strength sides.

  7. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,912
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00
    You need this type of competition to grow cricket around the world, it would take 2 weeks max, not a big time out of the schedule. Why do u need full coverage of the group matches, do u have full coverage of group matches in the hockey, b-ball and football in the olympics aside from Australia games and even though games aren't always live. IMO the CG is just a stepping stone to the Olympics and i gather that must cricket fans would love to see it in the olympics if the teams send thier full strength sides.
    The countries that dont have a cricket team wont show the cricket thus defeating the purpose. 20/20 also does not show what cricket is all about. IMO

  8. #23
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Scallywag
    The countries that dont have a cricket team wont show the cricket thus defeating the purpose. 20/20 also does not show what cricket is all about. IMO
    How many Commenwealth countries of any size (in terms of population) don't have a cricket team. 20Twenty may not show cricket in full fight but it gives a better introduction to it for non cricket followers then 50 Over Cricket or Test Cricket.

  9. #24
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    scandinavia
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00
    How many 20Twenty games have u seen with 1/5th filled stadiums, i haven't seen too many. Why would u want to watch another sport when cricket is on, doesn't sound like ur a true cricket fan
    But there wouldnt be any cricket.. what on earth has 20/20 got to do with cricket?

    I would be embarrassed on behalf of cricket if 20-20 ever reached the olympics and would much prefer to watch some other sports rather than a cheap slog-around version of a great game continually let down so badly by its administrators.

    If only we could move beyond this limited crap, it could be fascinating to see how cricket could be developed

  10. #25
    Soutie Langeveldt's Avatar
    Pinball Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    29,542
    I love the way everyone is harking on about how we shoulnt have too much Twenty20, just keep it in moderation.. And then Twenty20 will take over everything, cricket will turn into baseball, and everyone will be saying, god, why did we chose to have so much Twenty20?
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    Don't like using my iPod dock. Ruins battery life too much.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Thanks Dick Smith. Will remember to subscribe to your newsletter for more electronic fun facts.

    ****.

  11. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by swede
    But there wouldnt be any cricket.. what on earth has 20/20 got to do with cricket?

    I would be embarrassed on behalf of cricket if 20-20 ever reached the olympics and would much prefer to watch some other sports rather than a cheap slog-around version of a great game continually let down so badly by its administrators.

    If only we could move beyond this limited crap, it could be fascinating to see how cricket could be developed
    Yawn, yet another misinformed Twenty20 hater.

  12. #27
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    scandinavia
    Posts
    180
    I dont hate 20-20 any more than I hate 50 over games. In fact I would prefer 20-20 as the wait for the slog is shorter.
    But to me cricket is simply not a game that can be played properly if there is no need to take wickets.Its not how it was intended and it doesnt work as the constant need to change the rules of limited games shows.


    I am not anti-development but why cant the real game be developed?
    why couldnt one.innings games, increased over rates etc be considered as experiments.

    Of course as cricket is a very long game it will get a boost through a shorter version more in line with other games but if its at the expense of the quality of the game it will inevitably be short-lived as people start to realise how poor sport they are watching.


    I would expect 20-20 games to get good crowds for a few years and then go into decline as happened with the sunday-league in england and international odis.
    Then what? 10-10

  13. #28
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by swede
    I dont hate 20-20 any more than I hate 50 over games. In fact I would prefer 20-20 as the wait for the slog is shorter.
    But to me cricket is simply not a game that can be played properly if there is no need to take wickets.Its not how it was intended and it doesnt work as the constant need to change the rules of limited games shows.


    I am not anti-development but why cant the real game be developed?
    why couldnt one.innings games, increased over rates etc be considered as experiments.

    Of course as cricket is a very long game it will get a boost through a shorter version more in line with other games but if its at the expense of the quality of the game it will inevitably be short-lived as people start to realise how poor sport they are watching.


    I would expect 20-20 games to get good crowds for a few years and then go into decline as happened with the sunday-league in england and international odis.
    Then what? 10-10
    Everyone knows that Test Cricket is real cricket and limted over forms of cricket nessary isn't the real thing. But it is impossible of new teams to be competitive in the longer version of the game. Looking at Bangla and Zimbabwe we don't need any new Test Playing nation, but cricket still needs to grow in some form or another. Just look at sports like Football, Rugby and Basketball and how much they growm since the globalisation of their sports. Cricket needs to grow globally in one form, and it seems the best form is probably 20Twenty.

    In ODI smaller countires struggle to keep the intensity of the game going for 100 overs. Just look at some like Ravi Shah from Kenya, he is yet to score a ODI hundred, but has quite a few 50s. But in 20Twenty cricket guys like Shah, Davision, JB Burger and Dan van Bunge could win games for their respective countires.

    IMO Test Cricket should be the main focus for the top 8 countries but the teams below should focus on 20Twenty Cricket. The teams from 9 to 16 or whatever should also play List A and FC tournments.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Latest Press Release
    By James in forum General
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 23-03-2005, 04:25 AM
  2. Slow death of international cricket
    By Langeveldt in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 09-01-2005, 02:04 PM
  3. Cricket Web - Fantasy Cricket - T&N Trophy Challenge IV
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-12-2004, 03:24 AM
  4. Zimbabwean Cricket: Time for The End
    By Neil Pickup in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 16-05-2004, 10:44 AM
  5. The Twenty20 Cup in England
    By PY in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 22-07-2003, 03:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •