20 - Twenty Game (India vs Australia)

[archie mac]

Not Correct, IMO. In 20/20 it is very hard to get away with a poor ball or bowling, there is not much marging for bowling crap. On the other hand in tests and to some extent in ODIs you do get away with lot of crap in the name of building innings.

I am not against Tests or saying that 20/20 is the best format, but after watching some games in last few months, I have started to recognize its potential and appreciate what it brings to the fans. It is not as bad as one thought and if you bowl well there is a good chance that you will succeed, as Harbhajan showed the other day.

Cricket shouldn't be treated like a property of the purists, if the majority of the fans want to see 20/20 then why not. I couldn't care less for the globalization though.

I have no problem with people watching it, but don't tell me (not saying you have) Test cricket will die and that 20/20 is the better game If people express that opinion than I have the right to express mine

If it was a Test match and Harbhajan was bowling well, the batsman would not be able to block out four overs, they would have to prove they had the skill to master his bowling, there is no where to hide in Test cricket

 

[archie mac]

That may make his actions forgiveable in a business sense, but it's still deplorable in a cricketing one.

Enough for what? If they were retiring at 30, then that's the way it was - it wasn't exactly causing problems was it?

.

Because a lot of players batsman and bowlers are at their best around the age of 30, and as a fan I want to watch the best players, and we were losing the best because they could not afford to keep playing. Surely that is obvious?

 

[Sanz]

I have no problem with people watching it, but don't tell me (not saying you have) Test cricket will die and that 20/20 is the better game If people express that opinion than I have the right to express mine

One person found other formats lengthy and boring which it can be at times and, But no one said that 20/20 is better at least not before you said 20/20 is crap and asked for a separate forum for 20/20 and then went on to say its bastardization of cricket. Its quite an aggresive approach and to some extent elitist one.

It seems, to me, that you haven't even given the format a chance and simply rubbishing it with your pre-concieved notions.

If it was a Test match and Harbhajan was bowling well, the batsman would not be able to block out four overs, they would have to prove they had the skill to master his bowling, there is no where to hide in Test cricket

Not sure what the point is here.

 

[archie mac]

One person found other formats lengthy and boring which it can be at times and, But no one said that 20/20 is better at least not before you said 20/20 is crap and asked for a separate forum for 20/20 and then went on to say its bastardization of cricket. Its quite an aggresive approach and to some extent elitist one.

It seems, to me, that you haven't even given the format a chance and simply rubbishing it with your pre-concieved notions.



Not sure what the point is here.

No one said it in this thread that is true I have tried to watch on a few occasions, but I think it's crap. Elitist? maybe, traditionalist 100%, and proud of it

Also someone asked me to tell them why it is crap and I explained it, and I still think 20/20 should have its own forum

I thought the point about the bowling an obvious one tbh, have a think, and if you still can't understand, I will give explaining it another shot

 

[Sanz]

No one said it in this thread that is true I have tried to watch on a few occasions, but I think it's crap. Elitist? maybe, traditionalist 100%, and proud of it

Also someone asked me to tell them why it is crap and I explained it, and I still think 20/20 should have its own forum

Well If you find it crap then I dont see why you would visit Twenty20 Threads other than to simply bash the format which some folks like and want to discuss.I do not agree with having a seperate forum for 20/20 but if this is how some folks are going to deal with it then I think we are better off with a new section for 20/20, although I am not sure if it will stop you from sneaking in there and making same snide remarks.

As for being traditionalist - It is fine and all but no one is a 100 % tradiotionalist as far as teh game is concerned, its not possible to be a 100% traditionalist. Traditions of the game were different e.g. only certain countries got to play them, only certain people got to play them, so on and so forth. Its basically an opportunistic stand people adapt to based on their likes and dislikes. If you had liked Twenty20, you wouldn't care for any tradition of the game.

I thought the point about the bowling an obvious one tbh, have a think, and if you still can't understand, I will give explaining it another shot

I know what you were tying to say but what was the relevance. What is true in Twenty20 is true in ODIs too, except that the bowler has 10 overs instead of 4 overs. Yeah test matches are real tests (who denied it though ?) and Batsman wont be able to block out 4 overs, true but its true for the bowler as well, he will have to maintain his consistency for more than 4 overs. So what is the point and relevance ?

 

[Sanz]

Why do we need fifty countries playing cricket ?

Same reason why we needed more than two.

 

[Pratters]

I don't see why people should start bashng Twenty20 on Twenty20 threads the way it is occuring. That is just vandalising. If you don't like a format, discuss it in some other thread. How would you like if people who don't like tests one dayers keep coming in the tests threads and having debates on why test cricket or one day cricket is crap. No one is forcing any one to watch any thing they don't want to.

Also, I don't believe Twenty20 should have a separate forum for itself. I am happy with the way Cricket Chat is right now...

 

[Sanz]

How much IQ do you need to read between those lines? Ask anyof the top players in the world and they will tell you test cricket is the real thing. Why ? Because it is the ultimate test of their skills. It is where they want to showcase their abilities and earn the appreciation of their peers and opponents.

Also ask all those cricketers if they are willing to sacrifice the load of money they are making for the sake of their love for Test Cricket ?

 

[archie mac]

Well If you find it crap then I dont see why you would visit Twenty20 Threads other than to simply bash the format which some folks like and want to discuss.I do not agree with having a seperate forum for 20/20 but if this is how some folks are going to deal with it then I think we are better off with a new section for 20/20, although I am not sure if it will stop you from sneaking in there and making same snide remarks.

As for being traditionalist - It is fine and all but no one is a 100 % tradiotionalist as far as teh game is concerned, its not possible to be a 100% traditionalist. Traditions of the game were different e.g. only certain countries got to play them, only certain people got to play them, so on and so forth. Its basically an opportunistic stand people adapt to based on their likes and dislikes. If you had liked Twenty20, you wouldn't care for any tradition of the game.



I know what you were tying to say but what was the relevance. What is true in Twenty20 is true in ODIs too, except that the bowler has 10 overs instead of 4 overs. Yeah test matches are real tests (who denied it though ?) and Batsman wont be able to block out 4 overs, true but its true for the bowler as well, he will have to maintain his consistency for more than 4 overs. So what is the point and relevance ?

Some good points, especially about the traditionalists. On the seperate forum, we had one for the 20/20 WC, see how many posts I made there

A lot of the 20/20 threads that have been made, ask questions like 'to you think we should have more 20/20 matches'. As I think we should not have more and give my reasons, not sure what the problem is with that?

And tbh I am not a huge fan of ODI either, for the same reason, a bowler is on top and the batsman is struggling and than he has to be taken off, always sounds a little like baseball to me

 

[archie mac]

I don't see why people should start bashng Twenty20 on Twenty20 threads the way it is occuring. That is just vandalising. If you don't like a format, discuss it in some other thread. How would you like if people who don't like tests one dayers keep coming in the tests threads and having debates on why test cricket or one day cricket is crap. No one is forcing any one to watch any thing they don't want to.

Also, I don't believe Twenty20 should have a separate forum for itself. I am happy with the way Cricket Chat is right now...

If people want to tell me how crap ODI are I would be happy to listen tbh And if they don't like Tests that is their choice

I think it should have its own forum, on another site would be best tbh

 

[shortpitched713]

And tbh I am not a huge fan of ODI either, for the same reason, a bowler is on top and the batsman is struggling and than he has to be taken off, always sounds a little like baseball to me

Except, even in baseball a pitcher gets to stay on as long as the manager likes.

 

[Sanz]

Some good points, especially about the traditionalists. On the seperate forum, we had one for the 20/20 WC, see how many posts I made there

Coudn't care less for the count, but you did show up there and made the same snide remarks.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/showpost.php?p=832173&postcount=10

"If they must have 20/20 fine, but don't call it cricket, it is a ******* child and should not be able to use its fathers name "

 

[pasag]

Coudn't care less for the count, but you did show up there and made the same snide remarks.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/showpost.php?p=832173&postcount=10

"If they must have 20/20 fine, but don't call it cricket, it is a ******* child and should not be able to use its fathers name "

No, that thread was moved much later to the sub-forum. When he posted there it was still in CC.

 

[Sanz]

No, that thread was moved much later to the sub-forum. When he posted there it was still in CC.

Okay my mistake for not knowing this. I did check the date and wondered why Twenty20 World Cup section was opened in 2006, this explains it.

My sincere apologies to archie_mac.

 

[archie mac]

Okay my mistake for not knowing this. I did check the date and wondered why Twenty20 World Cup section was opened in 2006, this explains it.

My sincere apologies to archie_mac.

No problem


You had me worried there for awhile

 

[pasag]

I think it's a fine line in this issue tbh. If there is a thread about the format itself (either Twenty20s or ODIs), then people are more than entitled to discuss it, criticise it and basically anything can go. However threads discussing matches, tactics and stuff within the format has little place for people to come and start the whole 'which format is better' argument again and again.

That said, looking back in the thread, the old debate had already started before Archie got involved and he was just responding to points brought up by others, in his defence.

 

[archie mac]

I think it's a fine line in this issue tbh. If there is a thread about the format itself (either Twenty20s or ODIs), then people are more than entitled to discuss it, criticises it and basically anything can go. However threads discussing matches, tactics and stuff within the format has little place for people to come and start the whole 'which format is better' argument again and again.

That said, looking back in the thread, the old debate had already started before Archie got involved and he was just responding to points brought up by others, in his defence.

Thanks, I will try an avoid any 20/20 thread from now on

Good to see us 'Golden Age' boys sticking together

 

[thirdumpire]

sanz

 

[shortpitched713]

I think it should have its own forum, on another site would be best tbh

 

[The Sean]

Hooray for everyone!