If Watto dominates again, I'm in love.
If Watto dominates again, I'm in love.
I am a brave man, I am a coward. I am the tiger, I am the flower.
I am honest, and I'm a liar. I am vital, I am tired.
I am a free man, I am caught. From where I am, I see the top.
I am most importantly never concerned with what I am not.
Forever, more than just surviving.
THIS IS MY LIFE AND THIS LIFE IS MY DIAMOND
That being said, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. CT is not the best honour going, but a trophy is a trophy and once my team is playing in it I want them to win, more than I do most ODI series, where it's nice to win but losing doesn't get me down like a Test loss. In the CT the feeling when we go out in the group stage will be similar to when we lose a Test series.
Phillip Hughes 1988-2014
RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.
Anyhow if you're suspicious that people aren't up-front enough, then I'm happy to set out my views.
As for ODIs I will happily watch them - and indeed pay good money to go and watch them - and I will occasionally see some excellent cricket. By and large, however, they don't begin to compare with Test cricket and they pale into insignificance beside it.
As for this particular competition, I've never understood the point of it. It's an unnecessary bolt-on to the already-overfull international cricketing calendar, and now with the advent of 20:20 (whatever your thoughts of that particular format) there is still less room, and even less need, for this competition.
In 2004 England, as hosts, played Australia (in the semi?) and the ground was half-empty. Enough said.
West Indies has done well at it, so it's worth more than any other tournament these days.
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."
It means nothing. If it meant anything then call it a World Cup. Its a World Cup wanna be that doesnt have the prestige.
Another irrelevant ODI tournament with a tin pot to win.
Completely and utterly meaningless and clogs the calender. Make the WC every 2 years or get rid of this. I dont get what the point is.
Of course players and fans want to win but it carries no importance or consequence. It has nothing to do with the format (ie ODIs) but the point of it existence.
Last edited by Goughy; 09-08-2008 at 04:50 PM.
If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits
West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma
As I said it is 50/50 with the fans right now. You shouldn't try and pretend that majority of fans really think this tournament is important. Cus a lot don't, but a lot think it has some place. Saying it pointless is OTT, but saying right now it is a major tournament is not correct as well. The point of the tournament is somewhere inbetween.
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
It does clog the calendar in a way, but its also good World Cup practice because it revs up the players to peform on the world stage, and winning the Champions Trophy would be a great confidence booster leading into the world cup. I'm sure the players and most fans would rather win a mini world cup than another random ODI series against another team, because to win the CC you have to beat several/all of the teams.
I think its a little childish for people to keep throwing 'anti-ODI' movement comments in virtually every thread. My points have nothing to do with the format, just the existence of the tournament.
The calender would be better without it. If you are going to the effort to get everyone together then at least give a World Championship for winning it.
Its a lot of effort for nothing. Just another made for TV event to generate money.
Its got nothing to do with ODIs (though people can keep telling themselves whatever they want) but the fact that designing a massive secondary tournament that by its nature is inferior to the big event in an already packed schedule is pointless.
Last edited by Goughy; 10-08-2008 at 08:26 AM.
See, I just don't understand this. Yes, the schedule is indeed far too packed. So lance some of the potentially less important stuff. Get rid of Twenty20 Internationls - the IPL is more than good enough to cater for that. Get rid of bilateral ODI series', as many as you need to. Get rid of Bangladesh and other substandard sides from the schedule involving the top 8 teams. But don't take out something that can potentially be an excellent tournament and an excellent advertisment for the ODI game.As for this particular competition, I've never understood the point of it. It's an unnecessary bolt-on to the already-overfull international cricketing calendar, and now with the advent of 20:20 (whatever your thoughts of that particular format) there is still less room, and even less need, for this competition.
And had the scheduling been better, the ticket prices been more realistic and the whole thing basically been better planned, I'm wholly confident that would have been very, very different.In 2004 England, as hosts, played Australia (in the semi?) and the ground was half-empty. Enough said.
Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourthcricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
But with the World Cup and Champions Trophy it's really a different matter. I would prefer victory.
However, losing a Test is something that'll always disappoint me more than losing a WC\CT ODI. Although being knocked-out of the World Cup in 1999 was indeed every bit as disappointing as any Test series loss I've experienced.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)