is 20/20 the new oneday Cricket

[Scaly piscine]

So popularity is indicative of quality? I guess you also think mcdonalds is tasty and friends was a funny comedy. Mass market appeal usually means something is pretty ****ty, and i dont remember cricket having problems with popularity to start with or kids taking up the game.
I love slogging as much as anyone but it needs to be in the right context to have any meaning otherwise its nothing. Sixes are so special because they are so hard to acheive because in proper cricket you cant just slog at every ball.

Sport needs to be popular to run, Twenty20 in some respects is better than other formats and other respects it is worse. Opinions of the quality of the cricket will vary wildly. Any extra popularity is a bonus, Test cricket would struggle to sustain itself without ODIs so you certainly could say it has problems with popularity. I don't see too many kids taking up cricket in America and other similar countries and it could certainly involve more kids in Britain and the West Indies. Sixes are only a little harder to achieve in 'proper cricket' because the boundaries are bigger and because the ball is usually softer, but if you went out with the intention of hitting sixes you could hit plenty in Test cricket as well - but just as with ODIs and Twenty20 you have to select the right ball.

 

[one_dayer]

I think it will do teams like Bangladesh some good as well, learning how to hit boundary's, being sharper in the field etc.

 

[anzac]

popularity & revenue generation will see the concept become popular enough - so long as the marketing of it is done right..........

the biggest arguement against ODIs is that there are now too many of them and that they dominate any Tour with less than 5 Tests (presumably because of revenue generation) - I'd hate to see something similar with an even shorter format.........

I'd have no problem with it being used at the begining & end of a Tour as a bit of fun & entertainment to blow off cobwebs/steam (Barbarians RFU games).......

from a 'purest' point of view I can see improvements in bowling & ground fielding, but not much for the batsmen (get your timing and then go over the fence).....

I think I posted elsewhere that IMO it is a perfect format for the game in USA.........

 

[chaminda_00]

from a 'purest' point of view I can see improvements in bowling & ground fielding, but not much for the batsmen (get your timing and then go over the fence).....

I think it might improve batting just the way ODIs have improved batting in Test, well agrressive batting. Before ODIs their weren't many teams that could score 400 runs in day, now it happens a fair bit. With T20 cricket i think u might see scores of 400 in ODIs, and therefore improve batsmen ability to play aggresive for longer periods of time.

 

[Natman20]

Keep it

The 50 over matches i think should be kept they are great. 20/20 matches should also be played mayb 2 before odi series and they could b warm ups or u could get teams made especially for this style of game.

 

[JASON]

I think the best idea I have heard is a Rugby Sevens Style World 20/20 tour. Instead of encroaching into ODI cricket, I reckon 20/20 has a role to play in spreading the game into countries like Hong kong, USA, China, Canada, Fiji, Japan, Malaysia, Middle East, Israel etc.

The fringe cricketers and eternal second XI players can be put into a World 20/20 tour with a few Ex-players and occasional current player taking part.

Just like Rugby 7's this tour can play in 8-10 countries where expats, and corporate sponsorship can be milked and also help spread the game in these countries.

This could even replace the Hong kong sixers and they could even play the annual World 20/20 cup in Hong kong. Just like Rugby sevens.

This will help a lot of fringe players earn a living, not to mention coaches, ex-players and commentators. And like Sevens it can easily be fitted into TV viewing times.

If Rugby can milk the corporate dollars in countries outside the mainstream rugby playing nations, why shouldn't cricket?

 

[J.Coney]

eh, that was my idea.

 

[GotSpin]

Im hoping its used wisely by the various cricket boards. I think its been a smart move by having a 20-20 at the beginning of the match, creates excitment for the upcoming series. I don't think it will take over one day cricket as such. I also hope it will become popular domestically everywhere. Imagine the revenue!

 

[Jono]

If it does, I pity the bowlers.

 

[Scaly piscine]

If it does, I pity the bowlers.

Record gotten stuck again I see, you've never explained properly why you 'pity the bowlers' it just seems a foundation-less catchphrase you come out with every so often. You think Gough never gets anything (in terms of enjoyment and credit) out of his successful death bowling?

 

[Arrow]

Todays NZ/Aus match proved exactly why 20/20 will never hold a candle to 50 over cricket. Todays match was full of drama and constantly changing dynamics. NZ on the ropes and seemingly gone for all money, then slowly finding their feet, and counter punching australia to the ropes only to be knocked out by a last gasp right hand!

50 sixes in an innings cant match that.

 

[mavric41]

Todays NZ/Aus match proved exactly why 20/20 will never hold a candle to 50 over cricket. Todays match was full of drama and constantly changing dynamics. NZ on the ropes and seemingly gone for all money, then slowly finding their feet, and counter punching australia to the ropes only to be knocked out by a last gasp right hand!

50 sixes in an innings cant match that.

Arrow, I think you hit the target. (I just couldn't resist )

 

[Somerset]

Absolutely. Tonight's encounter was fantastic and enthralling cricket. Unless I'm missing something, Twenty20 will never have the excitement of a full 50 overs match and the New Zealand vs Australian match has certainly proven that.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Todays NZ/Aus match proved exactly why 20/20 will never hold a candle to 50 over cricket. Todays match was full of drama and constantly changing dynamics. NZ on the ropes and seemingly gone for all money, then slowly finding their feet, and counter punching australia to the ropes only to be knocked out by a last gasp right hand!

50 sixes in an innings cant match that.

Completely forgetting that there are far more competitive games like that one in Twenty20 compared to 50 over cricket. Still if I wait a month or so people will be saying how formulaic 50 over cricket is again...

 

[chaminda_00]

If it does, I pity the bowlers.

As a bowler i bowl for wickets first and reducing runs seconds. Twenty20 cricket allows u to take more wickets as batsmen play more stupid shots. Also i think they should increase the amount of minimum overs to 5, so bowlers can get into a bit more of a rythum. Also this will allow teams to play more batsmen, rather then all rounders who can bat and bowl a bit.

I like the idea of rugby sevens style tours for smaller countries in the Twenty20 format. I don't think that T20 will take over ODI as long as they just use it as tour openers like their done in NZ and are going to do in England for the NatWest Series. This is as long as the ICC and the boards don't get to greedly and change the format of the VB series, NatWest Series or Champions Trophy to T20.

 

[Arrow]

Completely forgetting that there are far more competitive games like that one in Twenty20 compared to 50 over cricket. Still if I wait a month or so people will be saying how formulaic 50 over cricket is again...

Being competative is not the point! A game of tiddly winks can be competative but that doesnt mean its worthy anything.

20/20 cricket is all one pace slogging. Its just about who can slogg the best and for the longest. As i said before its got no depth.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Being competative is not the point! A game of tiddly winks can be competative but that doesnt mean its worthy anything.

20/20 cricket is all one pace slogging. Its just about who can slogg the best and for the longest. As i said before its got no depth.

OK you haven't a clue what you're talking about concerning Twenty20 so I won't bother repeating myself.

 

[chaminda_00]

20/20 cricket is all one pace slogging. Its just about who can slogg the best and for the longest.

From the Twenty20 matches i've seen the best batsmen are stroke players who can hit when required, not the guys that just try and slog ever ball.

 

[nikhil1772]

Being competative is not the point! A game of tiddly winks can be competative but that doesnt mean its worthy anything.

20/20 cricket is all one pace slogging. Its just about who can slogg the best and for the longest. As i said before its got no depth.

No its not...and even if it was...well ITS NOT!

Just as ODI's and Test Cricket are so different,20/20 too is played differently and a different kind of skill is required to play it well...its not only about slogging...you have to play as the situation demands...look at the way how beautifully Ponting paced his innings when 4 quick wickets were down for Australia.

I think ICC should cut-down the number of ODI's and include 20/20 in its international schedule...no form of Cricket has to die to include another one...Honestly I find 20/20 the most interesting when you consider watching one full Cricket match

 

[nikhil1772]

If it does, I pity the bowlers.

I dont really think that way because...its a different kind of ball-game...
When One day Cricket was introduced Bowlers whose Eco. rate was below 3 in Test matches had to remain happy with 4.5 or 5 runs per over in the shorter version...and still they were considered good bowlers.Same way in 20/20 if a bowler can keep his eco. rate at about 6 or 6.5 per over he will be considered good...People will come to terms with it only after some time has passed by...

On the other hand with batsmen sloggin all over the place bowlers have more chances to get wickets...It will all get balanced...thats my view