Twenty20 Is A Batsman's Game: Fallacy or Fact?

[Dick Rockett]

why even bother with this elitist nonsense.

I'm mystified as to why you consider not liking Twenty20 to be elitist.

 

[adharcric]

In 2020, a crowd of drunken middle aged men and their slightly confused kids and wives turn up to see the batsmen hit the hell out of the bowling and try and catch one of the many 6s hit. They do not recognise a good bowling performance, all they want to see is fielders being ran ragged and hear the music and dance when boundaries are hit. They pay little attention to the bowling.

Harsh. Perhaps that's the case in England but there are plenty of people who just don't have the time for one-day or test cricket. They're not all idiots.

 

[open365]

How the hell would you know what people are paying attention to? There's music for wickets as well, so what? Another typically ridiculous comparison between ODIs and Twenty20 when most of what's in a Twenty20 is in ODIs anyway so why even bother with this elitist nonsense.

How is it elitist nonsense?

It's the truth, how can you disagree that people who watch 2020 go because they want to see big scores and big shots? It's the truth.

I put ODIs in there as the whole comparison between tests,ODIs and 2020 is a progressive thing,ODIs being in the middle of the too. I may not have described ODIs as well but surely your not pig headed enough not to get the point i'm making here.

And don't even come up with the "I'm a true cricket fan, i go to 2020s for the great bowling performances" crap because i said the MAJORITY of people want to see what i said they want to see and you probably don't anyway.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Perhaps the issues with Twenty20 cricket have been slightly exaggerated, but the current debate seems rather one-sided to me. There is no doubt (IMO) that Twenty20 cricket is heavily batting-oriented and I have seen the difference between playing 25-over and 40-over cricket. Even though that's league cricket and not international cricket, it's really obvious that the bowlers have a larger part to play and a better contest is offered in the latter format.

More straw clutching with no evidence whatsoever to back it up. Look at ER of players in the English domestic cricket for Twenty20 and 50 over competition (C&G). Notice how the difference between top and bottom is so pronounced in Twenty20, players getting (where there's significant numbers of players) 5s and 6s, then others getting 8s, 9s and worse. Translate that into a game and that's another 10+ runs, which is crucial in Twenty20 as you can't just to decide to attack a bit earlier at the end - you're already attacking and you've less overs to make it up. Now look at C&G, this time the difference is more like 1.5 in ER, translating into about the same number of runs. Except in 50 overs that doesn't matter much because you can just decide to be a bit more aggressive somewhere else and make it up in the larger number of overs you've got, plus of course contests aren't generally as close as in Twenty20 anyway.

 

[open365]

Harsh. Perhaps that's the case in England but there are plenty of people who just don't have the time for one-day or test cricket. They're not all idiots.

It was tounge in cheek comment aiming to show who 2020 cricket is aimed at and what it's aimed to provide.

I'm a cricket die hard and i love 2020, i'm not saying it's only for the cricketly un educated, i'm saying that one of the reasons it's so popular is because it's more batsman dominated and as such appeals to a wider audience.

 

[Richard]

Tbf, Joe's pretty ****ing awesome.

True, indeed. 'Twas a very, very poor example.

 

[adharcric]

More straw clutching with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.
... heaps of bull**** ... anyway.

Exactly how is that "straw clutching"? I just gave my personal experience as a cricketer to highlight that aspect of Twenty20 cricket.

 

[Richard]

More straw clutching with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

Ignore-list material, that is, surely...

 

[Scaly piscine]

How is it elitist nonsense?

It's the truth, how can you disagree that people who watch 2020 go because they want to see big scores and big shots? It's the truth.

I put ODIs in there as the whole comparison between tests,ODIs and 2020 is a progressive thing,ODIs being in the middle of the too. I may not have described ODIs as well but surely your not pig headed enough not to get the point i'm making here.

And don't even come up with the "I'm a true cricket fan, i go to 2020s for the great bowling performances" crap because i said the MAJORITY of people want to see what i said they want to see and you probably don't anyway.

What has this got to do with what you ACTUALLY said? There's no 'MAJORITY' in there. It's just an all encompassing generalisation.

In 2020, a crowd of drunken middle aged men and their slightly confused kids and wives turn up to see the batsmen hit the hell out of the bowling and try and catch one of the many 6s hit. They do not recognise a good bowling performance, all they want to see is fielders being ran ragged and hear the music and dance when boundaries are hit. They pay little attention to the bowling.

How can anyone even pretend this isn't elitist? It may well be true to a degree, but that's besides the point.

 

[open365]

What has this got to do with what you ACTUALLY said? There's no 'MAJORITY' in there. It's just an all encompassing generalisation.



How can anyone even pretend this isn't elitist?

Ok mr genius, why is 2020 soooo much more popular(get's bigger attendances) than other forms or cricket?

It was a tounge in cheek comment you moron.

 

[Dick Rockett]

It's just an all encompassing generalisation.

Like your comments about non-Twenty20 fans all being antipodean, biased, petulant children aren't "all-encompassing generalisations."

How can anyone even pretend this isn't elitist? It may well be true to a degree, but that's besides the point.

Haha, no it isn't. How is it elitist to point out the truth?

 

[Richard]

Maybe he's trying to call others elitist to deflect such realities from himself?

 

[Sanz]

is it common that a bowler goes for 40 in 2 even in 20/20??

No, it's not but it's common that a bowler's economy rate in Twenty20 would be around 10 which is close to 3-4 times that in test cricket and at least twice of that in ODIs. I was just looking at the strike rate of batsmen in Twenty20 Cup in 2006 Summer and shocked to see how batsmen who wouldn't last two overs in any other form of cricket were having strike rate in 100s and averaging 40s.

In Twenty20 you couldn't tell the difference between the class of batsmen and that has been my biggest beef with this format. Anyone who can swing his bat can be a batsman and anyone who can roll his arm can be a bowler. There really is no difference between say a Sachin Tendulkar and Ronnie Irani. There is no difference between a Shaun Pollock and a Ricki Clarke( No offense to anyone there).

It might be entertaining once in a while but the format is too short for International even or even a serious cricket. Such a form is good for mohalla/Street cricket where you dont care about the quality of the game being played but just want to have a social outing with friends, have some fun for couple of hours and then go home. It is something I compare to the corporate events I go to where we go to some crappiest Baseball games where people are more interested in booze than the ball game.

The thing is, yes runs will go off a bowler, but the tendancy is there will be a price to pay, and that is that wicket will fall.

Well batsmen don't have a choice, If they dont maintain good enough strike rate they wont survive in Twenty20, there is no scope or requirement for building an inning in this format. And there really is no price on wickets, no one cares if you get out after smacking 20 runs in 6-10 balls on average.

I am tending towards thinking that the balance is pretty much the same for all forms of the game maybe just leaning more to the batsmen. As Tom H said, the goalposts have moved and so a rpo of 6 throughout 20 overs is a mediocre batting performance in twenty20, but outstanding in tests...I think its just a lot of people are struggling to come to terms with the 'moving goalpost' effect.

No, it has nothing to do with 'Moving Goalpost'. And no 120 in 20 overs in test may not be as outstanding as a 70 in 20 overs in trying conditions. Neither do I think that 120 in 20 overs in Twenty20 is a mediocre performance. It may or may not be, it really depends on the quality of the tussle between the ball and bat. The point that some of us are trying to make is - There is hardly a real contest between bat and ball in Twenty20 regardless of the RPO.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Like your comments about non-Twenty20 fans all being antipodean, biased, petulant children aren't "all-encompassing generalisations."


Haha, no it isn't. How is it elitist to point out the truth?

Fine you're just a long way below my level of intelligence then for me to bother wasting much time with, fair enough...







And of course that's not elitist because it's the truth...

 

[open365]

Fine you're just a long way below my level of intelligence then for me to bother wasting much time with, fair enough...







And of course that's not elitist because it's the truth...

I'd rather be stupid than you.

 

[silentstriker]

Let's all just get along now.

If I were good enough to play international cricket, I'd rather be a bowler. Except when playing Twenty20, in which case I'd much rather be a batsman.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I'd rather be stupid than you.

Nice that you've had one dream come true.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Fine you're just a long way below my level of intelligence then for me to bother wasting much time with, fair enough...







And of course that's not elitist because it's the truth...

You'll tend to find that people who go around telling people how clever they are and that are cleverer than other people, generally aren't.

 

[Scaly piscine]

You'll tend to find that people who go around telling people how clever they are and that are cleverer than other people, generally aren't.

You've completely missed the point.

 

[open365]

Nice that you've had one dream come true.

Ba dum Tssssh