Cricket Player Manager
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 109

Thread: What an awful concept

  1. #16
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,197
    Quote Originally Posted by TT Boy View Post
    Last nights best bowlers bowled at 90mph plus (Powell, Edwards, Morkel, van der Wath), it was your supposedly 'bits n pieces take the pace of the ball' champions, Dwayne Bravo and Smith who were smashed into Pretoria. Also I can’t recall neither Justin Kemp or Gibbs playing too many slogs, Kemp played an aesthetically pleasing innings as did Gayle for that matter.
    Lol, even as a T20IBS member, I disagree with a lot of the criticism that's been in this thread, but if you think Gayle didn't slog, I don't know which game you were watching. Gibbs and Kemp were somewhat fine - I didn't find their innings any less asthetically pleasing than what we usually see in ODIs, as that's going from the president of the Daren Ganga, Boeta Dippenaar, Jacques Kallis and Trevor Gripper fanclub. But Gayle was a poor advertisement for the format, to me anyway.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09

    Quote Originally Posted by John Singleton
    Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a man’s right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of one’s own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain one’s life and to keep the results of one’s own efforts.


  2. #17
    Hall of Fame Member TT Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    16,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Lol, even as a T20IBS member, I disagree with a lot of the criticism that's been in this thread, but if you think Gayle didn't slog, I don't know which game you were watching. Gibbs and Kemp were somewhat fine - I didn't find their innings any less asthetically pleasing than what we usually see in ODIs, as that's going from the president of the Daren Ganga, Boeta Dippenaar, Jacques Kallis and Trevor Gripper fanclub. But Gayle was a poor advertisement for the format, to me anyway.
    A good game and slogging by my definition is closing ones eye and just swiping across the line. Gayle deposited Ntini clean over his head and his legside flicks were mercurial.

  3. #18
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,197
    Quote Originally Posted by TT Boy View Post
    A good game and slogging by my definition is closing ones eye and just swiping across the line. Gayle deposited Ntini clean over his head and his legside flicks were mercurial.
    Gayle swung across the line regularly though, and as soon as I see someone clear their front leg, it's a slog for mine. To be honest though, I'd call what Gayle does in test and ODI cricket slogging most of the time - the problem here is that doing what he does seems to be so effective in Twenty20.

  4. #19
    Hall of Fame Member TT Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    16,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    Gayle swung across the line regularly though, and as soon as I see someone clear their front leg, it's a slog for mine. To be honest though, I'd call what Gayle does in test and ODI cricket slogging most of the time - the problem here is that doing what he does seems to be so effective in Twenty20.
    I would have fancied Gayle to a hit a ton on this ground regardless of the format (has previous at Jo‘Burg) and the wicket was tailor-made for him. Under lights at Cape Town and then the pressure will be on him and I wouldn’t expect an innings of that magnitude but I gotta praise the man for it was stunning knock and none of his team-mates looked as good or settled.


  5. #20
    International Regular chris.hinton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    3,335
    Its a class competition its good for a new batch of fans and thats what counts

  6. #21
    State 12th Man jammay123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    london
    Posts
    730
    the thing about t20 is that it will get younger spectators or those who think cricket is rubbish into liking it and enjoying it and they will then hopefully get into test and odi cricket which i know works a i have freinds who said they never liked cricket but didnt understand it and they watcjed a few twenty over matches and understood and enjoyed it which i think means that it not only makes money for cricket but also helps build crickets foundations. and a game like tonights in cape town will do wonders for the game
    ENGLAND CB SERIES CHAMPS FUTURE WORLD CUP CHAMPS(2011) AND IN 2009 THE ASHES HOLDERS

    the official England 'patriotic cheerleader'

    Proud supporter of the England national cricket, football and rugby teams and of TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR FOOTBALL CLUBS

    Msn: jammay123@hotmail.co.uk

    come on CW BLUE

  7. #22
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,268
    Quote Originally Posted by jammay123 View Post
    the thing about t20 is that it will get younger spectators or those who think cricket is rubbish into liking it and enjoying it
    and they will then hopefully get into test and odi cricket which i know works a i have freinds who said they never liked cricket but didnt understand it and they watcjed a few twenty over matches and understood and enjoyed it which i think means that it not only makes money for cricket but also helps build crickets foundations. and a game like tonights in cape town will do wonders for the game
    The first part of that is correct but the second is not.

    Those who were attracted to the game by odi's have not started liking tests also. Twenty 20 is even less likely to do that. What it does do is to reduce the importance, over time of the existing formats.

    Trying to attract to the game those who think it is rubbish in the first place by changing it to suit their tastes doesn't guarantee permanent loyalties. Those who are in it for instant gratification will after they have had their fill need something more to turn them on as it were while those who are tradiional loyalists will have many among them who will be turned off.

    The crowds at grounds and cricket fans in general will keep getting less and less interested in the finer aspects of the game and this is what will finally change the game in a irreversible manner (I still hope not) and the pantheon of great sports will be the poorer for it.

    Fast food is not a replacement for great gourmet stuff but the latter needs more of those who appreciate it. Same with one night stands versus lifelong passions.

  8. #23
    JJD Heads Athlai's Avatar
    Duck Hunt Champion! Plops Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    #teamAthlai
    Posts
    28,182
    SJS I liked ODI and despised tests for a good while, twenty20 probably influenced me personally to watch more cricket so I don't really see the evidence behind what your saying.

    Isn't this exactly what happened when ODI cricket started?
    Direbirds FTW!

    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Wellington will win the whole thing next year. Mark my words.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I'll offer up my avatar to Athlai forever if Wellington wins the Champions League.
    President of T.I.T.S
    Tamim Is Talented Society

  9. #24
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,104
    Nice post from SJS. 20/20 has to be judged on its merits as a format of the game, not on this supposed influx of new fans to other forms of cricket. There's a lot of evidence that people who don't like cricket as a rule are showing an interest in 20/20, none that they are suddenly developing a taste for test and ODI cricket. The same applies to ODIs of course, there are many who like ODIs because they are "exciting" or whatever but find tests boring. The main difference with 20/20 is that it's more extreme, both in terms of the actual differences between the forms and the differences between how the forms are presented.
    Last edited by FaaipDeOiad; 13-09-2007 at 01:39 AM.
    I know a place where a royal flush
    Can never beat a pair

  10. #25
    JJD Heads Athlai's Avatar
    Duck Hunt Champion! Plops Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    #teamAthlai
    Posts
    28,182
    Hmm whats that old saying, "No such thing as bad publicity"?, its ridiculous righting off the idea that twenty20 bringing in new fans will not make people more interested in ODI and test cricket. While its hardly going to make every twenty20 fan a fan of the other formats this larger exposure could see a real influx of promotion of the game to areas that previously had no exposure at all.

    Will this interest be immediate? No probably not, but sticking to the same ol' was hardly going to draw interest into the game. Twenty20 also has its own benefits to the other forms of the game, though it will take years for this to develop amongst them.

    When ODI cricket began I'm sure we are all aware on how it was accepted by many fans, yet its mark on the longer form of the game is obvious, strike rates have went up in the longer form of the game since ODI made its grand entrance onto the worlds stage. The same is going to happen once again, the powerplay overs and death overs of a match which have always been targetted will now be a cash in time.

    I am very interested to see how bowling copes with this fresh wave of aggressive batting but to suggest that twenty20 is ruining the game is IMO ridiculous. Its a part of the game, it draws crowds, it brings in money. And without money cricket can not develop or expand, and the free publicity ain't bad either.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Mister Wright's Avatar
    Burger Time Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    24,372
    In the beginning I wasn't a big fan of it, didn't see the excitement in it as most games are a one sided affair if a team gets 220+ (which is the only game I've watched Aus v S.A. at the 'Gabba). However, if it is a competitive match that goes right to the end it is pretty excitement.

    Given that I don't like to see bat dominate ball, I'm not a huge fan, but given that there's been a lack of cricket to watch lately, I'll take anything atm.
    Cricketweb Colts Captain



    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Hayden > Lehmann
    I'm a member of Club Kerry

    I'm Green

    The color of immortality, nature and envy - you are truly a unique person. While clearly the color of nature, you also symbolize rebirth, fertility and hope in the world. On the other side of the spectrum, a natural aptitude to money with green coming to signify money and possibly even *********!

  12. #27
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,721
    Twenty20 is not as bad as people are making it out to be. Surely, it is not a TRUE test of the traditional cricketing skills, but it requires some interesting things of its own. Sure, the guys who can slog and take the pace off the ball are probably gonna be more successful in this format than the others, but then again, we have seen the same in ODIs with the likes of Larsen and Harris for New Zealand. And we didn't label them as rubbish bowlers, did we? Because it takes a bit of skill to do even that. If that was so easy, why culdn't Pollock or Ntini do the same and escape punishment?


    As someone rightly pointed out, in the first game, the best bowlers were guys who were being genuinely quick... not the bits and pieces heroes...


    The format is fine. SJS is right in saying that there is no real guarantee that Twenty20 fans will get into tests and ODIs as well. But put it this way: if there is a guy who never gave a damn about cricket and suddenly got interested in Twenty20, he will still wanna at least check out the scores in the newspapers when the other versions are on, just to see how his favourite player/team is doing... And at least a percentage (however small it may be) will definitely start to get a little more interest in the other formats of the game as we go on. For instance, my cousin became an instant fan of Chris Gayle after the first game. She doesn't give a damn about cricket, in all honesty but she liked the way he batted (she used the word that he batted like a cinema hero fighting off the bad guys in a movie).


    What I expect to happen over time is that say, in the next year or the year after that, we get to see a really good knock from Gayle in a test (maybe a flat track or whatever) and she reads about it. She is already a fan of him and watches a lot of Twenty20, she might wanna check out the highlights of his innings and then perhaps watch the next test he plays in, maybe just for as long as he is batting but slowly but surely the interest builds up. Of course a lot is left to chance here, but at least there is a CHANCE that someone will become a new fan. That is very important.


    But the responsibility, IMO, lies now with the curators. Yesterday's game showed that even a track with a bit in it for the bowlers, produces a very interesting game of Twenty20. That is the path that we should follow because just having flat tracks all the time will def. kill the game.
    We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.
    A cricket supporter forever

    Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.


    Check out this awesome e-fed:

    PWE Efed

  13. #28
    I think we will see some fans move from Twenty20 to other formats eventually, especially so with younger fans of it. Twenty20 brings young fans into it, they like it and a lot will start playing cricket themselves and eventually a lot of them, as they get more mature and find themselves more into cricket generally, will develop interest for the other formats.
    World Scrabble Champion 2014. 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

  14. #29
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,375
    The argument about T20 making average players good and vice versa can easily be applied to ODIs as well though.
    Phillip Hughes 1988-2014

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  15. #30
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,104
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    The argument about T20 making average players good and vice versa can easily be applied to ODIs as well though.
    Yeah, most complaints about 20/20 can also be applied to ODIs. It's still limited overs cricket, after all. The main issue I have with 20/20 is that the issues I have with ODIs are exacerbated. I generally see 20/20 fans saying that they feel 20/20 removes the problems from ODIs, such as boring middle overs and whatever else. For me, 20/20 takes the problems with ODIs and makes them worse, while diluting the things I enjoy about them. That is, defensive fields and defensive bowling, the dilution of concentration and the ability to play a long innings as an important part of batting, the glorification of big hitting over other, more subtle feats of skill, less opportunity for class to show through as the game progresses and so on.

    Perhaps whether or not 20/20 appeals comes down to what problems one has with ODI cricket. For instance, a lot of casual fans say things like "I don't like cricket except when it's X runs off X balls". To such a fan, 20/20 is perfect. And of course, a lot of people think ODI cricket is good at the death and with the new ball, but find the middle overs dull. 20/20 also removes this. Personally, my issues with ODI cricket as compared to test cricket are different, and 20/20 simply makes them a hell of a lot worse, and the things I enjoy are much harder to find.

    I also find the marketing of the format crass and annoying, but when it comes down to the actual games themselves, that's how it seems to me.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Poll on the Concept of Super Sub
    By JASON in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 05-12-2005, 02:22 AM
  2. Cricket manager concept
    By xixsoside in forum General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-08-2004, 12:31 PM
  3. Awful European Weather
    By Simon in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14-12-2002, 10:08 AM

Posting Permissions

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