Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 106 to 109 of 109

Thread: What an awful concept

  1. #106
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,894
    It is so ridiculous to peddle ODIs as somehow a contest between bat and ball. They aren't. Economy rate is still king in ODIs, and believe it or not, Twenty20 at least doesn't pretend at anything.

    I despise all limited overs cricket, but ODI actually pretends to be cricket, and I can't stand it. It's a bastard form that doesn't exactly know what it should be, and isn't really good at anything.

    Twenty20 gets finished faster, and we don't have to suffer through the tedious middle overs where the batsmen don't attack, and the bowlers don't either. The great thing about Test cricket is that usually someone is attacking. If the batting gets down, the bowlers attack and have awesome fields, and vice versa when the bowling gets down. In ODIs, both sides seem to be perfectly content when just hitting singles for about 25 overs. It's quite disgusting.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  2. #107
    International Debutant Dissector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    India
    Posts
    2,258
    I have to disagree with the middle overs of ODI's being boring also. They can often be fascinating especially if you have good spin bowlers who can take wickets. Even if bowlers are in containment mode it can be quite interesting. Knocking 5 singles an over isn't as easy as it sometimes looks. Inevitably you get dot balls and the pressure starts building. Teams may be forced to become more aggressive with their running and the possibility of a run-out increases. Good teams will figure out how to get those crucial two's (whose role is underappreciated comapared to boudaries and singles). And so on.

    Personally I like all three formats. I don't think 20/20 will affect the 10 or so tests that the top teams play a year. What they will do hopefully is to cut out some of the surplus ODI's like the 7 match series and the random tournaments in places like Malaysia. I would like about 10-12 less ODI's per year for each team replaced by around 15 or so 20/20 games.

  3. #108
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Locked up inside my opium den, surrounded by some Chinamen
    Posts
    45,254

    Is Twenty20 too much fun for its own good?

    A rather good and light-hearted article from Barney Ronay in The Guardian. Linky. His last paragraph sums the format up rather well:

    But is it really good for us? There is a problem with Twenty20's relentlessness, its one-dimensional mania. Cricket has always been the most glacial of disciplines, one whose rewards are grudgingly given and carefully hoarded. Watching Twenty20 can feel a bit like shoving great, dripping double-handfuls of vintage moose milk cheese into your mouth, shot-gunning an entire bottle of Château Margaux 1953 on a stag do, or smashing down Salisbury Cathedral with a wrecking ball because the resulting pile of limestone will make a really fun playground to yomp about in - for half an hour or so before it gets boring. England are playing some Tests in Sri Lanka in December. Anyone ready for a nice, sedate five-day draw?
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
    - Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence

  4. #109
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,264
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    A rather good and light-hearted article from Barney Ronay in The Guardian. Linky. His last paragraph sums the format up rather well:

    But is it really good for us? There is a problem with Twenty20's relentlessness, its one-dimensional mania. Cricket has always been the most glacial of disciplines, one whose rewards are grudgingly given and carefully hoarded. Watching Twenty20 can feel a bit like shoving great, dripping double-handfuls of vintage moose milk cheese into your mouth, shot-gunning an entire bottle of Château Margaux 1953 on a stag do, or smashing down Salisbury Cathedral with a wrecking ball because the resulting pile of limestone will make a really fun playground to yomp about in - for half an hour or so before it gets boring. England are playing some Tests in Sri Lanka in December. Anyone ready for a nice, sedate five-day draw?
    *raises right hand*


Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678


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, 01:22 AM
  2. Cricket manager concept
    By xixsoside in forum General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-08-2004, 11:31 AM
  3. Awful European Weather
    By Simon in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14-12-2002, 09:08 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
  •