20/20 cricket

[Scaly piscine]

I figure with the way Asian cricket tends to revolve around playing lots of ODIs that 20/20 internationally is likely to take off. I feel a lot of the reservations are from people who've not seen or played it and once they experience it they'll see how quality cricket tends to win through and it's not a case of sloggers and dibbly-dob bowlers doing well (ignoring Adam Hollioake who did well except for the latter stages - the guys who've gotten centuries in English twenty20 have all been internationals except for Ian Thomas I think). As for the argument against it being 'why not just play an ODI instead', 20 over cricket is much better to fit in on after work hours on weekdays like with football and it does away with most of the dull plodding bits in 50 over games.

I also think Australia will annoyingly be the best at it when it does take off properly because it does involve a lot of mental-strength when games inevitably get close and it does rely on fielding more than 50 over games.

 

[SJS]

Ever wondered why Billiards/snooker are different games than Pool and they have different stars and champions ??

 

[Scaly piscine]

Ever wondered why Billiards/snooker are different games than Pool and they have different stars and champions ??

There's not much comparison there, most snooker players don't play the other 2 and similarly with those that play pool or billiards. However Steve Davis doesn't do too badly when he does play pool. Those 3 games are not particularly alike regardless as they involve different skills, 20 over cricket is still cricket just you play more shots.

For the record the guys that got tons last season were Maddy, Hick, Ian Thomas (the only sucky player who has gotten one, but then Afridi got a ton in his first ODI...) Symonds and Harvey (what Aussies were there did well in most of the games).

 

[Linda]

Im not sure Id like this game to be an offical part of cricket, but would be good for charity matches and that sort of thing. A bit of fun.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Im not sure Id like this game to be an offical part of cricket, but would be good for charity matches and that sort of thing. A bit of fun.

That was the attitude of a lot of English County teams in the first season of twenty20, come the second season they were all taking it very seriously. I think the average person (and me) would much rather watch a 20 over game than a 50 over game with that tedious plodding bit in the middle overs, although that probably doesn't extend to the long-time cricket fans on here just as when ODIs started a few decades ago people grumbled at those.

Is a shame however the first 20 over international involved England Women team...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Aye, and it's a shame the first World Cup involved women, and that they're allowed to play at all, and they're allowed to be MCC members, and that they have the vote..

 

[Scaly piscine]

Err no it's a shame because they struggle to get the ball off the square.

 

[twctopcat]

Err no it's a shame because they struggle to get the ball off the square.

Exactly, it isn't much of a spectacle. Though not for lack of trying on the women's behalf.

 

[TendulkarFan]

I would love to see the 20/20 take off. It would definitely give cricket a huge potential market in US/Canada. Public here wants a good 2-3 hour fast-paced entertaining game - sadly, they don't have much patience for the long, arduous hard work that goes into building a test innings, or even a 50-over one day innings. For the purists, the test matches will always be there to fulfil the thirst of "real" cricket.

But since I live here, I would love to see the game becoming more popular here - a 20/20 game would be short, fast-paced and extremely exciting.

 

[Scaly piscine]

"Australia will play the first international Twenty20 match when they face Pakistan under lights at Adelaide Oval on January 13." - CricInfo

Should be a good showcase for the format, assuming Pakistan don't have one of their off-days (perhaps that should be off-3 hours). Australia will also be playing a Twenty20 match against NZ in February and later against England in the Ashes tour.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

So, first New Zealand "stole" the first Twenty20 from England, and then Pakistan took it from New Zealand? At this rate, maybe India will host a Twenty20 before the Aussies leave...

 

[Scaly piscine]

So, first New Zealand "stole" the first Twenty20 from England, and then Pakistan took it from New Zealand? At this rate, maybe India will host a Twenty20 before the Aussies leave...

Indeed, all this one-upmanship to get the first game bodes well. Amazing how quickly stuff can 'appear' in a schedule when people want it to. I hope Australia & Pakistan pick pretty much an ODI side with the odd difference as opposed to a load of all-rounders, bits-and-pieces and reserve players.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I'm betting on at least Harvey, Hogg and Symonds to play for the Aussies and Afridi for Pakistan. Just because they have seemed suitable for this format (Symonds played very well for Kent IIRC, Hogg played well for Warks when I saw him, Ian Harvey seemed to be hard to work out last season, dunno about this)

 

[Mr Casson]

I'm betting on at least Harvey, Hogg and Symonds to play for the Aussies and Afridi for Pakistan. Just because they have seemed suitable for this format (Symonds played very well for Kent IIRC, Hogg played well for Warks when I saw him, Ian Harvey seemed to be hard to work out last season, dunno about this)

I don't think Hogg is cut out for the Australian team. 20/20, ODI, test, whatever.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I think Harvey scored the first or second century in twenty20 as well (guys like him and Ealham get much better batting records in County Cricket), but against better players he might struggle as they might pick his bowling a bit better - same with Hogg. Shoaib Akhtar might have some pretty interesting bowling figures if he plays... something like... 4-0-50-5. Gilchrist to open for Australia with maybe Hayden or Symonds.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I don't think Hogg is cut out for the Australian team. 20/20, ODI, test, whatever.

He'd be better than Brett Lee, at least...

 

[Mr Casson]

He'd be better than Brett Lee, at least...

Not in OD cricket. Brett Lee's pace would pick up a few wickets when the batsmen are going for him. He can go for runs, but in OD cricket he picks up wickets. Hogg can get absolutely slaughtered, I've seen it too often.

And I assume that these things would just be amplified in Twenty20 cricket.

 

[age_master]

brett lee bats better than hogg alot of teh time too

 

[marc71178]

Oh yes, I can just see Brett Lee coming in at 6 or 7 and averaging 66 in County Cricket

 

[Mr Casson]

Oh yes, I can just see Brett Lee coming in at 6 or 7 and averaging 66 in County Cricket

Different games.

Oh yes, I can just see Hoggy coming in needing to blast a six to win with jack all time remaining to do it. The fact is, at Twenty20 level, Lee probably would be just as good if not better than Hogg.