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

[Richard]

but if the opportunity is there for a bowler to have success, whether success be measured by a run rate of 6 or whatever, then it can always be considered a fair battle. Bowlers can slow the run rate down with decent bowling. The batsmen dont turn into Robo-batters, programmed for perfection whatever delivery comes his way...hence a wicket falling every 2 overs!!!

Err, relevant how exactly?

Bowlers can only contain to levels that are inordinately expensive in any other game-form. And in any case, even then they don't do so that often.

Hence, Twenty20 does not allow bowlers to do anything positive - other than rest because they've only got 4 overs to bowl as PAJdeF put it.

 

[Richard]

Yes, it's different, but a bowler can come off feeling pleased with himself if he's gone for 7 an over, just as he can if he's gone for 2 an over in Test cricket. That's my view on things.

And my view is that going for 7-an-over should never be something you can be pleased with.

 

[Tom Halsey]

And my view is that going for 7-an-over should never be something you can be pleased with.

There is a jump in economy rates between Test cricket and ODIs... why aren't you allowed the jump between ODIs and Twenty20.

 

[silentstriker]

but in fact you have no evidence to suggest that if bowlers had a more attacking line the figures would be worse. Common sense would suggest in fact that a more attacking line would indeed lower a bowlers strike rate, wouldnt it???

So all these bowlers in Twenty20 have yet to figure out that the strategy is to bowl aggressively?

And no, more attacking line tends to work in tests when its a failure if a batsman scores a few runs and then gets out, but in Twenty20, it would be perfectly acceptable for someone to hit a quick 30-40.

 

[Richard]

There is a jump in economy rates between Test cricket and ODIs... why aren't you allowed the jump between ODIs and Twenty20.

Because the jump between OD and T20 is about 4 times the number in the jump between FC and OD.

 

[Swervy]

So all these bowlers in Twenty20 have yet to figure out that the strategy is to bowl aggressively?

Look I am asking you the questions here!!!!

I am not saying whether it is FACT or FALLACY . The thing is, no-one has really convinced me that it is a batsmans game other than giving opinion. I gave some facts that might suggest the perception might not be the reality.

TH would appear to be closer to the mark, in that its just that the goalposts have moved. ..but bowlers still have wicket taking opportunities and run stopping opportunities (maybe less of the latter, but they are still there)

 

[Richard]

The thing is, no-one has really convinced me that it is a batsmans game

Probably because you'd have to be an utter ninconpoop to believe it was.

It is, however, a batting game.

BTW... avatar... changed?!?!?!

And why the HELL did you not change it to ? Eh?

 

[Swervy]

Probably because you'd have to be an utter ninconpoop to believe it was.

It is, however, a batting game.

right..ok...please tell me the difference!!!

Is it something Daddy told you?

 

[Swervy]

BTW... avatar... changed?!?!?!

its a new Swervy era

 

[Richard]

right..ok...please tell me the difference!!!

Is it something Daddy told you?

Err - is it not incredibly obvious what the difference is?

If something favours batsmen it allows them to build huge run-totals and high averages. Twenty20 doesn't.

Instead, it favours batting, because bowlers almost invariably get smashed into oblivion. They take wickets, but that's a "well DUH!!" scenario. Of course they're going to get a few wickets.

Oh... yeah... me Dad quite likes Twenty20.

 

[Richard]

its a new Swervy era

You didn't answer the important part of the question.


WHY NOT , EH???????????

 

[Swervy]

Err - is it not incredibly obvious what the difference is?

If something favours batsmen it allows them to build huge run-totals and high averages. Twenty20 doesn't.

Instead, it favours batting, because bowlers almost invariably get smashed into oblivion. They take wickets, but that's a "well DUH!!" scenario. Of course they're going to get a few wickets.

Oh... yeah... me Dad quite likes Twenty20.

INCREDIBLY obvious...right ok.

Saying its day time when the sun is up on a clear day is incredibly obvious, however in this case, its sounds like a case of splitting hairs over phrasiology

 

[Swervy]

You didn't answer the important part of the question.


WHY NOT , EH???????????

its not there for easy clicking

 

[Swervy]

it is funny how you still enjoy the sly, 'veiled' insult in your posts though, I love the insinuation that it is I who is the 'nincompoop'...(its like being violently attacked by marshmellow men throwing cotton wool at me..i'm soooooo hurt)

 

[Richard]

INCREDIBLY obvious...right ok.

Saying its day time when the sun is up on a clear day is incredibly obvious, however in this case, its sounds like a case of splitting hairs over phrasiology

It's nothing of the sort.

If I haven't explained how being bat-friendly and batsman-friendly are certainly not the same thing I don't know that I'll ever be able to.

 

[Richard]

it is funny how you still enjoy the sly, 'veiled' insult in your posts though, I love the insinuation that it is I who is the 'nincompoop'...(its like being violently attacked by marshmellow men throwing cotton wool at me..i'm soooooo hurt)

Where did I call you a nincompoop?

I said "it's probable that no-one ever expressed such sentiments because to do so would be a nincimpoopish sentiment".

See?

I'm not one, incidentally, for the flame-throwing (with very rare exceptions - one of which I'm sure you might remember). I don't go out of my way to insult people to the best of my ability.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Err - is it not incredibly obvious what the difference is?

If something favours batsmen it allows them to build huge run-totals and high averages. Twenty20 doesn't.

Instead, it favours batting, because bowlers almost invariably get smashed into oblivion. They take wickets, but that's a "well DUH!!" scenario. Of course they're going to get a few wickets.

Oh... yeah... me Dad quite likes Twenty20.

Yes but your Dad's normal.

 

[Swervy]

It's nothing of the sort.

If I haven't explained how being bat-friendly and batsman-friendly are certainly not the same thing I don't know that I'll ever be able to.

ok, I see your point, but I think for convenience I will still keep one term for both things, because in the whole scheme of things, its not really that big a difference I dont think..and if it is, I dont really care too much

But cheers for your input, most enlightening as ever

 

[Richard]

its not there for easy clicking

How come Craig and Rich Twyman managed to get into it easily enough, then?

And Tom Halsey got : too.

 

[Richard]

Yes but your Dad's normal.

You clearly don't know him as well as you think...