• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Which did you enjoy more: World Cup or Twenty20 Championship?

Which tournament did you enjoy more?


  • Total voters
    57

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Nope. AFAIK he's always quite liked the format. More Brits than not have done - it's symptomatic of the jump-on-the-latest-bandwagon attitudes so common in these isles.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Why? 'Cos I don't like boxing? :dontgetit
Because you don't appear to appreciate some of the things that makes sport truly great and a pleasure to watch. Even if you don't enjoy the actual sport being played, you should be able to appreciate the spectacle, entertainment, conest, passion, context and situation surrounding that particular sport.

Bathurst is an example. I'm not much of a motorsport fan, but I watch Bathurst every year because of what it is, but not because of what it actually is. Make sense? :unsure:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Because you don't appear to appreciate some of the things that makes sport truly great and a pleasure to watch. Even if you don't enjoy the actual sport being played, you should be able to appreciate the spectacle, entertainment, conest, passion, context and situation surrounding that particular sport.

Bathurst is an example. I'm not much of a motorsport fan, but I watch Bathurst every year because of what it is, but not because of what it actually is. Make sense? :unsure:
Yeah, makes sense, but it's not the way I am. I'd enjoy Exeter Sunday XI vs Woodland Fort Sunday XI more than anything (and I mean ANYTHING) in motorsport, boxing or anything else, simply because I like cricket and I don't like motorsport or boxing. The calibre of play, the passion involved from large numbers... it just doesn't matter to me if I don't enjoy the format.

Obviously, once you do enjoy the format said factors increase such enjoyment over a gradual scale, but they cannot turn apathy into interest.
 

The Baconator

International Vice-Captain
I honestly didn't particularly enjoy either of them.
The WC was just.....well, we all know what it was, and the T20 just really drifted right past me without me really noticing it much.
 

cover drive man

International Captain
I understand the argument that there isn't much text book quality cricket but I still think the world cup in the caribbean was dire so I'm going for the twenty twenty.
 

Swervy

International Captain
I understand the argument that there isn't much text book quality cricket but I still think the world cup in the caribbean was dire so I'm going for the twenty twenty.
I know what you mean about the 'text book quality' however, the fundamentals of Twenty20, ODI and test cricket are the same. You will succeed if you do the basics right, relative to the context, in all forms of the game.

For example, Yuvraj hitting the 6 sixes. No amout of pure slogging will get you 36 runs in an over in any standard of cricket above probably the standard I play at. What Yuvraj did was play attacking shots with the intention of hitting sixes, but with the fundamentals right. I would go so far as to say that 5 of those 6 sixes were beautiful shots, maybe not in the classical cover drive sense you see in the old coaching manuals, but still, the head was in the right place, the bat came through nicely, the timing was sweet etc etc.

So for me the quality is still there in Twenty20 , its just that that quality is used in different ways
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
And such ways are something I just don't enjoy personally. I don't really like seeing six-sixes overs, and it's a bit farcical that it's happened in 2 major "international" tournaments within 6 months, having only happened twice previously in the recognised top-level history of the game.

The six-sixes overs, though, are just one example. Twenty20 differs from ODIs to an impossibly greater extent than ODIs differ from Tests.
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
Not that dislike OD cricket but the next organisers of the WC ought to look at what happenned at the caribbean as an example of what not to do for a successful tourney
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Yes, they certainly should. However, the organizers of the 2007 Cup should have looked at the 2003 one and learned from the many mistakes there, too. Instead, any number were repeated.

The bans on ambush-marketing are inevitable and anyone complaining about them is, really, just kicking-up a needless fuss: they're here to stay whether anyone likes it or not. Personally, I drink orange-squash and don't see why anyone would complain about not being able to bring Coke into the ground, or even certain mineral-waters, it's hardly an essential drink.

But ticket-prices, it's really pretty inexcusable to have such large ones: as I said earlier, gate-receipt revenue is negligable, why try and squeeze the extra few dollars out when you're causing great damage to the prospect of full stadia - something which is really a must for World Cup games. The same applied to the Champions Trophy of 2004.

Obviously, the chief problem with the World Cups of 2003 and 2007 was inadaquete cricketers, of which there were many in both tournaments. There's no amount of organization that can change that, and equally, if there's some good cricket one hell of a lot of poor organization can be easily overlooked.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
The idiocy of voting for WC2007 when not having even watched 20Twenty is beyond me.

And the Twenty20 World Cup > the ODI one by miles IMO.
 

Swervy

International Captain
And such ways are something I just don't enjoy personally. I don't really like seeing six-sixes overs, and it's a bit farcical that it's happened in 2 major "international" tournaments within 6 months, having only happened twice previously in the recognised top-level history of the game.

The six-sixes overs, though, are just one example. Twenty20 differs from ODIs to an impossibly greater extent than ODIs differ from Tests.

well, it comes down to personal choice

Although I dont really see that 2020 differs from ODI more than ODIs differ from tests
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
:huh: Pretty strong words by your standards? :blink:
I don't mind someone preferring the ODI World Cup, that's opinion. Voting for the ODI World Cup when you didn't even watch the Twenty20 is just plain idiocy.

Post wasn't directed at you at all btw.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Although I dont really see that 2020 differs from ODI more than ODIs differ from tests
"Standard" ER in Tests - 3-an-over; "standard" ER in ODIs - 4-an-over.





"Standard" ER in Twenty20s... ^%$£ knows, really. I've always got the impression that 7-an-over was about it, but that may have changed of late (and only in the upwards direction).

That's massive - massive. And it's why I find it so hard to make it feel like cricket, really. It doesn't matter if the runs are garnered through pure blind swinging or through extension on "normal" cricket strokes (though if you play normally in a Twenty20 game you won't get that many), it's the run-rates that matter. I hate obscenely fast or obscenely slow run-rates.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I don't mind someone preferring the ODI World Cup, that's opinion. Voting for the ODI World Cup when you didn't even watch the Twenty20 is just plain idiocy.

Post wasn't directed at you at all btw.
I didn't especially think it was, but I still think that's a touch harsh. I can't ever remember seeing you describe something so strongly TBH, which is why I was taken aback.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
I didn't especially think it was, but I still think that's a touch harsh. I can't ever remember seeing you describe something so strongly TBH, which is why I was taken aback.
Fair dos, it's just that judging things when you haven't listened to/seen them or whatever is one of the things that I detest.
 

Top