***Official*** IPL 2009

[Briony]

With the bowling a lot depends on the pitches given that batsmen basically have to attack. Top bowlers like Steyn and Flintoff have been really travelling when the pitch has been flat as batsmen rode their luck. In ODIs and test cricket they wouldn't turn out figures like that because batsmen (with the possible exception of a Sehwag or Gayle) are manifestly more cautious. On bowler-friendly pitches in this format, Steyn for instance has had some great figures because the batsmen still have to attack which can be obviously fraught with danger with the assistance around. In test cricket, a spicy pitch would still assist Steyn and co. but good openers can get through the first session relatively danger free if they play with skill and caution.

When it's all said and done, we can over-analyse 20/20. In such a truncated form, the pitch, whether it's a day match or day/nighter, the weather can at times have more influence that the ability of the players. The longer the form of the game, the more the innate skill, and superior temperament and techniques will prevail.

 

[Furball]

My point isn't about good bowlers - even the best bowlers in the world can get belted in T20.

It's the part timers who really suffer in T20. In ODIs, a part timer who can keep a tight line and length can be an extremely valuable commodity in the right circumstances, because they can bowl 7, 8, 9, 10 overs extremely economically and occasionally take big hauls.

In T20, the same part timers become fodder.

 

[Briony]

My point isn't about good bowlers - even the best bowlers in the world can get belted in T20.

It's the part timers who really suffer in T20. In ODIs, a part timer who can keep a tight line and length can be an extremely valuable commodity in the right circumstances, because they can bowl 7, 8, 9, 10 overs extremely economically and occasionally take big hauls.

In T20, the same part timers become fodder.

Agree, but it still depends on the pitch. With some of these night conditions being more bowler-friendly, even the part-timers don't necessarily get belted. Compare Kumble bowling the first night in very helpful conditions with what he's delivered since. And Kallis for instance is not considered by SA as a part-timer, yet in this sort of cricket he, Flintoff or Steyn can go for just as many as these bits and pieces guys on a flat deck. In fact, sometime the fact that Steyn bowls with good pace and be more helpful for the batsmen than the unpredictable dibbly-dobbly rubbish of a no-name, where the batsman has to make his own pace.

 

[Howsie]

So what do you have against tatoos - if you don't even know what it is? It could be the name of a deceased relative for all you know. Or it could be 'I'm better than Bradman'. Do you have something with tatoos in general?

It's not just the tattos though, I've read a few stories about him being real arrogant and that he hardly listen's to advice. And did you see him in the last game, Pieterson was bowling and the ball was hit straight to Kohli at mid-wicket, he runs in and tries a flick behind the back to Pieterson. Right away Pieterson looks at him and tells in to hold onto the ball, three balls later he does the same thing .

 

[honestbharani]

I am sure the theory itself here about part timers in T20 was that they won't succeed like they do in ODIs. Best example is India... We don't give our part timers overs in T20s but in ODIs you consistently see Yuvraj, Sehwag and even Raina and Rohit bowl lots of overs...

 

[honestbharani]

Yep.

In fact, James Hopes is probably the perfect example of a good ODI/List A bowler who's a terrible T20 bowler.

Cricinfo - Players and Officials - James Hopes

Scenario A:

You're an opening batsmen vs Australia in the 2nd match of a 5 match ODI series in which you're 1-0 down. Nathan Bracken and Mitchell Johnson have caused problems with the new ball, and Brett Lee and Shaun Tait have troubled your batsmen with their express pace. You've grafted your way to 20 off 30 balls, but after 15 overs your side is 40/3. Ponting throws the ball to James Hopes. Your partner at the crease has faced 4 balls and is yet to get off the mark. How do you play Hopes?

He bowls a decent line and length at decent, though not troublesome pace, and is hard to score runs off. You could charge down the track to him and try and belt him out the ground, but should you make a mistake, you're not likely to be too popular in the dressing room. Rebuilding the innings is your main priority, so Hopes is likely to bowl his overs for figures of 1/35 or so - great figures for a part time bowler.

Scenario B:

You're in the IPL, facing a side with Flintoff, Steyn and Bracken as the quick options, who have caused trouble. Vettori and Ojha are the main spin options the opposition captain has at his disposal. You're 8 overs in and again are 40/3. Hopes is brought on to bowl. How do you play him?

This time it's much different. Hopes is by far the weakest bowler the opposition captain has at his disposal. You only have 12 more overs in which to set a competitive total for your bowlers to bowl at, so you must score as many runs as possible off the weakest bowlers. Unlike Vettori for example, Hopes doesn't particularly have a lot in his locker - attempting to belt Hopes out the ground is a much better bet in this scenario.

excellently put. Completely AWTA.. In that respect, T20s are better than ODIs.

 

[Pratters]

T20s are way better than boring ODIs with crap middle overs.

 

[Howsie]

T20s are way better than boring ODIs with crap middle overs.

20/20 is alright, but ODI's for me are more fun to watch. 20/20 is very predictable, and after awhile like last years IPL gets pretty boring.

 

[Pratters]

I find ODIs highly predictable after watching it for nearly 20 years. I can't stand the format. ODI is formulaic. T20 meanwhile is very unpredictable and a match can change within one over.

 

[Briony]

I find ODIs highly predictable after watching it for nearly 20 years. I can't stand the format. ODI is formulaic. T20 meanwhile is very unpredictable and a match can change within one over.

True but the flaw in T20s is that if a team loses a whole clutter of early wickets it can be game over. In ODIs there's much more scope for recovery, especially if one team is a bit disadvantaged by conditions.

 

[Uppercut]

True but the flaw in T20s is that if a team loses a whole clutter of early wickets it can be game over. In ODIs there's much more scope for recovery, especially if one team is a bit disadvantaged by conditions.

Hmm, hardly. What about that match where Australia lost like 6 wickets in the first ten overs to Steyn and Parnell? That was game-over in well under an hour.

Prefer T20 because it's not so formulaic. In ODIs, both sides defend for long periods of the game. That's no fun.

 

[Jono]

Hmm, hardly. What about that match where Australia lost like 6 wickets in the first ten overs to Steyn and Parnell? That was game-over in well under an hour.

No it wasn't. There was a chance of Aust getting to 200+ with the recovery, South Africa managed to stop it before it became serious.

Plus, how rare are those matches!

Think about Pak vs. Aust match 1. Aust cruised the first 20, and then collapso. Spinners got into the match and managed to build pressure. That can't happen in T20s.

I would much prefer T20s if they sorted out the pitches. Sixes can get boring too.

 

[Uppercut]

No it wasn't. There was a chance of Aust getting to 200+ with the recovery, South Africa managed to stop it before it became serious.

Plus, how rare are those matches!

Think about Pak vs. Aust match 1. Aust cruised the first 20, and then collapso. Spinners got into the match and managed to build pressure. That can't happen in T20s.

I would much prefer T20s if they sorted out the pitches. Sixes can get boring too.

Of course it can happen in T20s. Look at the bowling of Kumble or Vettori this tournament. You choke a batsman for runs, build the pressure and take wickets.

Anyway, i don't see how it's any less possible for a side to rebuild after losing a few early poles in T20. Quite a strange criticism. It's a bit like we're arguing over what song is better. We can put into words what we don't like but strictly none of our criticisms are quite legitimate and when it gets to the bottom line we're just expressing opinions. I prefer T20, you prefer ODIs, and I guess we both have our reasons.

 

[Jono]

Of course it can happen in T20s. Look at the bowling of Kumble or Vettori this tournament. You choke a batsman for runs, build the pressure and take wickets.

Yeah true, bloody entertaining seeing 7 wickets fall with batsman slogging it to the fielder at long-on

I don't hate T20, but I'd hardly call one of its strong points that it allows for good watching of spin bowling.

Vettori, Murali etc. can be effective. Not denying that. But not in the same way (from a viewer pov) as you saw Afridi and Anjum in match 1.

 

[Pratters]

True but the flaw in T20s is that if a team loses a whole clutter of early wickets it can be game over. In ODIs there's much more scope for recovery, especially if one team is a bit disadvantaged by conditions.

Disagree. If a team is 20/4 in an ODI, most likely they will lose the game. In a T20 though, they can have two good partnerships and come back in the game which will be very difficult if not impossible in ODIs.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah true, bloody entertaining seeing 7 wickets fall with batsman slogging it to the fielder at long-on

I don't hate T20, but I'd hardly call one of its strong points that it allows for good watching of spin bowling.

Vettori, Murali etc. can be effective. Not denying that. But not in the same way (from a viewer pov) as you saw Afridi and Anjum in match 1.

Hmm, Shane Warne bowling in the first match is probably a better example of something similar to Afridi and Anjum.

The joy of watching good bowling in both formats is negligible compared to watching it in tests anyway. It's not what's good about either.

 

[Evermind]

IPL off the field is a bloody embarrassment.

Cricinfo - Drool, drool, slurp

Are you kidding me? Dravid? Pujara? Steyn?! WTH!

What're they smoking?

 

[jondavluc]

IPL off the field is a bloody embarrassment.

Cricinfo - Drool, drool, slurp

Are you kidding me? Dravid? Pujara? Steyn?! WTH!

What're they smoking?

That is ****ing funny.

 

[Briony]

IPL off the field is a bloody embarrassment.

Cricinfo - Drool, drool, slurp

Are you kidding me? Dravid? Pujara? Steyn?! WTH!

What're they smoking?

I don't think of Steyn as a blond but there are a lot of girls who like him, that pic not a flattering one of him though.

I think Lee's overrated too out of that bunch.

AB, Morne Morkel, Broad, and Vettori figure prominently in ***iest cricketer polls.

Dravid does attract votes and some even go for the likes of KP and Smith.

 

[jondavluc]

I don't think of Steyn as a blond but there are a lot of girls who like him, that pic not a flattering one of him though.

I think Lee's overrated too out of that bunch.

AB, Morne Morkel, Broad, and Vettori figure prominently in ***iest cricketer polls.

Dravid does attract votes and some even go for the likes of KP and Smith.

Yeah Morne is good looking if you found Lurch from the Addams Family attractive.