• 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.

1v1 Debate Topic ideas, Rules: subshakerz vs kyear2

The Big Showdown, good idea?


  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year
We want to do this duel guys? @kyear2 @subshakerz

My thought was that you guys could channel your cricket debating prowess towards a single issue of interest, in an organized, judged debate.

So something like a scoring system 0-10 based on each criteria below:

1: Soundness of position presented - Do you make the case in a logical and organized manner that others could get behind

2: Quality of argumentation - How you interact with the argument presented by opponent

3: Evidence provided - Quantity and quality of evidence provided

We could get 3 judges like boxing, have them score each participant 0-30, and the judges decision would determine the winner.

Format could be something like opening presentation, 2 rebuttals each, then question from each of the judges, followed by 2 rebuttals each for each question, then closing. IDK, it's all kind of fluid as an idea.

If you all do want to do it, I'd suggest a 50/50 topic, i.e. not one of the ones each of y'all get lampooned on, but maybe something more plausible for either side, lol.
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
We want to do this duel guys? @kyear2 @subshakerz

My thought was that you guys could channel your cricket debating prowess towards a single issue of interest, in an organized, judged debate.

So something like a scoring system 0-10 based on each criteria below:

1: Soundness of position presented - Do you make the case in a logical and organized manner that others could get behind

2: Quality of argumentation - How you interact with the argument presented by opponent

3: Evidence provided - Quantity and quality of evidence provided

We could get 3 judges like boxing, have them score each participant 0-30, and the judges decision would determine the winner.

Format could be something like opening presentation, 2 rebuttals each, then question from each of the judges, followed by 2 rebuttals each for each question, then closing. IDK, it's all kind of fluid as an idea.

If you all do want to do it, I'd suggest a 50/50 topic, i.e. not one of the ones each of y'all get lampooned on, but maybe something more plausible for either side, lol.
Sure I don't mind, something different. In fact, I wouldn't even mind having debate pairs for this.
 

sayon basak

Cricketer Of The Year

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year
The most important thing will be to find the mutually agreed upon position/topic which could be argued for/against in a CLEAR manner.

Overall Sobers v. Imran is a bit played out, but I think it could work with a well formulated position statement like "Peak Sobers was more valuable to his Test side than Peak Imran", and vice versa.

What we can't have is something open ended like "Slip fielders are pretty important and undervalued" or "Kallis batted too slow".
 

shortpitched713

Cricketer Of The Year

The poll for this thread was split exactlt straight down the middle, so if both sides agreed to it, this could be a good topic.
 

Top