Agnew: Champions Trophy should become Twenty20 tournament

[Neil Pickup]

The problem with playing over two days (in East Devon at least) is that in our U/13 and U/11 leagues last year we had 12 teams. Many sides didn't even get 11 games in with only one-day matchups.

As for the 'promising' player... Junior cricket in its present format isn't the place for them. Facing seamers bowling in the 40s and spinners in the 20s won't help at all and could just, if the player's attitude's not right, get the ideas into his head that he can play those shots all the time.

Idea's just come into my head... wonder if we could manage some kind of longer matches festival/tournament thing over Whitsun half-term or in late August?

 

[Son Of Coco]

The problem with playing over two days (in East Devon at least) is that in our U/13 and U/11 leagues last year we had 12 teams. Many sides didn't even get 11 games in with only one-day matchups.

As for the 'promising' player... Junior cricket in its present format isn't the place for them. Facing seamers bowling in the 40s and spinners in the 20s won't help at all and could just, if the player's attitude's not right, get the ideas into his head that he can play those shots all the time.

Idea's just come into my head... wonder if we could manage some kind of longer matches festival/tournament thing over Whitsun half-term or in late August?

Yeah, i guess one of the problems with that might be kids leaving for holidays etc with the parents over summer. It's a tough one, but it'd definately be worth trying to set up some longer version of the game they can play in. This guy I am talking about is coming to Oz this year and getting set-up with a team through the Academy in Brisbane so it'll be interesting to see how he goes. I notice he's been playing in the Devon U/17's against other counties, but I'm not sure whether that's another smash and grab or longer cricket.

 

[Neil Pickup]

County U11 cricket is 40-overs-a-side to start with, and the games increase in length as the players get older, until the time they reach U17 where they are playing two-day two-innings time games. [2004 Season]

I'd hope that anyone in a county side at U17 level would be playing regular First XI cricket in a Premier League team though.

 

[Langeveldt]

I refuse to believe that Agnew would put his good name on the line by spouting a load of waste like that...

 

[Neil Pickup]

I refuse to believe that Agnew would put his good name on the line by spouting a load of waste like that...

Cynical, bitter, twisted and whiney, and you're only 17.

Thirty years' time you're a surefire for "Grumpy Old Men 63"

 

[Langeveldt]

Cynical, bitter, twisted and whiney, and you're only 17.

Thirty years' time you're a surefire for "Grumpy Old Men 63"

But not ginger

 

[PY]

We have a WINNER.

 

[one_dayer]

Children, grow up!

Back to the subject I think that Twenty20 definately has its place on the interenational scene, but I wouldn't want it to take over completely from the one day game.

 

[Son Of Coco]

County U11 cricket is 40-overs-a-side to start with, and the games increase in length as the players get older, until the time they reach U17 where they are playing two-day two-innings time games. [2004 Season]

I'd hope that anyone in a county side at U17 level would be playing regular First XI cricket in a Premier League team though.

Ah, nice one. The scorecards are great - the guy I played with is J.Horton, he's missing from the last 3 games though, possibly due to his scores in the first 2 haha

 

[Neil Pickup]

8, 94, 4, 0 - hmm. Doesn't seem capable of slow scoring or self-restraint.. Never seen him (yet) myself, what club is this, I'll try to keep an eye out next season.

 

[sportychic33]

Anzac - I think you are talking about Martin Crowe's Cricket Max. Which was mainly a domestic competition, but was sometimes pulled out for visiting one day teams - such as the Indian tour to New Zealand in 2003. Cricket Max encourages batters to hit straight down the ground into a "Max Zone" which doubles hte number of runs - for example if you hit a 6 straight down the ground you would score 12. Fielders aren't allowed to stand in that area before the ball has been bowled. both teams get two innings of 10 overs.
If you bowl a no ball - its a free hit and then the ball has to be bowled again - you can't get out of the free hit.

It is ideal for players such as Andre Adams, Tama Canning, Chris Nevin, Hitchcock, and all the other all-rounders like Oram, Styris and Cairns

 

[Richard]

jeez I thought ODIs were bad enough re setting the game up for batsmen - 20/20 is soooo much worse in that regard..................

still pandering to people with ADD to keep them entertained..............

must be an absolute hoot to play if you do not take it too seriously - but I'd hate to see it gain any further credibility by becoming a major tourneyment.......

My thoughts exactly.
Personally I find Twenty20 rather boring, individual figures just don't matter enough. If you go for 15-an-over it really doesn't matter. Similarly, you can't be faulted for slogging and getting 3, 8, 1 in 3 innings.
It's great to see the crowds flocking in, of course it is, because it's vital money that is needed all too badly.
But whenever I see a one-day or First-Class game on TV it's an instant switch-on, whatever it is. If I see a Twenty20 match, I generally find total indifference to the idea of watching. If someone else wants to watch it, I'm fine to keep half an eye on it. Equally, it's good fun to go to a couple of matches on a fine evening in July (not that we had an enormous amount of them this year) with a good atmosphere, but I'm not overly fussed about what happens in the match, more about the family having fun on a day out.

 

[Swervy]

My thoughts exactly.
Personally I find Twenty20 rather boring, individual figures just don't matter enough. If you go for 15-an-over it really doesn't matter. Similarly, you can't be faulted for slogging and getting 3, 8, 1 in 3 innings.
It's great to see the crowds flocking in, of course it is, because it's vital money that is needed all too badly.
But whenever I see a one-day or First-Class game on TV it's an instant switch-on, whatever it is. If I see a Twenty20 match, I generally find total indifference to the idea of watching. If someone else wants to watch it, I'm fine to keep half an eye on it. Equally, it's good fun to go to a couple of matches on a fine evening in July (not that we had an enormous amount of them this year) with a good atmosphere, but I'm not overly fussed about what happens in the match, more about the family having fun on a day out.

why should individual figures matter...its a team game

But yeah its entertainment..and he money is good to keep the foundations of the game afloat..the first calss game will always be the number one priority for me

 

[Richard]

why should individual figures matter...its a team game

Because cricket is a team game played by individuals.
Without the individuals we would have no game.
Hence the greatness and goodness and otherwise of individuals is important.
Are you saying we should not take the blindest bit of notice of whether Don Bradman or Alistair Cook was the better player?

 

[Swervy]

Because cricket is a team game played by individuals.
Without the individuals we would have no game.
Hence the greatness and goodness and otherwise of individuals is important.
Are you saying we should not take the blindest bit of notice of whether Don Bradman or Alistair Cook was the better player?

of course we should take interest in it...but the bottom line is does your team win or not

 

[Richard]

Yes, I know that, but individual success is far more interesting than team success.
I mean, if teams had 11 players and 11 players only qualified to play for them it would make everything rather boring.

 

[Richard]

Oh, and I might add that far more important again than any team is the game itself. No team is above or more important than the game of cricket. Anyone who sets their team's interests above those of the game doesn't deserve to be a part of cricket.

 

[Swervy]

Oh, and I might add that far more important again than any team is the game itself. No team is above or more important than the game of cricket. Anyone who sets their team's interests above those of the game doesn't deserve to be a part of cricket.

fair enough