Blooding players in Twenty20

[Jakester1288]

Why does it happen? Why do players, older ones as well as the younger breed, get brought through the ranks with Twenty20?

 

[Noble One]

Cricketing boards attitudes towards international Twenty20.

It is still the third format of the game, great environment to introduce cricketers to the national squad, team dynamics, training, large crowds, media interaction.

 

[Jakester1288]

Cricketing boards attitudes towards international Twenty20.

It is still the third format of the game, great environment to introduce cricketers to the national squad, team dynamics, training, large crowds, media interaction.

But they can't prove anything. They can prove they can have a hack, but a line and length 9 times out of 10 bowler won't get to show anything when he goes for 40 runs off his 4 overs, or a grafting batsmen won't do himself any favors by batting too slowly or trying to hack and failing.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Depends on the type of player. A shot maker or fast bowler can showcase their talent in the short space of time.

 

[inbox24]

I reckon ODIs are a better format to blood, you can see the full array of attack and defence. T20s are more just a taste tester, more experimental.

 

[brockley]

I think their are T20 specialists who maybe not up to internatioal one dayers,i'd say dave hussey,dave warner and shane harwood are good inT20 but short in the one day department.
i back blooding some players in T20 some are more suited to that,look at cam white not that good in first class and one dayers,better suited to T20 i think.

 

[Jono]

I mostly agree with inbox. T20s at the highest level will test a player's temperament and ability to handle the pressures of international cricket. But not some specific skills.

However for many players, they won't have a good enough opportunity to really shine. Not all of course. I think Rohit Sharma showed enough in the 2007 T20 World Cup for India for example. Same with Gambhir (though he had already been in the team a while.

 

[Jakester1288]

I think their are T20 specialists who maybe not up to internatioal one dayers,i'd say dave hussey

David Hussey is better at FC cricket than the shorter forms, he can bash the ball, but he should be next in line to be picked for the Australian test team, IMO (Symonds, Watson etc [the injured blokes] don't count).

 

[oitoitoi]

T20's ok for Batsmen perhaps, allrounders too, especially if you're just looking for hitting power for the one day game, but ODI's are still the best for a young bowler. In fact I reckon for certain kinds of bowlers sending em straight to tests is the best option.

 

[SJS]

But they can't prove anything. They can prove they can have a hack, but a line and length 9 times out of 10 bowler won't get to show anything when he goes for 40 runs off his 4 overs, or a grafting batsmen won't do himself any favors by batting too slowly or trying to hack and failing.

I reckon ODIs are a better format to blood, you can see the full array of attack and defence. T20s are more just a taste tester, more experimental.

Absolutely. Its a pity we do not play first class games against international sides anymore. I wish even at a reduced level if at least three first class fixtures could be played before a five test series (maybe two for a shorter one)

1. A Match against the First Class Champions of the home country.
2. A match against an assortment of hopefuls with three to four seniors.
3. A match which is almost a dress rehearsal with a couple of young hopefuls in the company of the established players.​

This would be ideal to break in youngsters as well as providing conditioning to visitors and a chance for the home side to assess their options.

ICC should take their eyes off that bank book for sometime and see what can be done.

 

[Sanz]

'Right Age/Time/Format' to Blood is highly over-rated. The fact is there is no right answer. If it worked , it was the right decision, if it didn't then it probably wasn't.