Does a ''real'' cricket fan have to hate LOI and/or consider them irrelevant?

[Jassy]

Cricketweb probably has more test cricket fans than most other forums put together and that is a good thing. I am a test cricket fan myself and I appreciate it is the true test of a player's skill. However, does it make me any less of a fan if say, Australia's WC win in 1999 gave me more happiness than some random test series win? Indeed with the increasing popularity of T20 cricket can we turn a blind eye to tournaments such as the World t20? Clearly the players and the fans do care. You could see it in how disappointed FaF was and how pumped up Kohli was. Neutral matches in Bangladesh of all places seem to have attracted more people to the stadium than one of the tests between SA and Aus recently!

I am probably all over the place here; I'm not as good articulating myself as your Burgeys and Shris but I'm basically trying to ask if a) a true cricket fan cannot love all formats or dare I say cannot love another format more than tests and b)can we continue to disregard tournaments such as World t20 in future when clearly it means so much to players and fans alike. Sure, it won't mask say, India's lack of away test wins if they go on to win this current one but surely winning it does count for something?

 

[fredfertang]

Watching Test cricket is like making love to a beautiful woman, whereas T20 is more akin to a quick knee trembler round the back of the bike sheds - there's really no comparison, but then if you can't get to see a Test match the T20 is still a better option than just about any other way of passing the time

 

[BoyBrumby]

Quite so.

If flashed fried fois gras isn't on the day's menu a decent burger will more than suffice.

 

[Burgey]

Indeed

 

[uvelocity]

i dont think you can compare a world cup to a random odi or odi series. it's the massive saturation that has blunted every cricket fan's limbic response to odi's. taking t20's, i just dont enjoy them much at all.

 

[GIMH]

I am probably all over the place here; I'm not as good articulating myself as your [...] Shris

Sorry but there have been 3 or 4 replies to this post and nobody has referenced this. Never has a bar been lower

 

[BackFootPunch]

I'd consider myself a fan of all forms of cricket but saturation is the key thing that affects my desire to watch things like T20. I'll make time to keep up with/watch most Tests but half the time I just don't care about T20s. I've not read a single post in the T20WC match threads because I'm honestly not remotely interested in it. Another limited overs World Cup on the subcontinent? No thank you.

I'm a spin bowler myself but this stuff going on at the moment is a terrible watch. It's just the same game over and over.

 

[Burgey]

One of the best things about LO cricket IMO is the influence it's had on test cricket. The range of shots played in tests now and the increased rate of scoring means there are more results than there used to be, and the effect in the standard of fielding has been enormous.

Since the proliferation of LO cricket, 300 in a day is more or less standard in test cricket, even when less than 90 overs get bowled.

****s me when people bang on a out over rates because those of us old enough to remember can recall days of 3/200 odd off 100 plus overs being pretty regular. Of course, there is still a place for slow scoring rates in test matches, such as when SA batted hard in the third test just recently, or saved the day I Adelaide a couple of years back; but it's the exception rather than the rule these days, and I think that's a good thing.

 

[Adders]

Of course a true cricket fan can love limited overs cricket and there are plenty of them here on CW.

Just my opinion here but I'd say it is a prerequisite for a "real" cricket fan to rate Test cricket as the pinnacle and most important form of the game. After that it really is down to the individual, I personally can't get too worked up over the T20 WC and when it comes to England's current woes I definitely rate our ****e T20 performances akin to an annoying itch whereas losing 5-0 in the Ashes was like someone cutting off my ****ing arms and legs.........but plenty here don't feel the same and I don't consider they are "lesser" fans than myself.

 

[Cabinet96]

In answer to the OP; of course not.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

There is no such thing as a "real" cricket fan.

You like what you like, and you don't have to justify your reasons for liking them to anyone. Nobody should have the right to call your fandom "real" or otherwise.

I

 

[Adders]

Nobody should have the right to call your fandom "real" or otherwise.

Well I live in a free speaking country where I have the right to say whatever the **** I like. And it's my view that someone who thinks the game of cricket is only about smashing 6's and quality bowlers going for 10 rpo is missing the point then I have the right to say so.

Of course they also have the right to tell me to **** off and to mind my own traditionalist business.

 

[Dan]

Well I live in a free speaking country where I have the right to say whatever the **** I like. And it's my view that someone who thinks the game of cricket is only about smashing 6's and quality bowlers going for 10 rpo is missing the point then I have the right to say so.

Of course they also have the right to tell me to **** off and to mind my own traditionalist business.

The second paragraph there stops you from going into George Brandis territory. Thankfully. Nobody wants to be in George Brandis territory.

As a whole I do think the notion of a "real" or a "true" fan is pretty problematic. Though that's mainly from godawful twitter users who don't believe you can be a "true" fan of Justin Bieber unless you knew about him in 2002 or something. Let's not get into that same debate with cricket. Not because T20 should be considered an equal to Test cricket, but so we don't become godawful twitter users.

We should all do something productive instead, like writing Trane (Boult/Williamson) fanfic

 

[Maximas]

I am probably all over the place here; I'm not as good articulating myself as your... Shris

Yeah, look, would put many, many posters before Shri in terms of articulation myself . Look no further than the first couple of posters to reply for example.

Sure, it won't mask say, India's lack of away test wins if they go on to win this current one but surely winning it does count for something?

Only as much as Sanga's home centuries count

Basically, I think t20/LO cricket provides a different form of entertainment and challenges to the players to test cricket. I think test cricket is probably the least accessible format to new fans, but perhaps the most rewarding to long-time fans like myself. But it's not for everybody, and nor is t20 cricket, and that's cool.

I've always thought test cricket is like Radiohead, and LO cricket is like Coldplay, it's just a matter of what you prefer

 

[Hurricane]

I love nz domestic t20s. Good way to spot upcoming talent.
Although you can get deceived. Ruthers looked amazing in one T20 game I saw and hasn't delivered since.

 

[Adders]

As a whole I do think the notion of a "real" or a "true" fan is pretty problematic. Though that's mainly from godawful twitter users who don't believe you can be a "true" fan of Justin Bieber unless you knew about him in 2002 or something. Let's not get into that same debate with cricket. Not because T20 should be considered an equal to Test cricket, but so we don't become godawful twitter users.

We should all do something productive instead, like writing Trane (Boult/Williamson) fanfic

Re the bolded, of course it is problematic, we come in all shapes and sizes, from various cultures and geographical locations and have differing tastes. You cannot quantify "a cricket fan" any more than you can a race or nation.

That said, do we have to be so literal on this point in terms of this thread? I'm pretty sure I know what Jassy is asking here as do most others, and I also think it is a worthwhile discussion.

So in very simplistic terms we are talking abouts these categories of cricket watchers/fans.

1- Tests Only, those that only watch and rate test cricket.
2- Tests supreme but enjoy and value LO.
3- Tests and LO of equal standing/rating.
4- LO more important/entertaining, but still value test cricket.
5- LO overs only, would rather watch paint dry than 5 days of test cricket.

Now I would hazard a guess we have all those 5 categories here but the vast majority falling into option 2.

I guess what Jassy is asking is does a real cricket fan have to fall into category 1?. Absolutely not, but I do fail to see how anyone in category 5 can be considered a true cricket fan (and remember we aren't being too literal here!!)

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Well I live in a free speaking country where I have the right to say whatever the **** I like. And it's my view that someone who thinks the game of cricket is only about smashing 6's and quality bowlers going for 10 rpo is missing the point then I have the right to say so.

Of course they also have the right to tell me to **** off and to mind my own traditionalist business.

Yes, that is your right.

One person's fandom is no more "real" than another's.

 

[Adders]

You said I had no right to do so.......

Nobody should have the right to call your fandom "real" or otherwise.

I

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

I actually said nobody SHOULD have the right.

Everybody has rights.
You have the right to call everybody a ****, it doesn't mean you should.

 

[Adders]

Fair enough........but do you disagree with my statement above on those cricket watchers falling into category 5 not being "true" cricket fans?