***Official Australia in South Africa***

[Pedro Delgado]

I just think crying over a ODI is a little OTT. However you're right, a touney win against Aus is a rare thing indeed, and I am pleased for them.

 

[GIMH]

Exactly, beating Australia is something to be proud of and will probably give thousands of SOuth Africans real hope ahead of next year's World Cup. let them enjoy their moments in the sun

 

[Langeveldt]

But they won a series against Australia. That's unheard of for most teams lately. They also did so against some of the greatest odds the sport has seen. Let them have their moment.

Could you get odds for SA to win? Must have been well over 1000-1

 

[Goughy]

So every ODI that isn't in the world cup is meaningless?

Yes,

Australia win the Triangular ODI tournament but lose the Ashes (was it a successful tour, No)

South Africa destroy England in the One Dayers last year but lose the Test series. Was the tour a success for England, of course.

Throughout the 90's England generally did well in the NatWest One day games and poorly in the Tests. Will this be remembered as a successful period in English cricket. Never

ODI's pay the bills, bring in sponsorship and make the crowds happy. But in the grand scheme of things they are all meaningless.

 

[Loony BoB]

Australia tied the Natwest series with England.

I disagree with the idea that ODIs are meaningless, and anyone who thinks that is either way too die-hard for tests or else is a sore loser after a recent loss. You might think that a tour is a success/failure based on tests but I sure as hell don't.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

By that rationale, Australia drawing the one dayers was a reasonably successful Ashes tour then.

 

[Goughy]

Australia tied the Natwest series with England.

I disagree with the idea that ODIs are meaningless, and anyone who thinks that is either way too die-hard for tests or else is a sore loser after a recent loss. You might think that a tour is a success/failure based on tests but I sure as hell don't.

My mistake, I meant the 2 team NatWest Challenge before the tests not the Triangular. Slip of the typing finger. Anyway, Aus beat Eng more than the otherway round in ODI's in the summer of 2005.

As for the other point we will agree to disagree. I guess the tours mentioned were a success for Aus and SA then.

 

[Loony BoB]

I just don't see it so black and white. A successful tour is when you do as well as or better than you were expected to. Bangladesh are having a successful tour at the moment. Australia draw a series and it's called an unsuccessful tour, regardless of who they face. That's how I see it.

 

[Beleg]

I am sorry but this 'meaningless' tag is complete rubbish.

Meaningless for whom? Meaningless for what?

This ODI probably provided many viewers with more enjoyment and thrill then most test series would have done in a century. As Rich mentioned, the magnitude of celebrations was huge. Folks were ecstatic, crying. I won't be far from the mark if I say that this win has won over many young cricket fans in South Africa, to the benefit of cricket as a whole.
It's downright arrogant to shrug of the entertainment value of the series, the quality of cricket displayed by both teams and the competitive spirit involved on both sides.

ODI series are meaningless only in the minds of cricket snobs who consider the slightest deviation from normality to be the onset of doomsday. Ultimately, cricket is played for entertainment value and in the minds of most people, watching batsmen blaze off in a flurry of powerful hits is more entertaining then a whole day of cat and mouse between bat and ball.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Fair enough Beleg and each to their own. I've been getting up at 4 am every morning for the last two tests between England and India, and shall do so again come Thursday. When it's time for the ODI's I'll be sleeping like a baby ODI's are usually so dreary that they'd probably send me back to the land of Nod anyway.

 

[Goughy]

I am sorry but this 'meaningless' tag is complete rubbish.

Meaningless for whom? Meaningless for what?

This ODI probably provided many viewers with more enjoyment and thrill then most test series would have done in a century. As Rich mentioned, the magnitude of celebrations was huge. Folks were ecstatic, crying. I won't be far from the mark if I say that this win has won over many young cricket fans in South Africa, to the benefit of cricket as a whole.
It's downright arrogant to shrug of the entertainment value of the series, the quality of cricket displayed by both teams and the competitive spirit involved on both sides


ODI series are meaningless only in the minds of cricket snobs who consider the slightest deviation from normality to be the onset of doomsday .

Wow, Im a arrogant snob who talks rubbish. I enjoy one-day cricket but I far prefer the 20/20 and both mean nothing compared to Test cricket.

Im fed up with people who constatly accuse people who value Test cricket as snobs and spit the term purist at them.

Ultimately, cricket is played for entertainment value and in the minds of most people, watching batsmen blaze off in a flurry of powerful hits is more entertaining then a whole day of cat and mouse between bat and ball.

Most people eh!! well Im sure the 'minority' that watched the Ashes adictively must be pining for a 50 over game they can really enjoy.

Also look at the Preview coverage of the Aus vs SA tour. Its all about the tests. The ODIs are there for a reason but who in their right mind can argue that they are as important of Test cricket.

 

[marc71178]

Fair enough Beleg and each to their own. I've been getting up at 4 am every morning for the last two tests between England and India, and shall do so again come Thursday.

I'd probably have a lie on Thursday since the game starts on Saturday!

 

[Ikki]

Test > ODI

 

[howardj]

After our regrettable ODI performance, I'd like to make the following changes to the squad:

Cosgrove for Martyn
Jacques for Katich
Tait for Lewis
McGrath for Johnson

I also think Hogg (if Warnie is not coming back) should not be discarded the way he was for the last two games.

 

[Beleg]

Wow, Im a arrogant snob who talks rubbish.

Ahaan. Thanks for confirming that.

I enjoy one-day cricket but I far prefer the 20/20 and both mean nothing compared to Test cricket.

Fair enough, it's your right.

Im fed up with people who constatly accuse people who value Test cricket as snobs and spit the term purist at them.

1. I don't see how you can value test cricket by trashing ODI's. If you are bothered by people calling a spade a spade then there isn't much anyone can do about it.

2. Might as well come out of the closet and accept it. You are a snob.

Also look at the Preview coverage of the Aus vs SA tour. Its all about the tests.

If you really want to get an idea of 'public' interest, once the test series has ended, try tallying the television ratings of the test match and comapring them with the ODI's and see who comes in front.

The ODIs are there for a reason but who in their right mind can argue that they are as important of Test cricket.

People who don't believe in the inherent superiority of test cricket?

Most people eh!! well Im sure the 'minority' that watched the Ashes adictively must be pining for a 50 over game they can really enjoy.

A few points.

The 2005 Ashes was an aberration. There is nothing in the recent history of test cricket that rivals it. Pakistan tours England this summer. I'll suprised if that tour gets one quarter of the attention the Ashes got. Rarely do you see an ODI which isn't sold out. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the tests. And we are talking about the English here, who along with the aussies are the leading test-goers in the world.

In Pakistan, during the winter season (six tests), 70 percent of the tickets for all matches were free yet I only remember 3 days when the houses were anywhere close to being packed. For the ODI in Multan, you couldn't buy a ticket in black for twice the original price on the match's eve.

The decline of test cricket audience is a well documented fact, really. Your average working joe in third world countries cannot even afford to follow test cricket. Regardless of any stylistic reasons, it just isn't practical - takes up too much time. Investing thirty hours of your life for a game which isn't even guranteed to have a closure? Screw that. Specially when there is an alternative available; a faster, more cost and time effective mode of cricket. You need to open your eyes to the fact that test cricket is an acquired taste and there is nothing innately superior about it.

 

[Tom Halsey]

I saw his expression when they flashed his bowling record on the scoreboard and the crowd laughed at him. I felt so sorry for the guy. It's all well and good to laugh at him and whatnot, but most of us couldn't do any better than he did and has done and we should think about how it must have felt to be on the cricket field at a moment like that. Think that this is probably his childhood dream - to play for Australia. Whether or not he's good enough, he tried and for whatever reason, he failed.

Must've been the loneliest place on earth at that time.

I've played a couple games where I got belted and I really do feel for him.

I have to say I don't think there was any need to flash up the fact that Lewis has the worst bowling figures ever.

 

[Goughy]

Your average working joe in third world countries cannot even afford to follow test cricket. Regardless of any stylistic reasons, it just isn't practical - takes up too much time. Investing thirty hours of your life for a game which isn't even guranteed to have a closure? Screw that. Specially when there is an alternative available; a faster, more cost and time effective mode of cricket. You need to open your eyes to the fact that test cricket is an acquired taste and there is nothing innately superior about it.

If I'm a snob you are Philistine but I really don't want to get into name calling. I think you might be better at it.

I must admit I don't really lie awake at night thinking about the socio-economic factors behind the popularity of ODIs in the 3rd world.

I generally view cricket through a player's eyes rather than a time-challenged fan.

I accept that you know more about the popularity of the different forms of the game in that part of the world, but from a players point of view Test cricket is far more important.

And I must admit if people call themselves big cricket fans yet say "screw that" to test cricket because it take time then I really don't have much time for them.

 

[Goughy]

The 2005 Ashes was an aberration. There is nothing in the recent history of test cricket that rivals it. Pakistan tours England this summer. I'll suprised if that tour gets one quarter of the attention the Ashes got. Rarely do you see an ODI which isn't sold out. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the tests. And we are talking about the English here, who along with the aussies are the leading test-goers in the world.

In Pakistan, during the winter season (six tests), 70 percent of the tickets for all matches were free yet I only remember 3 days when the houses were anywhere close to being packed. For the ODI in Multan, you couldn't buy a ticket in black for twice the original price on the match's eve.

Actually most days of test cricket are generally sold out in England but thats not my point here.

ODIs are entertainment and for that they are popular. However, just because something is popular doesn't mean it has depth, meaning or significance.

Look at the popularity of Kelly Clarkson, Backstreet Boys, Girls Aloud. Pop Music so called because its popular. Does that mean they are more important musically than bands with depth and purpose.

Robert Ludlam, Wilbur Smith sell boatloads of books. Why because they are entertaing not because they hold literary merit. I mean I read the Sharpe books but just because I enjoy them does't mean I don't know that they are just exciting page turners full of improbable acts and little real significance.

American Idol got 3 times the viewers the Winter Olympics did. Watching people embarass themselves in auditions and seeing people compete that you wouldn't walk down the street to listen to is more popular than watching a countryman/woman winning Olympic gold.

Eastenders in the UK will always get more viewers than anything the History or Discovery channels put on. Why? because people want lighthearted entertainment. It doesn't mean there is anything important going on.

ODIs are entertainment. Like the music, books and TV shows listed above people enjoy them and as they are popular they are given a constant stream of more because it is profitable.

There is nothing wrong with this at all. I watch and enjoy American Idol, I just take it for what it is (pure entertainment) rather than attached undeserved credit for being a powerful, and important part of TV history.

Popularity = Profit not meaning or significance.

I never said ODIs were not entertaing, I said they were meaningless. They are as meaningfull as a Kelly Clarkson CD or a Bernard Cornwell book.

Im ready and warmed-up for all you Kelly Clarkson fans to bring it on and argue that she is the most significant artist since Marvin Gay.

 

[Langeveldt]

But why are the ODI games only meaningless when SA win them? Im thinking SA beating England and the recent win over Aussie..

I don't see West Indies's champions trophy win from nowhere being branded as meaningless, or India's win in the NatWest challenge being branded as meaningless, not to mention Geraint Jones's knock against Australia last summer.. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right places.

 

[Beleg]

If I'm a snob you are Philistine but I really don't want to get into name calling. I think you might be better at it.

Uh-huh. Like I said, spade a spade... I don't take potshots. Your posts fit the defination of a snob to the T.

I must admit I don't really lie awake at night thinking about the socio-economic factors behind the popularity of ODIs in the 3rd world.

Then perhaps you should refrain from talking about things you apparantly have no idea of.

I generally view cricket through a player's eyes rather than a time-challenged fan.

Sometimes it pays to keep things in prespective.

I accept that you know more about the popularity of the different forms of the game in that part of the world, but from a players point of view Test cricket is far more important.

I am glad you are able to speak on behalf of all the 'players' of the world.

And I must admit if people call themselves big cricket fans yet say "screw that" to test cricket because it take time then I really don't have much time for them.

Your failure to acknowledge the truth when it is staring you in your face is very telling.
I have laid down my points in front of you. You have been unable to come up with an on-topic response, turning to mindless rhetoric instead. The above statement is a classic example of why we use the phrase 'lack of prespective.'