Opinions on The Super Series

[honestbharani]

I see the whole thrill of international cricket as pitting one nation against another, and all the patriotism and honour that goes with representing your nation.. Who would get hyped up for playing in this super series? Its such a selfish form of cricket, playing for a faceless, pointless team just for money or to further your own personal cause.. I guess cricket has had such a brilliant brilliant summer, the ICC needed to force its mediocrity and sheer stupidity back on the game we all love..

All we need now is a "Microsoft lefties v righties Twenty20 challenge.com"

The Rest of the World is not faceless. The idea was done because Australia were so dominant that they felt only a team comprising of the best players from the rest of the world could beat them. I agree that has been shaken up somewhat by the Ashes. Ideally, had this happened at the same time last year, it would be have been even better, but I still think this would be a great series. Australia are still the best and RoW does comprise of most of the best players outside Australia.

 

[archie mac]

I think those matches should be given international status as well. International players taking on each other in a competitive match = an international match. I don't see what the fuss is all about.

The reason they were not given Test Match status, was because it was not a country V country, which is what a Test match should be. Just to justify this silly once off game, they have decided to call it a Test match. Call it a first class game by all means, but not a Test match, they have all ready been watered down by sub standard Test sides.

 

[Jono]

Why don't you go by yourself?

Costs were coming up to almost $1500 (If the test went for 6 days)

 

[Jono]

During the Tsunami match, there was money to be given for runs, sixes, fours etc. Even Steve Waugh suggested that the bowlers should throw it up a little bit so as to make as much money as they can for the great cause. It won't be the same here. You certainly won't see Murali throw them up because his record is at stake and there is no good money for every six or four that is hit and there certainly isn't a great cause as there was during that Tsunami appeal match.

Ah yes but you see honestbharani, to Richard its must more important that we don't get 300+ run slogfests rather than to earn as much charity as possible. How dare the game be such a farce, no matter what good intentions were evident.

Despite this "slogfest" I was at the Tsunami match and the atmosphere was electric and seeing all the stars out there was amazing. I remember the ovation after the minute silence for the Tsunami victims. The game was played in an excellent spirit, and Steve Waugh and Tendulkar fielding despite one being retired and the other not fit for the match was great to see and the fans loved it.

 

[Langeveldt]

The Rest of the World is not faceless. The idea was done because Australia were so dominant that they felt only a team comprising of the best players from the rest of the world could beat them. I agree that has been shaken up somewhat by the Ashes. Ideally, had this happened at the same time last year, it would be have been even better, but I still think this would be a great series. Australia are still the best and RoW does comprise of most of the best players outside Australia.

But how do you motivate yourself to play for the R.O.W?

There's no colonial revenge, tradition, pride, cameraderie anything.. Its selfish cricket where the only thing to play for is your batting average.. It's a shame the statisticians don't invent a "meaningless pocket liner" column for their player stats, and shove Twenty20 in there too..

 

[honestbharani]

The reason they were not given Test Match status, was because it was not a country V country, which is what a Test match should be. Just to justify this silly once off game, they have decided to call it a Test match. Call it a first class game by all means, but not a Test match, they have all ready been watered down by sub standard Test sides.

There is no real written rule that only a country V country should be an international match. For my money, any match with the top international stars playing against each other is an international match, for making it any lesser would dampen their spirit of competition and we might end up seeing balls being thrown up for easy 100s because "the crowds want to see runs, not wickets".

 

[honestbharani]

Costs were coming up to almost $1500 (If the test went for 6 days)

ahh. tough luck, man.

 

[honestbharani]

But how do you motivate yourself to play for the R.O.W?

There's no colonial revenge, tradition, pride, cameraderie anything.. Its selfish cricket where the only thing to play for is your batting average.. It's a shame the statisticians don't invent a "meaningless pocket liner" column for their player stats, and shove Twenty20 in there too..

Pollock mentioned the fact that being able to beat Australia in Australia is not something that most of these guys have had a chance of doing, so that will be good motivation in itself.

 

[Slow Love™]

Was that deliberate? Because if it is, it is a fantastic description

Yes. Yes, it was.

(Nope. .)

 

[Slow Love™]

But how do you motivate yourself to play for the R.O.W?

There's no colonial revenge, tradition, pride, cameraderie anything.. Its selfish cricket where the only thing to play for is your batting average.. It's a shame the statisticians don't invent a "meaningless pocket liner" column for their player stats, and shove Twenty20 in there too..

Hmm... I have enough of a hangup about nationalism for that not to be a massive, overriding factor in my interest in cricket (and pride in my country tends to exist more at some times than others - but I acknowledge that there's certainly nothing wrong with loving your country in of itself.). I support Australia 'cause I have the best chance of seeing the players as often as is possible and because it's a local interest - for example, I support Hawthorn in the AFL, but I can't say it's because Hawthorn as a city is such a wonderful place in comparison to say, Carlton, Brisbane or North Melbourne. But I was born nearby, and I do stick with them through poor times.

I'm sure there's better things to play for than colonial revenge though.

I think there's quite a lot of pride in being chosen to represent a ROW XI, and it could well become a regular tradition - I think there's plenty to play for in terms of competition and in terms of honor. As to camaderie, I don't really know, but representing your country doesn't guarantee that either - look at India.

 

[archie mac]

There is no real written rule that only a country V country should be an international match. For my money, any match with the top international stars playing against each other is an international match, for making it any lesser would dampen their spirit of competition and we might end up seeing balls being thrown up for easy 100s because "the crowds want to see runs, not wickets".

They would still be playing a FC match, and they did not play for fun in those earlier series, which were not Test Matches. Australia will not take this match lightly, Test Match or not, so I don't think it would turn into a joke match, but I hope it does so we don't see its like again, and that would really make Test Cricket a joke.

 

[thierry henry]

tbh I think most fans and administrators honestly thought that this would be a good idea, not just a money-grubbing exercise. Australia were so dominant (not in every single match of course, but overall) that it seemed at one point like everyone was crying out for a team that could take them on and match them, and hence the Super Series was devised. The Australian team at this point seemed so invincible that the SS actually appeared as though it was going to be a match between two quite even teams.

I know this is a debatable point, but as I see it, Australia has only lost 1 series, away from home, and, for the time being, they are still the #1 team in the world by a fair margin. Hence, I still think this shapes up as an exciting series. However, it's unfortunate in that while a year ago this series seemed like a desperately needed break from predictable Australian dominance, it now seems like a contrived series that they are just squeezing in at the last possible moment before the Australian team totally loses its dominant status.

 

[honestbharani]

They would still be playing a FC match, and they did not play for fun in those earlier series, which were not Test Matches. Australia will not take this match lightly, Test Match or not, so I don't think it would turn into a joke match, but I hope it does so we don't see its like again, and that would really make Test Cricket a joke.

Why would it turn test cricket into a joke? Great players playing against each other will always provide good quality of cricket. I don't watch cricket just because of my nation. Sure, I want India to do well, but I also want to watch good players play good cricket, no matter what team they are representing. And honestly, why is "Rest of the World" not a team? If the SS happens once in every four years and becomes reasonably regular, they will become a team too. And it is not always that you get to see the best players from different nations play together as a team. If you think test cricket should only be nation V nation, would you ban the Windies?

 

[archie mac]

Why would it turn test cricket into a joke? Great players playing against each other will always provide good quality of cricket. I don't watch cricket just because of my nation. Sure, I want India to do well, but I also want to watch good players play good cricket, no matter what team they are representing. And honestly, why is "Rest of the World" not a team? If the SS happens once in every four years and becomes reasonably regular, they will become a team too. And it is not always that you get to see the best players from different nations play together as a team. If you think test cricket should only be nation V nation, would you ban the Windies?

I think you have me there But no, I would not because of the history of the WI in Test Cricket. I don't even mind them playing the game, but not with Test status. I think we might be going around in circles.

 

[Richard]

IDK why those matches weren't given official status, but IMO, if the match is a competitive one between international class players, it should be given official status. Trust me, these super series match will be better off for it.

Nope, it all depends on a number of things - IMO Test and ODI cricket are to be played between teams reprisenting the boards of the international sides.
The WSC matches were not officially sanctioned, they were a result of one mhogle deciding to buy the players for himself and, as I say, that's like saying that because some rich landlord decided to pay a load of World-class players to play a few games on his personal ground these matches should be classed ODIs.

 

[Richard]

During the Tsunami match, there was money to be given for runs, sixes, fours etc. Even Steve Waugh suggested that the bowlers should throw it up a little bit so as to make as much money as they can for the great cause. It won't be the same here. You certainly won't see Murali throw them up because his record is at stake and there is no good money for every six or four that is hit and there certainly isn't a great cause as there was during that Tsunami appeal match.

I'm sure it won't be quite as bad as the Tsunami match, but that was precisely the reason the Tsunami match shouldn't have been a ODI. Personal performance wasn't the most important thing - it didn't matter who did well or who won. All that mattered was money raised for the cause.
And as a result I'd lance the game from all official records if I were to be given the chance.

 

[Richard]

Ah yes but you see honestbharani, to Richard its must more important that we don't get 300+ run slogfests rather than to earn as much charity as possible. How dare the game be such a farce, no matter what good intentions were evident.

And I said all that where? All I said was that such a blatantly contrived game should not have anything official about it at all.

Despite this "slogfest" I was at the Tsunami match and the atmosphere was electric and seeing all the stars out there was amazing. I remember the ovation after the minute silence for the Tsunami victims. The game was played in an excellent spirit, and Steve Waugh and Tendulkar fielding despite one being retired and the other not fit for the match was great to see and the fans loved it.

And none of this changes the fact that the game was not what a ODI should be.

 

[Richard]

And honestly, why is "Rest of the World" not a team?

For me, no "Rest Of" can ever truly be a worthwhile team.
It will always be a result of contrived matchmaking - "not from there against from there". And no "Rest Of" match should ever have Test-match status. First-Class cricket is different, as it's not always played by regular teams and First-Class cricket, with the odd exception (such as WSC), should just be played on status.

 

[Richard]

There is no real written rule that only a country V country should be an international match.

No written rule, sure - often the unwritten rules are the more prominent. Ever seen a written school rule: "no pupil shall throw chairs at teachers"? Or many other similar things? No, they're just so obvious they don't need writing-down.

For my money, any match with the top international stars playing against each other is an international match, for making it any lesser would dampen their spirit of competition and we might end up seeing balls being thrown up for easy 100s because "the crowds want to see runs, not wickets".

And that's precisely the point - if the players aren't motivated enough to take it seriously, we shouldn't just use top-status to force them to do so.
If they treat it seriously enough, all well and good. If they don't, it wasn't worthy of being an international ITFP.

 

[Swervy]

And as a result I'd lance the game from all official records if I were to be given the chance.

well we all know what you would do with the records if you had a chance...a disregard for the times Vaas has been bad, when Harmison has been good, and first chance averages being more important than true averages..

leave it to the experts Richard