Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[dhruvdeepak]

http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1761747.cms

NEW DELHI, July 16:  Yielding to ICC pressure, the Indian Cricket Board on Sunday decided to introduce Twenty-20 cricket in the domestic circuit from the coming season.

The BCCI, which had so far constantly opposed the instant version of the game, also decided to participate in the inaugural World Championship in South Africa next year.

"We were outvoted 10-1 at the ICC meeting (in Dubai) earlier this year. Except us, every member was in favour of having the 20-20 world championship," BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah told reporters after a working committee meeting here.

"So we had no other go but to embrace this format of the game," Shah said while explaining the change in Board's approach to the version.

The BCCI had maintained that there was no need for India to play 20-20 cricket, which it said was invented in England because the traditional first-class and one-day games there were failing to attract crowds.

The domestic 20-20 championship is expected to be held in April-May, 2007, although the exact schedule is yet to be worked out, BCCI treasurer N Srinivasan said.

That will make it a crowded calendar as the World Cup of the traditional limited overs game in the West Indies is to be held in March-April, 2007, and the first ever 20-20 World Championship in South Africa in probably May-June.

"Our plan is to have one domestic tournament every year," Srinivasan said.

The senior members of the Indian team were also likely to play in the domestic event.

The ICC announced after its executive board meeting in March this year that beginning from 2007 to 2015, the Twenty20 World Championship would be held on an annual basis.

The BCCI was forced to agree to the members' decision as it had voted in favour of such a proposal at an earlier meeting in Sydney in 2005.

But India's financial muscle had enabled them to get an exemption from playing in the inaugural event in 2007. India, however, were supposed to field a team from the 2008 event in Pakistan onwards.

"Since we are anyway participating in the format, we decided to play in 2007 also," Shah said on Sunday's decision.

Indian captain Rahul Dravid said a few days ago that India should embrace the new format.

"We don't have a domestic competition and I think it (20-20) has a place in domestic cricket," Dravid had said.

[dhruvdeepak]

http://cricket.expressindia.com/fulleistory.php?source=cn&content_id=71160

New Delhi, July 16:
Yielding to ICC pressure, the Indian Cricket Board decided to introduce 20-20 cricket in the domestic circuit from the coming season.

The BCCI, which had so far constantly opposed the instant version of the game, also decided to participate in the inaugural World Championship in South Africa next year.

"We were outvoted 10-1 at the ICC meeting (in Dubai) earlier this year. Except us, every member was in favour of having the 20-20 world championship," BCCI Secretary Niranjan Shah said after a Working Committee meeting here.

"So we had no other go but to embrace this format of the game," Shah said while explaining the change in Board's approach to the version.

The BCCI had maintained that there was no need for India to play 20-20 cricket, which it said was invented in England because the traditional first-class and one-day games there were failing to attract crowds.

The domestic 20-20 championship is expected to be held in April-May, 2007, although the exact schedule is yet to be worked out, BCCI Treasurer N Srinivasan said.

That will make it a crowded calendar as the World Cup of the traditional limited overs game in the West Indies is to be held in March-April, 2007, and the first ever 20-20 World Championship in South Africa in probably May-June.

"Our plan is to have one domestic tournament every year," Srinivasan said.

The senior members of the Indian team were also likely to play in the domestic event.

[dhruvdeepak]

i somehow think this is going to work out well. kill me for supporting the ICC on this,  but having a 20-20 'world series' every year will be great. every Test nation will soon have a domestic 20-20 tournament. As long as this is it (and a 20-20 match every tour between two teams), there should be no worries of overdoing the 20-20 thing. i wouldnt mind less odis in order to make time for this 20-20 schedule as it is.

my suggestion is for the international 20-20 world cup tournament to evolve instead into a battle of domestic teams across the world, uefa style. That would be a better advertisement of the game IMHO. have a standardized scoring system across all the 20-20 domestic tournaments and let the best, say, 20 teams battle it out in a world cup format.

Pros:
-Domestic players will get to travel abroad and gain experience, interacting with foreign cricketers and learn from them. International players turning out for their domestic teams can help the domestic players in the same way

-Televising of domestic games generates interest for the game. This particular format tends to bring in the crowds and is a perfect fit for the young generation, for the working class who want to take in a game in the evening and for those who havent a clue about the game (they will get hooked on - i have seen this happen with my own eyes). People will want to see domestic cricket again

-Allotting some time out from international cricket adds a dimension to the sport, i feel. There is a different attachment to a domestic team for a fan, compared to supporting your country. Never in cricket has this been exploited. Fan loyalties can be more diverse and this in turn can lead to some sort of franchising model (another area that has not been explored in cricket). Every other sport in the world does it, and does it successfully. I dont know why cricket cant be the same

Cons:
Over to you guys

[fineleg]

Cons:
20-20 is not really cricket - imo. Will prob end up watching it, but i'm skeptical if we will "enjoy" it.

[pieterSAN]

What I like about 20-20.

- Making it a part of the domestic calendar will mean that there will more big hitters and exciting players to choose from for one-day cricket. There is a better chance of finding finishers.

- Greater entertainment for the less discerning viwer

What I don't like about 20-20.

- One-day cricket has meant that players have evolved from 30-40 years ago. Apart from  a 2-3 batsmen around the world there are very few that can boast of the technique and application that players had back in the day. 20-20 will only magnify this effect. We will have more players with stand-and-deliver technique. Players will be less likely to take their defense seriously.

- It would also mean that bowlers think differently. At one time, bowlers were what won you matches and tried to pick up wickets. This is going to encourage bowlers to develop the skills that make economical. How many will aspire to be wicket-taking bowlers?

- It's degrading. There was a time that hitting a six or a four was impressive. Now the grounds are getting smaller and pitches are getting better and bowlers are turning into side-attractions. By extension, I don't want to see a 20-20 World Series every year. It's a lottery if there ever was one.

Slightly off-topic - I would love to see more transfers between domestic teams from different countries and a Champions League tournament. It would be nice to have this for one-day cricket, though.

[ramshorns]

Cons:
20-20 is not really cricket - imo. Will prob end up watching it, but i'm skeptical if we will "enjoy" it.

The one highlighted in bold is the biggest con.

Agree 20-20 is not cricket.  It is the stupidest thing ushered on a cricketing fan since the games inception.  One more easy way for ICC to milk the money from the stupid fans i.e. us. 

What next???Bunch of 8 year olds tossing the cricket balls to the likes of Dhoni and see how far he can hit.  Sure that will be excting as well. 

20-20 give me a break.......

[suraj]

http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1761747.cms

NEW DELHI, July 16:  Yielding to ICC pressure, the Indian Cricket Board on Sunday decided to introduce Twenty-20 cricket in the domestic circuit from the coming season.

The BCCI, which had so far constantly opposed the instant version of the game, also decided to participate in the inaugural World Championship in South Africa next year.

"We were outvoted 10-1 at the ICC meeting (in Dubai) earlier this year. Except us, every member was in favour of having the 20-20 world championship," BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah told reporters after a working committee meeting here.

"So we had no other go but to embrace this format of the game," Shah said while explaining the change in Board's approach to the version.

The BCCI had maintained that there was no need for India to play 20-20 cricket, which it said was invented in England because the traditional first-class and one-day games there were failing to attract crowds.

The domestic 20-20 championship is expected to be held in April-May, 2007, although the exact schedule is yet to be worked out, BCCI treasurer N Srinivasan said.

That will make it a crowded calendar as the World Cup of the traditional limited overs game in the West Indies is to be held in March-April, 2007, and the first ever 20-20 World Championship in South Africa in probably May-June.

"Our plan is to have one domestic tournament every year," Srinivasan said.

The senior members of the Indian team were also likely to play in the domestic event.

The ICC announced after its executive board meeting in March this year that beginning from 2007 to 2015, the Twenty20 World Championship would be held on an annual basis.

The BCCI was forced to agree to the members' decision as it had voted in favour of such a proposal at an earlier meeting in Sydney in 2005.

But India's financial muscle had enabled them to get an exemption from playing in the inaugural event in 2007. India, however, were supposed to field a team from the 2008 event in Pakistan onwards.

"Since we are anyway participating in the format, we decided to play in 2007 also," Shah said on Sunday's decision.

Indian captain Rahul Dravid said a few days ago that India should embrace the new format.

"We don't have a domestic competition and I think it (20-20) has a place in domestic cricket," Dravid had said.

Yeh toh ek din hona hi tha BCCI
Tum isse bach nahi sakte the

Jist tarah tumne ICC ko blackmail kiya hai
Usi tarah ek din ICC tumhare against united hoga
Jis tarah tumne ICC ke schedule ko ignore kiya
Usi tarah ek din ICC tumhe 20-20 adopt karne pe majboor karega

Yehi hota aaya hai BCCI yehi hoga...

If fineleg gets this one TL degree shd be awarded......

[Cover Point]

What next???Bunch of 8 year olds tossing the cricket balls to the likes of Dhoni and see how far he can hit.  Sure that will be excting as well. 

err Home Run Derby anyone? I can see that become popular.

We present this year's Surf Max Power World Six Hitting contest.

From India... 6 feet 2 inches of Raw power, Your own .maaaaahiiiiiiiiii Dhoooooooneeeeeeeeeee!

From Pakistan... The New Pathan... the thundering, the murdering .... Shaaaaaaahid Afreeeeeeeeedeeeeeee!

From Pommie Land... He has travelled from the southern reaches of Africa all the way to be a pom!... The traitor, the Punk, the handsome.... K ..e..v ..i..n  Peeeeeterrrrson!

etc etc

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

Cons:
20-20 is not really cricket - imo. Will prob end up watching it, but i'm skeptical if we will "enjoy" it.

The one highlighted in bold is the biggest con.

Agree 20-20 is not cricket.  It is the stupidest thing ushered on a cricketing fan since the games inception.  One more easy way for ICC to milk the money from the stupid fans i.e. us. 

What next???Bunch of 8 year olds tossing the cricket balls to the likes of Dhoni and see how far he can hit.  Sure that will be excting as well. 

20-20 give me a break.......

dont usually agree with you but i agree with you on this comment of yours, applause

[psk213]

Cons:
20-20 is not really cricket - imo. Will prob end up watching it, but i'm skeptical if we will "enjoy" it.

The one highlighted in bold is the biggest con.

Agree 20-20 is not cricket.  It is the stupidest thing ushered on a cricketing fan since the games inception.  One more easy way for ICC to milk the money from the stupid fans i.e. us. 

What next???Bunch of 8 year olds tossing the cricket balls to the likes of Dhoni and see how far he can hit.  Sure that will be excting as well. 

20-20 give me a break.......

Completely agree with Rams here. To me this is nothing but an extended net session making people pay to watch batsmen play without any accountibility. I understand that there will be some new and innovative shots created, but it is not only important that you can play a shot but also to know when to play it. in other words shot selection is just as important as the ability to play a shot. You go to net sessions and you will see many a player very fluently executing shots, primarily because there is no pressure, nothing is riding on their batting, just to see them come a cropper in the real game.

A five day game and to an extent a ODI tests the ability of the batsmen to build an inning, know when to shut it down, when to accelerate etc. Just as I am interested in Dhoni hitting four sixes in an over, I also love to watch a Wasim Akram bowling a maiden over moving the ball either ways, or a McGrath probing the offstump corridor etc. These are the battles that one remembers over time and not a cross-batted swipe that results in a six behind the wicket keeper. 

[fineleg]

I guess we can safely conclude *most* Indian fans dont 'need' 20-20 and BCCI recognized that.
But they are forced to go that route now.

[natty]

I think 20-20 wont be the end of the experimentation.. The point is to evolve a new format that can be finished in 3 hours +

In 10 years time, this format (whatever evolves from 20-20) would probably account for at least 50% of international cricket. Maybe the pitches might become different, number of at bats allowed reduced (from 10 to say 7 and maybe 2 innings per side of 15 overs each which makes it 30-30).  Who knows what else?  The only constant will be the time factor (around 3 hours).. Another consideration is that cricket, like american football, is good for TV ads (over breaks)..  So there will be plenty of time for ads (unlike soccer).   

[dhruvdeepak]

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1042298

'If one-dayer is pyjama cricket, Twenty20 is underwear cricket'


This is underwear cricket

According to former India cricketer Navjot Singh Sidhu, Twenty20 will definitely lead to a fall in skill quotient.

If one-day cricket was pyjama cricket, then Twenty20 is underwear cricket. You have to remember that there can be no fruit without root. Test cricket will remain the standard bearer for the sport. Twenty-20 can be a good advertisement for the sport and can be used to lure new nations into the sport. It is the kind of cricket, that seems attractive to view but to the viewers who are used to seeing high quality cricket, the standards may start to dip. It will never test your true ability. Even ordinary cricketers can succeed, all you have to do is come out and swing your bat. So the skill quotient will definitely drop.

And what does it do for the bowlers? Absolutely nothing. If you go to watch a heavyweight title match bout, it has to be between opponents of similar class or else it is a lop-sided encounter. They have to think of the bowlers too. What will the spinners do? Flight is already a forgotten art. Spin and spinners will be killed. You have bowlers like Chris Gayle and Sanath Jayasuriya, who are capable of firing the ball in, succeeding but what about the rest.

For that matter, what will the pacemen do? From ball One, the batsmen will be out to hammer them. This succeeded in England because no one was interested in watching cricket there. In India, people are already addicted to cricket — why do we even need this here?

This cricket is like a burger, you can have it once a week but for a whole meal you need to return to Test cricket. More than once a week and it will give you a tummy ache. Yes, the music, the carnival-like atmosphere, the cheer leaders make it good fun but I don’t think it can ever take the place of real cricket.

Twenty20 is like a mirage, looks good for afar but come close and it’s all an illusion. I expect it to fade away rather quickly. In the 80s and 90s, double wicket cricket was big and I played in a few tournaments too. Big stars too played it. But where is it now? Twenty20 has to be given in small doses — don’t overdo it.

No room for negativity

Ramesh Powar gives a thumb-up cricket’s latest avtar, citing its benefits for batsmen, spectators and bowlers

It is without doubt an entertaining format, largely designed keeping in mind the needs of the public. Please remember that it is a batsman’s game at the end of the day. People want to see fours and sixes being hit. However, if bowlers go in with a competitive attitude, they will succeed.

Nowadays, 400 plus runs get scored and chased in the one-dayers. The wickets are good. Seven-eight runs per over are scored regularly, so one can’t say that batsmen will dominate only in the twenty20 format.

As a spinner, I don’t think that I will stop flighting the ball. No batsman can hit all the deliveries thrown at him. On the other hand, since the batsman will have to be positive from the word go, the bowler will get every chance to dismiss him. Anybody who plays his cricket ‘positively’ will revel. ‘Negative cricketers’ will have no place here.

A domestic twenty20 tourney might become a success, but it completely depends on how the Board goes about it. All the ‘star cricketers’ have to be a part of it.

One good that will come out of this is that with this attractive package, television coverage will not be a problem, and if the matches are being televised, then an upcoming player has every chance of being noticed early. With the matches being of a short duration, crowds will also come in.

Twenty20’s introduction to Indian cricket is good, but its continuity will be decided after its ‘first year, first show.’

As a player, I feel it will be entertaining and challenging to play this version of the game. I remember having played a Twenty20 game in England five years back. I enjoyed it. You need to be skillfull, a good finisher and a good all-rounder to excel. I think my being an all-rounder would help. I have watched some Twenty20 games on television and I thoroughly enjoyed them.

I don’t think professional cricketers would have any problem in adapting to Twenty20. You might see some unorthodox shots being played, but ultimately, a Sachin or a Rahul Dravid will sparkle in that set-up as well.

[fineleg]

This double wicket cricket that Sidhu talks was there in 80's and 90s ...can anyone throw light? I seem to vaguely remember abt it.

[dhruvdeepak]

This double wicket cricket that Sidhu talks was there in 80's and 90s ...can anyone throw light? I seem to vaguely remember abt it.

yep we used to play it in school to practice teamwork and playing for each other.
you play in teams of two each, get an allotment of overs for each pair, and basically every time you get out, deduct a certain amount of runs from your pair scores.

in dubai, this used to be a craze, but a slightly different concept. there was this place called Insportz which had completely closed nets i.e. closed off rectangular areas. teams of 8, and you bat in pairs, 4 overs each pair (16 over match basically). everyone has to bowl 2 overs and every pair has to bat 4 overs. everytime a wicket falls its -5 runs, but the same pair continues batting till their 4 overs are up. the ball is always 'live' i.e. never dead so you can run at any time. also, the runner didnt stand at the bowling crease, but almost halfway down the pitch. there was a line almost halfway down the pitch which served two purposes: one for the runners' crease and the other to divide the net into scoring areas. basically if you hit the ball into the net on either offside or legside, on your side of the line, it was 1 run. hit it into the net on the other side of the line and its 2 runs. hit the ball straight and into the net behind the bowler (about 7-8 meters behind the nonstrikers' end stumps) and its 4/6. You can be caught off the net, even when its 6. Oh, and you have to complete a single in order to get the runs. I.e. you cant hit a 6 and just stand there admiring it. You score 7 if you complete a single, or nothing. Same for the other scoring areas.
Absolutely thrilling game, used to play it all the time and represented my school many times too playing it. In fact there was an int'l double wicket championships using the same system of nets and scoring, i have seen it on tv. my PE teacher played for NZ in one of the tournaments.

[dhruvdeepak]

Stanford 20/20 Cup going on live, I'm watching the Anguilla vs Barbados game at the moment. Funny uniforms and black colored bats. decent game (Barb 146, Ang 20-2 at the moment)