Holding is correct. The true cricketing skills of a player do not become evident in the T20 format. It is well suited for part time cricketers who only need slogging skills and not cricketing skills.
Re: correct and well said
by Indian on May 20, 2010 06:44 PM
was ashwin shane warne murlitharan Harbhajan Amit mishra Sohail Tanveer bowling not cricketing skill Was Batting of Sachin Robin utthapa kevin peiterson etc not skill?
In t20 u r not allowed to play defensive for long. That is the major difference
Re: Re: correct and well said
by Prashanth Sathyamurthy on May 20, 2010 07:23 PM
I agree that good cricketers remain excellent no matter what is the format. But players who are average in a 50 over game (especially those who can slog here and there)too can shine. You cannot distinguish a good cricketer and an average cricketer in T20. This the point my friend..
Re: Re: correct and well said
by Tirthankar Ghosh on May 20, 2010 06:56 PM
Well...it is like...if you have the right skills, you can play T20 inspite of being a great cricketer. But it is not necessary to be a good cricketer to perform in T20. A good danda-guli player can do that.
Re: correct and well said
by Prasad Vemparala on May 20, 2010 07:03 PM
What is cricketing skill?T-20 is going replace 50 oovers matches. People are impatient to watch long matches. Soon you may find 10 over match also.
One good suggestion/idea is- Play test cricket in the form of T20-25 overs a side-2 innings-1 day. There wil be entertainment as well as we can see some gud cricket. Open for ur comments!!
Pollard is fine. tell me who else r not cricketers..in his view..then Yusuf patan is also not,David warner also not-which is true. Coming to T20-its definitely not a showcase of real talent, only players who play on that day shine. One good suggestion/idea is- Play test cricket in the form of T20-25 overs a side-2 innings-1 day. There wil be entertainment as well as we can see some gud cricket. Open for ur comments!!
Holding hold on - we have been watching game since 1976- we have seen your era ... lilie, albert.. marshal , richards.. today we are seing pollard, hussey, yousaf pathan.. boss there is no comparison in class but what to do , we cant change , watch and enjoy.. moreover what you made in whole career pollard is making in one match- think ahead!
in fact T20 brings in an element of team spirit as often only two or three may click in any one game. where as an in test everyone plays for himself taking more than 5 days and making it a draw. the same reflxes need to decide fast whether to defend or attack a ball. it is often attack and one loses wicket.so have to rely on the others to save the match
What Holding says is right considering the era he is from. Cricketers from that era have not played 20/20 and may dislike it. However, you cannot deny the fact that anything which needs to be done to keep the game of cricket alive is correct and cannot be wrong. Every thing needs a change and if change does not come teh thing is lost. T/20 is necessary to keep people's interest in the game and spread the popularity of the game.
If IPL or T20 was there at his time then there would not be any complaint by him. He didnt earned anything from T20 or IPL . so Now complaining . Sour grapes for him
One way - what he says is correct. This is not classic cricket but in today's world - people only need fun. Now, nobody has even time to sit for whole day and see 7-hour one day. They prefer T20 which finishes in 3 hours like a movie. Now, we can see even movies are becoming smaller and you will get only 2-hour movies - so that next T15.
Re: classic cricket and fun
by Shikari on May 20, 2010 06:16 PM
Why only T20 why not 6 a side. Where ieach side gets six balls to play. real instant cricket. The whole tournament can be held in 3 hours. Why waste a whole month.
