The outcry against Twenty20 by the protogonists of Tests is rather foolish. There is a need to change the mind set of the cricket players as well as the cricket administrators. In olimpics started initially for Marathon in mind we have now a dozens of events right down to 100 meter sprints. All have their own importance. No marathon racer has ever complained against the sprinters. This is simply because there are different sets of atheletes for each segment. Same is needed for the cricket setup. If the teams are totally different for each type than there woul be no problem. Totally means not only the players but coach & captain also. This way you can have more events without injuries to the players. Oldies should cannot give their opinion for tweny20 as it is beyond them. Shorter version is going to stay with more &more popularity till the audience likes. Come what may. It is the longer version which has to think of changing their opinion & attitude. Their survival depends only if they do not oppose shorter version. So it is in the interest of the cricket as awhole not to oppose any version of the game. There should be no comparison . whatsoever, like in other games.
After having bribed his way into the Indian dressing room and destroyed India's 2007 Cup campaign by first ousting the real Transformer - Sourav Ganguly.
Just think of it - cricket was a gentleman's game - it used to be said - it's not fair, it's not cricket.
And here we have the Aussies, who, in their desire to beat the Windies's World cup record of two successive cup wins, got three, by removing the main threat - India by DIVIDE AND RULE!!
If a team preapres for World Cup win like a war against another country, with spies, pawns and divide-and-rule those people in that country clearly deserves to be given war, not cricket.
Now they have an survivak battle against IPL and Twenty20. It is just too good to watch the Aussies fumble.
They have not left it a game any more. It is for them a war, and to be fought by any means. The Aussie public, supposedly sporting, is now quite the opposite. It is diabolically, devilishly satisfying to imagine what they must be feeling.
Aussies deserved wins till Warne and McGrath were in the team. Once they messed around with World Cup, Aussies deserved to be banned from cricket.
Re: It is a good thing that Greg Chappell is quiet
by Against Pseudos on Jul 21, 2009 10:49 AM
DN:
;-).... and maybe it was Kirsten who was instrumental in getting us similarly kicked out of the T20 World Cup this year?.... :)
Then it will be somebody else.... and then somebody else altogether.... :)
If I pause to make a list of why Indians are not so successful in world cricket, I'll probably come up with a long list containing Miandad, Bucknor, Lara, Imran, Chappell, Waugh, Kirsten, Reid, etc. etc. etc... But not a single Indian player will have been responsible for India's defeat.... ever... :) Happy to note that Chappell was responsible for India NOT winning a world cup since 1983.... ;-) Wonder why he let us win in 1983 at all, either?.... :)
1. Make result oriented pitches. 2. Award the curators when the match ends with a result of win. 3. Award runs for the opposite team for slower over-rates. Let's say 5 runs for each over that is not bowled. 4. Replace the outfields like it is in Aus/Eng. The outfields in the sub-continent are very fast and it makes the matches uninteresting. The outfields in Aus/Eng are good and we can see batsman running for three very often which will be good to watch.
Re: Points to improve Tests
by YoBro on Jul 20, 2009 07:49 PM
good points.. and you forgot to mention most important! 5) Reduce ticket costs and give away many free tickets to people who buy some (as well as randomly to people who apply for it). Finally make entry, stay easy and more entertainment for visitors in stadium. 6) Advertise it as the best and most pristine form of the game!
Best cricket is Test Cricket. Though I am young I hate 20-20 because there is nothing in for a bowler and batsman are hardly challenged.
Test cricket is loosing its way in India because of BCCI-ICC Nexus. They don't want to have many tests as it does not generate the kind of revenues associated with 20-20 and One day format.
Test Matches in India:
The first day itself is sufficient to drive away all people out of the stadium.
Pitches are so wantedly being created bland that players like Don Bradman, Sunny Gavaskar, Chappel could have batted the entire of 5days.
C'mn they should be something for bowlers..Test wickets should be bowlers Paradise and its for batsman to come out of all odds.
Definitely a good wicket more favorable to the bowler (Spin or Pace) will make test cricket interesting, result oriented and profitable.
Instead of 20-20 test matches why not think of a restricted maximum 90 overs first innings and an unrestricted number of overs of second innings, test match? this will remove boredom and will have results. i think this is the real future for test matches.
