<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Pyrahtechnics
(Login Pyrahtechnics)

Re: T20 from 2020

February 18 2017, 12:41 AM 

Two small problems with using artifical wickets - players can't wear spikes without ripping up the surface and fielders not wearing spikes are at risk of picking up an injury if they running on a damp outfield.

Bowlers changing footwear every over is not an option due to the combined time consumption it takes.

 
 
Guest
(Login BrickyardBoy)

Re: T20 from 2020

February 18 2017, 11:36 AM 

Stu

You ask the question:

"Next it will be 40 yd boundaries. Why not do away with bowlers completely, just pick 11 batsmen, have bowling machines set for the same speed every ball and competitions to see who can hit the ball the furthest."

The answer, surely, is that were such a blatant mutation to be adopted, the truth, that this is not cricket, would be revealed. The fiction could not be maintained and the reality would be evident to all. Therefore, it would not be marketable as cricket. Only when the last memory, that cricket at its best is a true contest between bat and ball, has been lost, will the machines take over. But ultimately, they will, I fear. Technological advance has something of a history of consigning crafts and guilds to the darker recesses of history. It is usually described as being progress, when in fact it means slavery for the masses and great wealth for the few.

It takes us back to the Brian Close view in the late 1960's and early 1970's, which was that limited overs cricket would develop into something so far removed from the real thing that it would be unrecognisable and (in his opinion) not worth playing. I agreed with him then and I do so, more vehemently, now. The longer forms (60/50 overs) can be good cricket. T20 slogging, is, for me, not.

Of course, Brian Sellers had different ideas and sacked Close who went off to captain Somerset and be recalled to captain England in a ODI.

Yes, it generates money and some players and many ex-player/commentators become very rich on it, but it is not worth watching. Economic activity (work) sustains life, but it is not what I want to do with my leisure time.

The age-old dilemma returns. How do you value yourself? By what you are, or by what you have?


    
This message has been edited by BrickyardBoy on Feb 18, 2017 11:47 AM


 
 
James
(Login ElTwis)

Re: T20 from 2020

February 21 2017, 1:19 PM 

I'm all for anything that increases the reach of cricket. There's a lot of snobbery around about t20 but we need to face facts, the vast majority ofpeople don't want to see 4 or 5 day games except at an international level. The county championship is necessary to feed into the test team but without the money generated through domestic t20 it would simply stop existing.

Astroturf/drop in pitches/playing in football grounds, do whatever is necessary to get people watching the game in some form then work on moving that interest into longer formats. Otherwise crickets future is bleak.

 
 
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk