<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 23 2017 at 3:45 AM

WRF  (Premier Login AlexRoberts)
Owner

 
T20 is evolving so fast it is radically redefining cricket

"Twenty20 cricket is easy to deride. This is a format invented by a marketing survey. Its surrounding razzmatazz – everything from pitch-side jacuzzis to cheerleaders to all those nicknames, deliberately ludicrous and yet instantly forgettable – has often seemed designed to make spectators forget that they were actually watching cricket." - The Guardian

Article

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Guest
(Login ElTwis)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 23 2017, 7:31 AM 

Really enjoyed that article, worth a read for those who are dismissive of the format as being overly simplistic

 
 
Stu
(Login StuartRA)
Assistant Moderator

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 23 2017, 9:57 AM 

A very interesting article.

 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 23 2017, 11:33 AM 

I love the point made that t20 can revive the specialist keeper because numbers 7 - 11 face so few balls. I firmly believe Hodd should be in our t20 side - it's very easy to imagine Handscomb missing a crucial stumping at a key moment.

 
 
Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 8:13 AM 

Though I understand the natural reaction to try and play a proper keeper. I'm not sure how it can work unless the keeper is a good enough batsman.

If you're hiding a keeper at 7 to 11, hoping they don't have to bat, that will be one less specialist bowler you can play.

 
 
Seadog73
(Login Seadog73)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 8:45 AM 

I reckon those specialist bowlers would rather have a specialist keeper behind the stumps.

 
 
WR_Metcalfe
(Login WR_Metcalfe)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 9:53 AM 

For us to pick Hodd in the current team it would mean dropping a top order batsman such as Leaning/Handscomb/Kohler-Cadmore or dropping the 6th bowler, Coad/Carver/Waite/Fisher. We have been very good in one day cricket this year with 6 bowlers. So is Hodd good enough to bat in the top 6? Which brings us back to the wicketkeeper-batsman conundrum.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 10:03 AM 

Brilliant, a Hoddy fan club. All he had to do was get left out for a match or two.

 
 
Dwight_Schrute
(Login Dwight_Schrute)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 10:24 AM 

Hodd a number 10 or 11 in T20.

Call time on Handscomb and get this Sarfraz deal concluded.

 
 
Steve C
(Login stevecowton)
Assistant Moderator

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 11:34 AM 

First rule of WRF Club:
A players reputation increases in inverse proportion to his number of recent appearances.
The less he plays - the quicker his reputation grows.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 12:08 PM 

Fisher must be a world beater on that basis then!

For what it's worth I think if you play three spinners which is increasingly common in t20 then a decent stumper is a priority.

 
 
PaulYorks
(Login PaulYorks2)

Re: T20 Evolving fast (Guardian)

July 24 2017, 4:47 PM 

I attended the Birmingham vs Leicestershire T20 game a week or so ago, and was surprised by how boring I found it. I quite enjoy T20 on TV, and was not consciously prejudiced against the format. Although there were 9,000 people in, there was little sense of occasion and the action on the field seemed banal, with no dramatic tension. I've been to many 4-day and 50-over games as a 'neutral' over the years, and have always enjoyed them, but this was different. The game is too short to ebb and flow, the difference between success and failure seems random at times, and the skills required to prosper (while impressive) seem often to run counter to the spirit of the game as I understand it (I particularly hate the current vogue for bowling wide yorkers).

I read a fascinating interview with Ashwin last year, in which he said that good balls were no longer good balls, and "a short, wide and sh*t ball could be the best ball to bowl from now on".

I appreciate the complexity and innovation that T20 brings, but agree with the article that "T20 is no adjunct to the longer formats. It is a completely different sport." Alas (for me), a sport that I don't enjoy very much.

 
 
Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Better media management

July 24 2017, 5:11 PM 

At the end of the day the cricket has to be entertaining and it certainly helps if you have some emotional investment in one of the teams. If Yorkshire aren't involved I can usually find some reason to support one team over another but it isn't the same by a long chalk.

One thing that did annoy me yesterday was when announcements were being made which you couldn't hear because the music volume had been turned up to 11.

Music, kiss-cams etc play their part but if someone on the field scores a century, hits 6 sixes off an over etc, it should be marked by a clear announcement giving the details and allowing people to show their appreciation.

 
 
 
  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