Jump to content

Who cares about ODIs anyway?... Look forward to the Lanka Tests here

Sooda

By Sooda
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

Jersey #10 Newbie

Jersey #10

Posted
Posted
bhai why don't you give the same assessment in terms of bowling.....and then you shall see the truth. :icflove:
It's hard to compare the bowling aspects of the two games. The bowlers are broken down by the end of the opponent's 1st innings usually hence not able to give their 100% in their second innings. But then by the time the opponent gets their second inning, the pitch is all cracked up so the bowling looks good...ridiculous...:giggle: in ODI you get to see 100% of a bowler through out the game. B-> Bowlers can show all their talent in 10 overs and dont have to stretch and stress for 20-40 overs average :hysterical:
Link to comment
Jersey #10 Newbie

Jersey #10

Posted
Posted
transparent is a sad reflection of modern new fans. No understanding of cricket
In that case I am in the majority and some of you are not :giggle: so basically you are saying that, w/e the majority choses is wrong and w/e some of the buddhas who are too stubborn to change with the time are right? :giggle: Silly boy :giggle:
Link to comment
bharat297 Newbie

bharat297

Posted
Posted

Majority ... hahahaha ... Please Just because its more popular doesn't mean its more difficult. I dont think you seem to get that. Its more popular because its shorter, so it can fit in a prime time schedule. Add some fireworks, and cheergirls and some celebrities here and there to sponsor teams and your gonna get a product that sells. People who have jobs and school and college don't have time to go to 5 days of a Test match. That doesnt mean Test matches are less difficult than limited overs. Even Adam Gilchrist, who makes a lot of money every year from T20 has stated "that Test cricket is the ultimate test of a player's and team's ability". One of the greatest players the game has ever seen, Sachin Tendulkar, has stated “It's why, from a cricketer's point of view, Test cricket will always be No1. In Test cricket the bowler is always trying to get you out and you have to be on top of your game for five days. You have to be at your best and sustain it. Twenty20, you might never have heard of a guy then he swings around for 20, 30 minutes and he's done wonders for his side. It's easier to be successful.” Sourav Ganguly, has stated "Test cricket is the ultimate form of cricket and I know for sure players will be remembered with what they do in Test matches," Shane Warne, who has been of T20s loudest supporters has said "We'd then have the ultimate challenge of Test cricket and all out attacking Twenty20, as the limited overs format. Also the Australian players would have more time available to play state and club cricket," Im pretty sure Gilchrist, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Warne, etc. know more about cricket than you do. The fact is in 20-20, a team has 20 overs to bat with 10 wickets. Thats 2 overs per wicket, so naturally they can take more risks which is why they score faster. Why don't you see that? Why do you think all these former players who were dropped/retired are carving up T20 such as Gilchrist, Hayden, Ganguly, Kumble, Warne. Look at Hayden ... he couldn't score a run for almost a year for Australia in Tests but a month after he retired he carved up the IPL. Did he suddenly pick up more skill in that one month? No chances are ... he trained less, ate more, and cared less about the outcome when he was batting, which is why he scored more. For most players T20 is a bit of fun and games. Feel free to again erase my argument with "BS" in giant letters if you can't prove my argument. Popularity does not necessarily equate to difficulty. Boy ... you are honestly a salesmans dream. Slap on some bright lights, fireworks, cheergirls, glitz and glamour and they can sell you anything.

Link to comment
bunny Newbie

bunny

Posted
Posted

Personally I feel it's all about the pitches. A seaming/spinning wicket makes a T-20/ODI also really interesting. Of course, lots of great games have also been played on flat pitches, but then it becomes basically about the batsmen. And I guess it isnt challenging to the batsmen in the traditional sense. It becomes more about hitting ability and calculation, rather than technique and mental strength.

Link to comment
bharat297 Newbie

bharat297

Posted
Posted

^ Yeah the pitch does make a difference. Definitely. But basically T20 is primarily about hand-eye coordination and placement. If you can connect and pick the gaps, thats all thats necessary and even if you make a quickfire 20 and get out, you've actually done very well for your team because there are 9 other wickets in the pavilion. Just thinking about it logically ... its much easier to bat for 1 hour than it is to bat for 4-6 hours (which is on roughly how long it takes most batsman to get a ton). Likewise, its much easier to bowl a 4 over spell than it is to bowl 25-30 overs per day and back up and repeat. Also, bowlers can get away with defensive bowling in T20 because its all about economy rate. Wickets are a bonus, but teams would prefer a bowler who bowls 4 overs 0/18 than 4 overs 2/40. In Tests, defensive bowling is pointless because batsman don't have to score off every ball. This means the bowler has to always attack the batsman, trying to get him out. What makes T20 still a challenging game, is the fact that 1 or 2 bad overs can ruin the entire game. For instance, you could be cruising along at 0/60 off 8 overs. Then 2 or 3 quick wickets and you might be 3/65 off 10 or 11 overs and from there your expected target falls drastically. Thats what makes it exciting, in that matches can turn around very quickly.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...