Predator_05 Posted September 9, 2007 Share Posted September 9, 2007 Debunking some of the myths associated with Twenty20 http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/twenty20wc/content/current/story/309782.html Twenty20 has come a long way in five years. One group that was initially resistant to the idea were bowlers, who said: "It's a batsman's game already." There seemed to be nowhere for them to go, as batsmen were given the freedom to go on an all-out attack. Bowlers who had prided themselves on being capable of consistent line and length became nothing more than colourful bowling machines. However, once they outgrew this denial phase, bowlers realised they had to sharpen their skills and be able to execute their plans with ultimate precision. New slower balls quickly became part of every bowler's armoury, as did short run-ups and different lines of block-hole delivery. Pre-Twenty20, players spoke solely of yorkers, but the new era demanded the increased accuracy of off stump - or even fifth-stump yorkers to keep control of the game. Personally I think that bowling in this form of the game is much more cerebral than just plonking the ball on a length - especially at my slow pace. The Twenty20 masters are those who can outwit their opponent by delivering the unexpected and having mental agility to rival their physical agility. Bowlers need to feel composed and measured in their approach but wholly committed to their planned delivery. They also need to be able to suspend their egos regarding their best delivery and focus on what the most effective delivery is in the context. You can't over-emphasise how much of a challenge it is for the bowlers. Batsmen walk to the wicket with shoulders back and muscles pumped ready for action. They look to impose themselves from ball one since usually there is not time to settle in. Big crowds are often the cause of fear of failure - for many domestic players Twenty20 has been their first experience of full houses - but it seems that the modern batsman is fired up by the crowd and feels that he has nothing to lose. The batsmen generally have clear plans, and despite the physical burden of having to sprint between the wickets, manage to keep their heads clear and stay committed to their shots. Tactically, batsmen are becoming more aware, manipulating the field with a wide array of shots and standing still for as long as possible so as to obtain the best platform to dispatch the ball to the boundary. The Twenty20 arena is no place for technical perfection, which has encouraged players to use their immense natural talent to invent new shots and stay ahead of the game. Fielding is huge in the new era. Not only do some players gain selection largely due to their fielding prowess but we are seeing specialist fielders running from one end of the pitch to the other to maximise their effectiveness for the team. Fielders seem more prepared to swap and change positions constantly, and also seem to relish the extra workload and pressure that each ball brings. Gone are the days where you may be redundant in a certain position: the Twenty20 fielder is switched on and expects the ball every time. As for the captaincy, it is an experience in itself, like taking a Lamborghini down a giant slalom course. There are big decisions to make with almost every ball. Team talks can help but ultimately it's the player's execution under pressure that gives the winning captain control. There is enough evidence of Twenty20's positive influence on the game's other versions to justify its unquestionable merits, and now that players have embraced this swashbuckling format, the bar can only be raised in the future. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
yoda Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Finally it has become a sport which will be played by real athletes. Unfortunately that means Indians will suck at it like in most other sport. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
fineleg Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 India cannot compete in this strength and athleticism dominated 20-20. But whether or not India is good at it, my first preference will be Test cricket. Between 50-50 and 20-20, I will let the jury be out and will evaluate. Link to comment
zubinpepsi Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Thank god we dont have 4 teams in a group.. Now India definitely can go to the next round atleast..... cuz we have scotland to beat the hell out..:D Link to comment
Raj Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Windies = India in disguise :hysterical: Link to comment
Bumper Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I havent even subscribed to 20/20 world cup. Am least bothered about what India does in this tournament. An absolute waste of time and a gross dilution of cricket. 20/20 may be reqd for the game's proliferation, but this is not the way to do it. First ICC must make each country play this format more regularly & induce more fan interest. Even a regular trination ODI tourney would have been more interesting than this stoopid world cup. Link to comment
ludhianvi Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I am sure the purists dont like 20/20. But 20/20 is here to stay for sure, whether you like it or not. Link to comment
Guest dada_rocks Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 जब एकदिवसीय प्रतियोगिता का पदार्पण हुआ लोग ऐसी ही हिट-मिस की बात करते थे | Link to comment
Predator_05 Posted September 11, 2007 Author Share Posted September 11, 2007 Sorry dude ... Hit and giggle it is ... Nothing else. Gibbs and Kemp proving my point as I write ... You didn't enjoy some of the shots Gayle played earlier during the day ? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Predator_05 Posted September 11, 2007 Author Share Posted September 11, 2007 He does that in ODIs and sometimes Tests too .. but cricket is not all about how far and long one can hit a ball .... atleast not to me. For starters, Gayle has never scored a hundred that fast in his life. Cricket (and sport, in general) for me is entertainment. Nothing else. Today was as entertaining as it could get. The loud music played on cue after every boundary, a sold out crowd getting involved in the game by creating a terrific atmosphere, and witnessing some stunning individual efforts from Gayle and Gibbs in a match of numerous twists and turns was very entertaining. Sure, it looks like a mismatch, but that is only because of the West Indies' dropped catches. This was competitive cricket. Honestly, i would have no problems whatsoever if they scrapped the 50 over game and replaced it with Twenty20. The abridged version of the game we saw today was like the 50 over game, minus the boredom you would experience from the 20th 'til the 40th over. All action. That is how it should be. Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Predator_05 Posted September 11, 2007 Author Share Posted September 11, 2007 I dunno man ... Classical cricket is for those who can appreciate the finer things in life and sport .... the ups and downs the twists and turns ... the subplots withing the main plot etc etc .... yes its time consuming but as the cliche goes ... no pain no gain ... Fair enough, but that is why we have Test cricket. That is the real form of the game - always has been and always will be. I personally, wouldn't think twice if had to choose between watching a test match or Twenty20/ODI. That isn't the point. I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Being a purist shouldn't restrict you from appreciating other forms of the game. There are people who love listening to Beethoven but can still enjoy most forms of contemporary music (which may not be half as skilful as Beethoven). Besides, a true purist should welcome the introduction of Twenty20 with open arms. Why ? Because the game is dying a slow death as far as publicity is concerned - moreso outside the subcontinent. The World Cup was sh*t, and traditional cricketing powerhouses like the West Indies or even England were drifting further away from the sport. Twenty20 is the elixir which can revive the supporters and give them a reason to start watching cricket again. Look at the crowd which turned up today. More bums in more seats is a good thing for cricket, and as a purist, isn't it in your interests to see the game in a healthy state; making headlines and gaining popularity ? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Predator_05 Posted September 11, 2007 Author Share Posted September 11, 2007 Call me a sceptic if you want ... but I dont think those "bums" are going to spend time checking out Test Cricket ..... worse yet some of those sitting on the fence could change allegiance in favor of Tick-20. ...and why is that a bad thing ?? Ultimately, cricket benefits from it Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
ludhianvi Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 जब एकदिवसीय प्रतियोगिता का पदार्पण हुआ लोग ऐसी ही हिट-मिस की बात करते थे | true, just like odi helped test cricket, maybe this will also help odi cricket Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now