Cricket

[midge5]

I was watching the Australia vs South Africa 20-20 game yesterday and have to say I really enjoyed it. I've also been to a few of the Glamorgan games and nearly always have a good time. Even when one side seems to utterly dominate there is generally something happening and the atmosphere in the ground is far better than even some football or rugby games I have been to.

However, other messageboards I have read, and amongst some of my friends, quite a few of those who have been big fans of cricket really hate this form of the game. Nearly all of them have test cricket as their favourite and then their reasoning about 20-20 is generally that they find it cheapening to the sport to have these world class players just try to slog their way to victory. (though the best one was someone who was annoyed he couldn't spend the day lying in the sun drinking )

While I can see their reasoning, and personally still prefer test cricket, I find this far more enjoyable than the full one day games especially with this stupid new sub rule.

As I remember there being a few cricket fans here I was just wondering what you all thought of the different forms of the game.

never liked cricket

might well be that its cos i dunno anything about that game

[Ste]

I think the 20-20 form of the game is a great idea for county cricket, and even better for the amateur leagues.

In the International form I think it should be viewed as a kind of friendly type of match - like charity matches.
A one-off game at the beginning/end of the tour works pretty well.

[eJohn]

Cricket and Rugby both suffer from the same problem :

Lack of Internationally capable teams.

Australia, India, England, Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand, West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Kenya, Zimbabwe

Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, France, England, Italy, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Fiji, Argentina


The complete lack of depth in both sports has various reprecussions :

Test series' get stale
Tour dates and fixture lists are carbon copy
Some nations in both sports are ridiculously incompetent and perennial whipping boys
The World Cup's of both sports essentially dont mean very much (in my eyes) because youve practically played everyone in the past year anyway. Contrast this to football, when we havent seen England - Brazil since the last world cup, or England - Italy since 1997 ( i think).

So, having lots of 20/20 games and ODI's is the only way to sustain a sport where theres desire from fans to see lots of International cricket, but there really isnt a world market to do it in.

[Obliterate]

I went to watch Middlesex against someone (I think it was Derbyshire) at Lords last year in a 20/20 match and it was great. There was a huge crowd there, lots of big hits, lots of wickets and overall a great couple of hours entertainment.

[JC]

I tend to get along to a couple of Lancashire 20/20 games in the summer as well as a few one dayers. 20/20 is a lot more accessible to people, it doesnt take up a whole day, is a lot more action packed and generally there is more of an atmosphere. Whether the older more established cricket fans enjoy it or not doesnt really matter, it's what is needed to bring in young fans.

I dont like the sub thing though, thats a bit silly.

[pig]

Im a big fan of 20/20 and cricket ofc.

I went to the last two 20/20 finals and will be going to the final this year, when im back in brum I always try and go to the 20/20 games after work. The atmosphere is great, the cricket is great and it doesnt take all day.

At the end of the day its making cricket accessible to the masses. I can sit and watch cricket for five days no problem, but not many cant. 20/20 on the other hand gets them hooked and hopefully they will move from 20/20 to 1 day, to test...