| |
| 20 Apr 2008 04:43:41 |
| Cicero |
| IPL et all |
Just a quick poll. Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has on the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views if they enjoy the game). Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? |
| 20 Apr 2008 09:49:52 |
| Dave Cornwell |
| Re: IPL et all |
"Cicero" <moofie53@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message news:1SzOj.3219$ko5.1668@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Just a quick poll. > > Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really > couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has on > the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views if > they enjoy the game). > > Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? --------------------- Like any live entertainment it's probably great if you are actually there but I won't be glued to every match on Setanta. I suppose if there were more English players I might be interested to see how they got on with a view for selection to our 20/20 team. Dave > |
| 20 Apr 2008 09:12:18 |
| gumby |
| Re: IPL et all |
"Cicero" <moofie53@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message news:1SzOj.3219$ko5.1668@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Just a quick poll. > > Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really > couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has on > the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views if > they enjoy the game). > > Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? certainly very entertaining last night watching Bing v Haydos & Hussey then Hopes smack em around and then McGrath didn't look as though he had retired. I suppose even better if KP, Collingwood et al were there. Although a Vaughn 12 off 50 might be a bit drab |
| 20 Apr 2008 09:15:34 |
| gumby |
| Re: IPL et all |
"Cicero" <moofie53@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message news:1SzOj.3219$ko5.1668@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Just a quick poll. > > Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really > couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has on > the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views if > they enjoy the game). > > Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? the other thing was wasn't it so obvious that Ganguly was using Ponting's tactics in the first game? |
| 20 Apr 2008 21:33:25 |
| MonoJoker |
| Re: IPL et all |
"Cicero" <moofie53@bigpond.net.au > wrote in message news:1SzOj.3219$ko5.1668@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Just a quick poll. > > Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really > couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has on > the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views if > they enjoy the game). > > Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? It's 20/20 "cricket" which says it all. It's about bat dominating ball - when 50 overs is still not instant enough they invent another form of the game like the Super 8s. Why not just line up a team of 11 batsmen/allrounders and have a bowling machine send down 20 overs on a synthetic pitch? It's about as contrived as 20/20 cricket. I don't think it's a passing phase, people still convince themselves that a one sided 50 over game is entertaining but the gloss may wear off when people start to realise the result of 90% of 20/20 games is decided by the toss of a coin. I know I harp on about it but the fact administrators continue to make ODI games a onesided contest where bat must dominate ball at all costs has done nothing to make the game more exciting or attract more fans in the long run. All it does is favour the team batting first and if you make 300+ you're nearly assured of victory. I remember some of the most exciting one day cricket I ever watched was in the mid to late 80s when 180 was a competitive score and you could still bowl to defend it. Games where a team scored 150 and it took the team batting 2nd 49.2 overs to overhaul it were also great to watch. Shortening the game, roping off boundaries, making wickets harder and flatter does not equal better cricket or closer results. But then I still think test cricket is the pinnacle whereas most meatheads claim it's boring because they don't wear pyjamas and try to hit every ball for 6. Cheers LT. |
| 21 Apr 2008 13:18:51 |
| Dave Cornwell |
| Re: IPL et all |
"MonoJoker" <largejobs@bigjobs.com > wrote in message news:fuf9ld$n29$1@aioe.org... > "Cicero" <moofie53@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message > news:1SzOj.3219$ko5.1668@news-server.bigpond.net.au... >> Just a quick poll. >> >> Does anyone really care about the results or performances? (I really >> couldn't care less about the League- apart from negative impacts it has >> on the game of cricket (proper) but I am not knocking other people views >> if they enjoy the game). >> >> Also- do you think it will last- or is it just a passing phase? > > It's 20/20 "cricket" which says it all. It's about bat dominating ball - > when 50 overs is still not instant enough they invent another form of the > game like the Super 8s. > > Why not just line up a team of 11 batsmen/allrounders and have a bowling > machine send down 20 overs on a synthetic pitch? It's about as contrived > as 20/20 cricket. > > I don't think it's a passing phase, people still convince themselves that > a one sided 50 over game is entertaining but the gloss may wear off when > people start to realise the result of 90% of 20/20 games is decided by the > toss of a coin. > > I know I harp on about it but the fact administrators continue to make ODI > games a onesided contest where bat must dominate ball at all costs has > done nothing to make the game more exciting or attract more fans in the > long run. All it does is favour the team batting first and if you make > 300+ you're nearly assured of victory. I remember some of the most > exciting one day cricket I ever watched was in the mid to late 80s when > 180 was a competitive score and you could still bowl to defend it. Games > where a team scored 150 and it took the team batting 2nd 49.2 overs to > overhaul it were also great to watch. Shortening the game, roping off > boundaries, making wickets harder and flatter does not equal better > cricket or closer results. But then I still think test cricket is the > pinnacle whereas most meatheads claim it's boring because they don't wear > pyjamas and try to hit every ball for 6. > > Cheers > LT. ------------------------ Pretty much agree. Although sometimes I wonder if the way we've played the long form of the game for over a century was coached into us and it wasn't quite as difficult to hit the ball as was originally thought! Dave > > |