The next T20 is in 2020, Gayle ,Samuels,Sammy,Badree,maybe Bravo will be long gone by then - they will be a shadow of the team you see now - ok they have Brathwaite, but he cant do it all himself. England stars will be late twenties - this is the time to do it. I have decided to start a special 'fund' for saving up to go out there. 10 pounds a week over 200 weeks is sufficient methinks. Then again, i want to go to Japan for the Rugby World Cup too ! - oh well, 20 pounds a week it is then !
Surprised there's no tournament in 2018.
The format for this worked out perfectly, the smaller countries got a fair chance to compete and reach the main draw, while the whole event was just the right length.
Other 'star' players who wont be around then....Steyn,maybe ABDV,Yuvraj,Dhoni,Nehra,Taylor,Shahid, Who else?
It's hard to say. For example, I was amazed Brendon McCullum retired from international cricket just before this event. The Kiwis might have won with him in the team?
The next T20 is in 2020, Gayle ,Samuels,Sammy,Badree,maybe Bravo will be long gone by then - they will be a shadow of the team you see now - ok they have Brathwaite, but he cant do it all himself. England stars will be late twenties - this is the time to do it. I have decided to start a special 'fund' for saving up to go out there. 10 pounds a week over 200 weeks is sufficient methinks. Then again, i want to go to Japan for the Rugby World Cup too ! - oh well, 20 pounds a week it is then !
What about following Charlton in Europe??. oh wait....
I don't think you can target to win a T20 tournament like a country can target a football World Cup. There is simply too much luck involved or, perhaps, one bad day or one big innings against can mean exit from the competition. Don't forget that the new champions were beaten by Afghanistan. If England targets the next T20 World Cup, it is just asking to fail.
I don't think you can target to win a T20 tournament like a country can target a football World Cup. There is simply too much luck involved or, perhaps, one bad day or one big innings against can mean exit from the competition. Don't forget that the new champions were beaten by Afghanistan. If England targets the next T20 World Cup, it is just asking to fail.
I agree you cant target any tourno , never know who might do a 'Brathwaite' that you just cant odds. However, what I am saying is that in 2020 all of our 'top' players now will be in their prime then.
I don't think you can target to win a T20 tournament like a country can target a football World Cup. There is simply too much luck involved or, perhaps, one bad day or one big innings against can mean exit from the competition. Don't forget that the new champions were beaten by Afghanistan. If England targets the next T20 World Cup, it is just asking to fail.
I would say there is luck involved in winning most tournaments, but clearly more so in T20. But the two best sides for hitting sixes got to the final so maybe that tells a story. I can't have hurt the West Indies to win every toss though!
Windies wont be a force next time, nor will the sub-continent sides - it will be the likes of Oz,England,SA and NZ - though I think we've lost that hoodoo and inferiority complex now. these players believe they can go out and beat anyone. Losing in the manner they did will only make them doubly want to make sure it doesn't happen again in that way.
It's fine margins. If we had lost to South Africa, then struggled against Afghanistan (as we did), opinions might be vastly different about how good we are/prospects etc. The New Zealand game was our only solid performance. The fightback against South Africa and West Indies in the final showed that we are tenacious. I don't think there's much between 5 or 6 teams, to be honest.
Cricket has always been a batsman's game, 20/20 just emphasises this to a greater degree. I hate it, I really do. It is a cancer within our glorious game and will kill cricket within 50 years. Yes it is very popular, yes it has got people interested in cricket who never would have been and yes it generates a lot of money for players and the authorities, but to what cost? I have admired the way we have resisted it over the last 10 years but that has now gone. We are to let our players play IPL and we will have a franchised regional league here within four years. I know many support this but I don't and I am very saddened by the change in stance by the ECB. Call me old fashioned, a stick-in-the-mud, boring or whatever; but that is how I feel I'm so glad I have a wonderful collection of Wisden Alamanacks and other tomes on cricket. I'm off to read some Cardus, Swanton and Arlott.
Cricket has always been a batsman's game, 20/20 just emphasises this to a greater degree. I hate it, I really do. It is a cancer within our glorious game and will kill cricket within 50 years. Yes it is very popular, yes it has got people interested in cricket who never would have been and yes it generates a lot of money for players and the authorities, but to what cost? I have admired the way we have resisted it over the last 10 years but that has now gone. We are to let our players play IPL and we will have a franchised regional league here within four years. I know many support this but I don't and I am very saddened by the change in stance by the ECB. Call me old fashioned, a stick-in-the-mud, boring or whatever; but that is how I feel I'm so glad I have a wonderful collection of Wisden Alamanacks and other tomes on cricket. I'm off to read some Cardus, Swanton and Arlott.
T20 is accessable and exciting. You can have county three day games played in front of one man and his dog! It won't kill cricket, it will grow cricket - it will just kill cricket as many people used to know it.
Cricket has always been a batsman's game, 20/20 just emphasises this to a greater degree. I hate it, I really do. It is a cancer within our glorious game and will kill cricket within 50 years. Yes it is very popular, yes it has got people interested in cricket who never would have been and yes it generates a lot of money for players and the authorities, but to what cost? I have admired the way we have resisted it over the last 10 years but that has now gone. We are to let our players play IPL and we will have a franchised regional league here within four years. I know many support this but I don't and I am very saddened by the change in stance by the ECB. Call me old fashioned, a stick-in-the-mud, boring or whatever; but that is how I feel I'm so glad I have a wonderful collection of Wisden Alamanacks and other tomes on cricket. I'm off to read some Cardus, Swanton and Arlott.
T20 is accessable and exciting. You can have county three day games played in front of one man and his dog! It won't kill cricket, it will grow cricket - it will just kill cricket as many people used to know it.
Yes but the fourth day of county championship matches are usually packed.
Both forms can survive together, a big benefit for spectators of T20 is being able to play it in the evenings when people aren't working.
In England at least, and especially in London, live Test cricket is very popular, even against the likes of Sri Lanka, there will be a good crowd at Lord's
Cricket has always been a batsman's game, 20/20 just emphasises this to a greater degree. I hate it, I really do. It is a cancer within our glorious game and will kill cricket within 50 years. Yes it is very popular, yes it has got people interested in cricket who never would have been and yes it generates a lot of money for players and the authorities, but to what cost? I have admired the way we have resisted it over the last 10 years but that has now gone. We are to let our players play IPL and we will have a franchised regional league here within four years. I know many support this but I don't and I am very saddened by the change in stance by the ECB. Call me old fashioned, a stick-in-the-mud, boring or whatever; but that is how I feel I'm so glad I have a wonderful collection of Wisden Alamanacks and other tomes on cricket. I'm off to read some Cardus, Swanton and Arlott.
I'm with you to a great extent, @Riviera. I decided about a year ago to try to embrace T20 as I had previously loathed it. I've had some measure of success by treating it as though it is a different sport, which is, in my view, not too far off the truth. To be fair, the World Cup had a number of exciting games, but I have sat through a number of very boring T20 games where the team batting first has scored too many or the team batting second knock off too many runs in the first 4 overs to make it a decent game.
I still much prefer County games and Test cricket (actually, I prefer County games as I get fed up with the drunks at Test matches) to T20, but I share your fear that the T20 wave of enthusiasm may not last long. And, then what? T10 or T5 for those with an ever shortening attention span?
I don't necessarily agree with everything Riveira has said, but I'm totally against franchising in England. Every single reason for franchising in Australia isn't true here, it's all about the greed of the few out weighing everything else.
Australia just had the 6 state teams, with no local rivalries and limited accessibility to the potential paying public due to the lack of teams and therefore games. The franchise system has 12 teams, so means more local rivalries, more games and therefore more accessibility to the public. Plus it was on free to air TV to maximise viewers.
Here we'll have far fewer franchises than there are currently county teams. They'll be more spaced out and will only be aired on Sky. So at every turn they are reducing accessibility instead of increasing it. But at least Surrey will get even richer, that's all that matters right!
I don't necessarily agree with everything Riveira has said, but I'm totally against franchising in England. Every single reason for franchising in Australia isn't true here, it's all about the greed of the few out weighing everything else.
Australia just had the 6 state teams, with no local rivalries and limited accessibility to the potential paying public due to the lack of teams and therefore games. The franchise system has 12 teams, so means more local rivalries, more games and therefore more accessibility to the public. Plus it was on free to air TV to maximise viewers.
Here we'll have far fewer franchises than there are currently test teams. They'll be more spaced out and will only be aired on Sky. So at every turn they are reducing accessibility instead of increasing it. But at least Surrey will get even richer, that's all that matters right!
I would prefer a bigger emphasis on T20 with existing counties. I am a Surrey fan too - but not a regular - attended a couple of T20s at the oval last year and planning to catch a few more this year.
I stopped going to T20 at the Oval. So many twats in the ground who couldn't give a toss about the cricket and would rather spill beer all down my back. If that's what franchise T20 is going to be like, they can count me out.
I stopped going to T20 at the Oval. So many twats in the ground who couldn't give a toss about the cricket and would rather spill beer all down my back. If that's what franchise T20 is going to be like, they can count me out.
I stopped going to T20 at the Oval. So many twats in the ground who couldn't give a toss about the cricket and would rather spill beer all down my back. If that's what franchise T20 is going to be like, they can count me out.
Feed the snake!
The snake usually ends up barfing warm, flat dreggy beer down my neck!!!
I stopped going to T20 at the Oval. So many twats in the ground who couldn't give a toss about the cricket and would rather spill beer all down my back. If that's what franchise T20 is going to be like, they can count me out.
5pm at a Test Match is much the same, with the various Snakes going around. Apart from Lord's of course!
Let's face it, cricket gets an awful lot of its income from pissed spectators...
Comments
The format for this worked out perfectly, the smaller countries got a fair chance to compete and reach the main draw, while the whole event was just the right length. It's hard to say. For example, I was amazed Brendon McCullum retired from international cricket just before this event. The Kiwis might have won with him in the team?
I have admired the way we have resisted it over the last 10 years but that has now gone. We are to let our players play IPL and we will have a franchised regional league here within four years. I know many support this but I don't and I am very saddened by the change in stance by the ECB.
Call me old fashioned, a stick-in-the-mud, boring or whatever; but that is how I feel
I'm so glad I have a wonderful collection of Wisden Alamanacks and other tomes on cricket. I'm off to read some Cardus, Swanton and Arlott.
In England at least, and especially in London, live Test cricket is very popular, even against the likes of Sri Lanka, there will be a good crowd at Lord's
I still much prefer County games and Test cricket (actually, I prefer County games as I get fed up with the drunks at Test matches) to T20, but I share your fear that the T20 wave of enthusiasm may not last long. And, then what? T10 or T5 for those with an ever shortening attention span?
Australia just had the 6 state teams, with no local rivalries and limited accessibility to the potential paying public due to the lack of teams and therefore games. The franchise system has 12 teams, so means more local rivalries, more games and therefore more accessibility to the public. Plus it was on free to air TV to maximise viewers.
Here we'll have far fewer franchises than there are currently county teams. They'll be more spaced out and will only be aired on Sky. So at every turn they are reducing accessibility instead of increasing it. But at least Surrey will get even richer, that's all that matters right!
Let's face it, cricket gets an awful lot of its income from pissed spectators...