By Scott last year, mid-September Leave a comment on this post
I can’t approve of the format, but the result seems perfectly adequate.
Tags: australia, england, Twenty20-World-Cup |
What I can’t understand is why I found this so -called exciting game game slow. Apart from the satisfaction of seeing the Aussie bowlers perform well, in what is supposed to be a format that favours batsmen, the only highlight was defeating England.
To paraphrase that classic of Glen McGrath’s - fancy being beaten by the team that lost to Zimbabwe!
That was surely one of the most boring games of cricket i have seen.
Didn’t johnson bowl well though, he was brutal.
And weren’t we supposed to be humiliated?
What I don’t understand is how batting sides are now making totals in 20 overs that can be thought a reasonable score for a 50-over game. How do they do it? Is it because they are taking more risks because they don’t have to protect their wicket for so long? Or are batsmen getting better? Or does the game just favour the batter?
Kathy, what I did observe in the Australia-England match is lots of wild hit-or-miss swinging from Gilchrist and Hayden, anyway. When it connected, they got 4’s or 6’s, but much of the time, they just missed. It wasn’t attractive, clean batting, that’s why I enjoyed the bowlers more. Their quality, far from being compromised by the format, seemed to increase.
I expected both aussie openers to get out any moment, but selling your wicket cheaply seems to be the way to get high scores - or low, as England did, struggling against the good bowling. Only Flintoff of the English bowlers looked capable, and when he bowled. , Gilchrist and Hayden looked ordinary. Freddie was by far the most miserly of their bowlers. Maybe it’s that the bowling standard are down, rather then the batsmen’s are up?
Well, Freddie looks like he’s barely holding it together, ankle-wise.
Yes, things are back to normal again, Australia played like champions and England was hoping to repeat what they have done to them in Ashes long time ago…. Australia beat England, huh..not a headling, just another day in office for Australians.
In partial answer to Kathy’s question, the rules - esp. fielding restrictions and the ‘free hit’ - are pretty obviously more bat-friendly than for ODIs. Anyone know if they’re bringing the boundaries in further?
I know this sounds hidebound and all that, but the result is a pretty gimcrack spectacle.
The south African cricket grounds are already small - they don;’t need to bring the boundaries in more.
The longest six in today’s India/New Zealand match was 88 meters- if that was at the WACA the batsman would have been caught. Of course, the WACA’s probably too large as it is.
Kathy, also the rules regarding the wides down the lg sides are applied strictly…anything to the leg which doesn’t touch the batsman is a wide. They don’t go by those white lines we have in 50-50.
Then the no-ball rule and wides of bouncers restrict the bowling enthusiasm. The batsmen know the general area a bowler is constrained to bowl in. One can visualize it like a cuboidal area where the bowled balls should mostly be.
After all this, the grounds are there of course…some are skewed in the lengths of their boundaries with “special spots” to score easily at. Those who can innovate are finding the balls to help over the boundary line in those spots.
Lastly, the gung-ho spirit with which the batsmen step out for a 20-20 game adds to their punch power and imagination till they seize up due to excessive blood in the brains!
What gung-ho spirit is that, Soulberry? Perhaps you had better tell Bangladesh about it.
Once again, as I said earlier, it was the Aussie bowling here who controlled the innings, not the batsmen. Quality bowling…
Well, I can see the appeal of the game, but, call me old-fashioned if you like, there is something about it that is a bit of a turn-off too. I know the crowd love all the 4s and 6s, but they lose their currency for me when they happen so often.
I think that both Soulberry and Rusty are right — the batting is clearly gungho, but that tight bowling is more important than ever. Any looseness in the bowling is exploited in exponentially greater fashion than in longer forms of the game.
I know people probably all said this about one-day cricket when it first came in — that it looks like a highlights package, not a game — but it does! Though clearly one-day cricket did help make Test cricket less stodgy than it used to be by teaching the players how to innovate, and to get results rather than draws.
I think I’d just like to see a fair contest between bat and ball without a lot of silly rule changes and restrictions. And I’d like to see a subcontinent team do well — Sri Lanka, perhaps.
The WACA’s not too big Marcus, Gilly hits sixes there all the time.
Warning: This post contains Anti Kevin Pietersen remarks. Don’t read if you have a weak heart.
I can’t approve of the format either Scott.
After the result of the ENG v SAF game, with KP mixed up in “something/anything” again, I decided to do a little research. How effective is he in his charade of try-hard arogantdom?
This is narrow focused research of England versus Australia or South Africa, because quite honestly, the way other teams are playing right now the rest of the world should be in “Division 2″. I’ll add New Zealand to my elite because they always lift against the best. It’s something you can count on.
I’m also making the assumption that KP says or does something to stir some controversy every single game because I believe he cannot help himself to be an absolute dickhead. He’s like the ADHD kid at school; if someone isn’t looking at him he makes sure he makes enough noise so that attention shifts to him. For any normal person it would be a very unhappy lifestyle, especially when you can’t win as a team.
England has beaten Australia twice in Tests, twice in ODI’s and once in T20 with KP playing. But they’ve lost six tests, eight ODI’s and two T20’s. That’s a 25%, 20% and 33% win to loss ratio, hardly a supportive means for your his mouth.
It’s not any better against his former nation. One ODI win, five ODI losses and now a T20 loss. ONE time he walked off the field with a result to back himself up.
I suppose he’s lucky England aren’t scheduled to play South Africa in Tests anytime soon.
I almost want someone to tell him to shut the hell up, but then it would be less fun to kick his arse almost every game…
Chris - Yeah I distinctly remember Freddie’s look as he craned his neck to see where the next one from Gilly went; Australia v England at the WACA 2006. He was clearly bemused.
Kathy - You brought up a good point, I should add Sri Lanka to my ODI elite. They are doing well in the T20, they did well in the World Cup, they need some work in Tests.
Chris- I’m just thinking of the spectators. The ropes are out at around 90 meters, the seating starts quite a bit behind that, and the stands start behind that again. This means that a spectator in the stand routinely sits at about 120 meters from the centre of the wicket. That’s just absurd. They could bring in the rope 5-10 meters and bring the stands right up to the boundary rope, meaning that the spectator will be only 80 meters from the action. Hopefully the planned redeveloment of the WACA will go ahead and improve this.
And Gilchrist can hit sixes there, but on a good day he could probably clear the Missisippi. 
By the way, Michael, good to see you back. I was starting to worry.
Good point Marcus. It ends up being a fine balance doesn’t it. Grounds that the spectators are close enough to see the action, and making the batsmen have to hit the ball really well to be rewarded with a six.
Michael, I do think KP comes in for a lot of criticism he doesn’t deserve. Just because he’s one of the best batsmen in the world doesn’t mean he can make his team win every time. It’s an unfair burden to place on him. In fact I think part of his problem is that England is constantly placing that burden on him and it distorts the team’s functioning. It puts huge pressure on him, and it makes the rest of the team in awe of him. England play best when they all do their bit — not when they’re kowtowing to their big star.
As far as his remarks are concerned, I don’t think they’re any more stupid than McGrath’s used to be when he was winding up the Poms before a series. It’s just that usually McGrath didn’t have to eat his words afterwards ;-). And half the time, you don’t know how much reporters are putting pressure on a player to give them a good quote before a crunch match. Overall, though, KP should let his bat do the talking. But I don’t see it’s his fault or that it lessens his reputation if England lose. As far as I can see, he’s been a model of rectitude and hard work in recent times.
The difference between KP’s comment and McGrath’s is that McGrath knew he wasn’t going to be lynched after a loss as a scapegoat; even after an *Ashes* loss. KP was a dill not because of what he said, but because in saying it he forgot all the fun the English media have in playing point the finger.
Gee, Michael, back with a bang, aren’t you! How’s cricket over there these days?
I don’t often see KP playing against anyone other than Oz, because of the programming here on free-to-air TV, but I have mellowed towards him recently. At least he is a genuine world-class cricketer, unlike many in the English team/s at the moment. I don’t know what the politics are, but they seem to have a different line-up every time I see them. And the faces aren’t repeating, either. How you can have good, tight teamwork when it keeps changing is beyond me. But England have always suffered from the star mentality, thinking one star can carry the rest of the team. Chappell was saying that about Ashraful’s position in the Bangladesh team, also.
It’s the old thing of the star team vs. the team of stars, I guess.
You guys have to read this — it’s a great piece about the Ashes in Iraq:
Thanks for the link, Kathy. More here too.
Markus: Thanks!
Kathy: Yes Pigeon was well known for firing up against an opponent “before” the series but I’m finding KP getting caught up in banter or something controversial almost constantly. His run out is just another example. And last night I found myself thinking, “Not Freddie too!?”
Rusty: *grins* Season starts in one and a half weeks and I am sitting here waiting to see if I am 2nd Grade or 1st Grade material (out of 4 Grades). I would love to make 1st Grade but wonder if it would be wiser to play out a season in 2nd’s to feel my way back into Australian cricket while still having something to shoot for. Or maybe I am being a wus. I’ll let fate decide.
« What’s the point of Super Eights? | Main | Twenty20 Super 8s »
The Corridor (a cricket blog) is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)
The Corridor (a cricket blog) All content © 2004-2008 Will Luke. All Rights Reserved.
None of the views or opinions offered on this site reflect those of my employers, Cricinfo Ltd and ESPN International
Posts
