1. Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    30185
    25 Sep '07 14:31
    The contrast between the exciting Twenty20 tournament and the dull-as-ditch-water ODI world cup earlier in the year couldn't be more striking. ODIs were invented to get the crowds in. With Twenty20 being more reliable for excitement, will ODIs soon be history? I don't think there's enough room in the calendar for all 3 forms of cricket.
  2. Berks.
    Joined
    27 Nov '04
    Moves
    41991
    25 Sep '07 14:50
    The 50 a side game will survive at international level - it is still more evenly balanced between bowlers and batsmen.

    The world cup down in the West Indies was poorly organised. Stretched over far too long a period and inappropriate ticket pricing for the locals both can be improved upon. Cut down the number of second stage games, be prepared to play them simultaneously (a smaller number of hosts will help too).

    Losing India & Pakistan early on didn't help matters, and if Australia's new side is not as effective as their recent one the result should be less predictable.
  3. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    17944
    25 Sep '07 15:40
    Originally posted by Peakite
    Losing India & Pakistan early on didn't help matters,
    i still find it hilarious that one of the few sellouts of the tournament turned out to be ireland vs bangladesh.
  4. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    25 Sep '07 15:53
    The contrast is more between an incompetently run tournament and an excellently run one. I think there's still a place for ODIs - Twenty20 can often be too one-dimensional.

    I'm looking forward to a balanced calendar with all three forms. There's way too much ODI cricket at the moment, so there's plenty of room to reduce that and to increase the Twenty20s. When there are fewer ODIs around they'll seem more exciting as well.
  5. SubscriberSmookieP
    Lead, Follow, or..
    Fort Lauderdale
    Joined
    17 Aug '06
    Moves
    119668
    25 Sep '07 16:02
    What is this 'criquet'? Is it a multi-national sport? Is it in the Olympics like baseball?
  6. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    25 Sep '07 16:30
    Originally posted by SmookieP
    What is this 'criquet'? Is it a multi-national sport? Is it in the Olympics like baseball?
    Now there's a thought. Twenty20 is the perfect format to get cricket in the Olympics.
  7. 6yd box
    Joined
    24 Jun '07
    Moves
    5179
    25 Sep '07 17:23
    Originally posted by mtthw
    Now there's a thought. Twenty20 is the perfect format to get cricket in the Olympics.
    i second that.

    by the way What is baseballšŸ˜µ
  8. Berks.
    Joined
    27 Nov '04
    Moves
    41991
    25 Sep '07 19:14
    Originally posted by spurs73
    i second that.

    by the way What is baseballšŸ˜µ
    It's a cross between rounders and 3-Oxoestr-4-en-17beta-yl 3-phenylpropionate (or something similar).
  9. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    17944
    25 Sep '07 21:45
    Originally posted by SmookieP
    What is this 'criquet'? Is it a multi-national sport? Is it in the Olympics like baseball?
    baseballs been kicked from the olympics
  10. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    17944
    25 Sep '07 21:48
    Originally posted by mtthw
    Now there's a thought. Twenty20 is the perfect format to get cricket in the Olympics.
    the reason (or so they say) that cricket and rugby aren't in the olympics is because they're not 'international enough' to gain a place.

    but twenty20 and rugby sevens would be perfect.
  11. Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    2521
    25 Sep '07 22:211 edit
    Not just that , the amount of time which has to be devoted for a cricket edition in the olympics would be huge if you talk about one-day cricket. Not to mention different stadiums required to conduct more than one match on a day . Remember how long the last world cup took. Now twenty20 is a different ball game together .

    I would actually like if they scrapped One day cricket together and have only tests for real cricket and twenty20 for entertaining cricket.
  12. Standard memberCrowley
    Not Aleister
    Control room
    Joined
    17 Apr '02
    Moves
    91690
    26 Sep '07 10:14
    Originally posted by trevor33
    the reason (or so they say) that cricket and rugby aren't in the olympics is because they're not 'international enough' to gain a place.
    You spelled 'not American enough' wrong.
  13. Standard memberrhb
    Ginger Scum
    Paranoia
    Joined
    23 Sep '03
    Moves
    15902
    26 Sep '07 10:17
    Surley 20-20 cricket is just another symptom of the global dumbing down of all things?
  14. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    26 Sep '07 10:50
    Originally posted by trevor33
    the reason (or so they say) that cricket and rugby aren't in the olympics is because they're not 'international enough' to gain a place.

    but twenty20 and rugby sevens would be perfect.
    I've always thought rugby sevens would be fantastic in the Olympics as well. You couldn't fit a decent sized rugby tournament into two weeks, but you can fit rugby 7s into 2 or 3 days. And it's fantastic to watch. It worked well in the Commonwealth games last time round.
  15. 6yd box
    Joined
    24 Jun '07
    Moves
    5179
    26 Sep '07 11:17
    Originally posted by Crowley
    You spelled 'not American enough' wrong.
    Nice one Crowley..hehehehehehe
Back to Top