“I think they need to accelerate now. The current run rate is only 7.14”, says the commentator, in a match from the twenty20 world cup. Run rate of 7.14 and still need to score fast??? Just shows how the pace of the game has changed in the past 20 years and more so in the past couple of years since the inception of 20-20 cricket. If a cricket fan who went into coma in the 70’s, wakes up now and hears this, will well… go back to coma again. But yes the fact is that cricket has certainly changed beyond recognition. Gone are the days when scoring run a ball was considered good. In ODI, teams are no longer intimidated by scores in excess of 300. And now with the arrival of 20-20, the definition of scoring fast has completely changed.
There has been much opposition to this new format of the game, saying it has too little time to test the skills of the players. It is only a “bang-bang-boom” kind of cricket, where every batsman just tries to whack the ball out of the ground. I would like to disagree here. Skill will continue to remain the most important element in the game.Examples from the current twenty20 world cup illustrate it perfectly. Mohammed Asif rattled the Indian top order with some very fine swing bowling, and almost won the match for Pakistan. Such was his impact that the Indian batsmen were happy to “see him off”.
Another opinion of the skeptics was that spinners will have no role to play in this format. Batsmen will simply muscle them out of the game. Daniel Vettori showed the other day against India, if a spinner backs himself and bowls intelligently, how effective he can be. He took 4-20 from 4 overs, outstanding figures for a 20-20 match, against India, which plays spin better than any other country in the world, on an excellent batting pitch, where South Africa chased down a record 434. You still say it is not a spinner’s game?
The 20-20 has a lot to offer to the game of Cricket, which is slowly losing its popularity across the world.
Bring the crowds back: The biggest accomplishment of 20-20 has been the fact that it has brought the crowds back to the ground. In recent years all over the world, matches have been played in front of largely empty stands. The ODI World cup in West Indies was a big disappointment. Even in India, crowds throng to the stadium only to see an international match and there are empty stands even for a match as important as Ranji Trophy final.
But this has definitely changed with the arrival of 20-20. In England and West Indies, even the domestic 20-20 tournaments have seen full attendance on the grounds. I am sure we will see a similar result in case of ICL (or IPL).
More closer matches and more upsets: In the 2007 ODI world cup, how many matches actually went down to wire and ended in nail-biting finishes? Hardly 2-3 in a total of 51 matches played, less than 5%. Whereas, in the current 20-20 world cup, we have already seen around 5-6 closely fought matches, in a total of 18-19 matches played so far, an impressive 30-35%. Also, there will be far more upsets in this form of the game than any other, as the shorter version of the game suits the minnows. This will make the matches more enjoyable to watch and add an element of unpredictability to the game, which is now plagued by the monotonous nature of one day cricket.
A step towards making Cricket a global sport: 20-20 is a step in right direction in making Cricket a global sport. 20-20 has the best chance amongst all the forms of the Cricket to spread across the world. The Chinese, Japanese and the Americans will find it easier to accept 20-20 which gets over in just over 3 hrs, than the ODI which drags on for one whole day ( most of the times on predictable lines), and the Test cricket which spreads over 5 days but still could end up without a result !!!.
Test cricket will still be the real test of the abilities. But even in 20-20, you need skill and talent to be successful. However, the gap between the best and the rest is narrowed considerably, ironically which is a plus point for the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment