What role will technology take within umpiring? Will any of the developing nations have made it to Test status and be thriving? Will Mike Atherton have replaced Malcolm Speed at the ICC? Will India still be calling the scheduling shots?

It seems to me that as we stride boldly into 2006, we could be at somewhat of an important juncture in world cricket. Or in other words....Stuff is happening! And like my fourth form physics teacher said, every action has to have an opposite and equal reaction, (I think).

Anyway, if you have a view on what cricket will look like in 2020 or beyond, please share it, space suits ‘n’ all.

That would be Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (I think, though I'm not sure if it was third or second), for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. Athers is a fab commentator, and Sky could do no worse then hire him in place of one of Beefy or Willis, but I'm not sure he has the diplomatic skills required for a post like the head of the ICC, plus, the ICC is an organisation that is supposed to do nothing but dish out rhetoric, it can never have a head that might actually do something about pressing issues. And it will almost never be head by an ex-test captain. But always by some high flying businessman or influential politician.

What will happen in 2020? I don't know really. I suppose umpires would still exist, although they'd be heavily aided by technology, to the extent that their job would just be that of conveying the result of Hawk Eye, snickometer, ...[inset new technology here]... to the players. 50 overs cricket might have died, USA and Canada might be test teams.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese start to figure prominently, in at least one-dayers.

"....it can never have a head that might actually do something about pressing issues....

And yet if the ICC is going to have any chance of being a relevant organisation then that's exactly what they have to do.

Marcus, you took the words right out of my head-China-and they will be powered by a Quartet of??Chinamen bowlers(terrible joke, sorry) and their Coach will be Michael Bevan and their catching will be superb-trained by Yuvraj..
Their opponents in the World Cup Final will be Bangladesh who will have a team made up of 9 All-rounders and One specialist bowler and batsman-coached by Mahela Jayawardene and WPUJC Vaas. India will send a B team because the A team players have contracts with rival sponsors. Pakistan will lose to Bangla in the Semis after being well set at 180-1. Australia will lose to China in the Semis with 5 of their Batsmen run out and Inzi will be commentating in Urdu and laughing his head off with Arjuna Ranatunga(English) Both of them are working for the BBC. England will get knocked out by Wales in the group stage, Likewise S. Africa will lose to Lesotho and NZ will lose to Western Samoa. The W. Indies will have disintegrated by then and no longer have a team. Likewise, nobody will remember or hear from Dean Jones again. The tournament will be held in Sri Lanka and Murali will be head of the ICC.

Do we want ICC to be a relevant organisation though?

Coming to think of it, the ICC might not last until 2020.

Saurav Ganguly would be 47 and hopefully the controversy would be over by then. Can you believe they're stil pressing for his selection!

Also, thanks to fake birth records, a single-digit aged child would have played cricket for Pakistan. Saying this because if Abdul Razzaq is 26, then I'm a unicorn.

Jay's post reminds me of that classic from Geoffrey commentating during the Toronto Sahara Cup 1997 about Afridi:

"If he's 17 I'm 21."

Agreed that Razzaq looks a little bit beyond his 'official age' but Afridi, I'm not so sure. He's recently been sporting Rado (the Switzerland based watch company) as their official brand ambassador in Pakistan, and he didn't look like he was more then 25 in one of his recent adds. And a decent hair cut migh well take take a few more years off.

India might have JUST found their one bowler who could better the 90mph mark. It is unbelieveable: a country with a billion people and not ONE fast bowler!

Also, let's not rule out the possibility that Australia may have won another 4 world cups. Following the "World Series" (now VB Series) is not fun anymore. I mean when was the last time anyone even challenged Australia on their own turf.

He sure didn't look 16 when he was depositing every other delivery from Murali and Jayasuriya into the stands during his 37-ball blitzkreig. I remember reading this book by John Crace on Wasim and Waqar (published 1992) in which Crace clearly indicates that Waqar wasn't sure about his own age. No reason to think why Afridi, Razzaq or even Butt and co. should be.

Here is a little fact of intergalactic incredulity. Aaqib Javed was born in the not-so-ancient 1972 and played his first first-class game in 1984!!!! Yeah, 1984!!! At the age of 12!!! 12 that is !!! I'm sure he was dubbed the budding new under-developed and puberty-approaching fast bowler. What a joke! Go check his profile on cricinfo "Players" section and you'll see it. As a side note, he was a spent force by 26. That's when most men are only beginning to reach their physical peak.

We should not be mean on that rare commodity of the sub-continent called a fast bowler, Jay:)

Maybe, just maybe that effort leading to the hattrick of lbws in Sharjah 1991 took too much out of him at the raw age of 19...He is hosting on TV during the series, and he looks quite 34-ish (going by the 'looks' logic) in the pictures

Following on from Jay's Post about the VB Series, the last time I remember the Aussies being knocked out of the Final was when the West Indies and Pakistan made it- with Wasim captaining a "young "side with 6 bowlers, 4 batsmen and the ever noisy and brilliant Moin Khan. Those were the days Jay, those were the days..as far as Aaquib is concerned-he expended every ounce of energy from his little frame and once he gained weight, it was all over, but for one brief shining moment, he was immaculate for 8 overs in that WC Final-when England was reduced to 22-2(even though Stewart was out TWICE) and that is what I will remember of him, not his 7-37 in Sharjah...

Cricket in 2020... The first thing that comes in my mind is, would players be physically present in the cricket ground to play the game CRICKET. Considering technology to change the world drastically, would players install their characters in a manipulated robot, and control them from the commentary box????
Leaving the technological affect on cricket in 2020, would players try scoring 6 every ball?? would there be bowlers faster than BrettLee?? would there be just 12 to 14 teams like at the moment or would there be around 40 to 50 teams??? would the match be still be for 50 overs??????? or for 20 overs at the max?? would the players be physically fit to work 50 overs in a stretch??? Would there be ICC??? would ppl be bothered to go watch a cricket match in the stadium??? would the cricket business survive though 2020??? WILL CRICKET BUSINESS SURVIVE TILL 2020?????????