June 19, 2009

Why Twenty20 needs other forms of cricket

Posted by Cricinfo - 2 weeks, 3 days ago in Extras

From Binu Thomas, India

I recently read an article from Aravind Panchal in "Inbox" observing that in Twenty20 cricket, there are no definite favourites. I do not think that anybody can argue against it. But what I want to contend is the proposition that the chance of not having favourites or champions is good for the game. I am not quite so sure.

Surprises as good as long as they remain only as surprises. But more than this simple fact of life, there is one thing about Sports - that unless the game do not consistently reward quality, the game itself cannot compete with other games who nurture quality, over a long period of time. The reason why we celebrate the failure of Australia is: they have a set of players who are proven champions in "OTHER" forms of cricket.

Continue reading "Why Twenty20 needs other forms of cricket"

June 13, 2009

Group bug

Posted by Cricinfo - 3 weeks, 2 days ago in T20 World Cup

From Ankit R Gulechha, India

The group stages of the ICC World Twenty20 are over and the Super 8 leg kicked off two days back. It would interest many of us to see how rules laid by ICC has left a few matches insignificant in group stages and also led to formation of one sided groups.

According to the rules, irrespective of the number of matches a team wins in the Group stages or the position in which they finish in their group, they will move forward to the next round based on their ranking which was determined after the last edition of world cup. Just to give an example, though South Africa finished on top of group D, they were ranked as D2 and moved to group E. If ICC had not made such rules South Africa would have moved to group F.

Now what this did is that it made the last league match between South Africa and New Zealand insignificant, because irrespective of result South Africa would go to group E and New Zealand to Group F.

Similarly the Sri Lanka and West Indies match became a practice match for them before super Eights. If the rules were, and should have been, that group leaders are ranked based on performance in this world cup, and not last years, then the groups would have been like these: Group E: India (A1), Pakistan (B2), Sri Lanka (C1), New Zealand (D2) and Group F: Ireland (A2), England (B1), West Indies (C2), South Africa (D1).

If we look at the current group we have to feel for England, West Indies and South Africa on having lost out on a match with Ireland. What this bizarre rule has done is placed three group toppers (India, England and South Africa) in one group, which is unfair.

The team which has gained most from this is Sri Lanka. Not only do they play Ireland in Super 8, but also two other teams which finished runners up in their groups. Overall the group E looks tight with the favorites being South Africa followed by a three way race between India, West Indies and England for second semi-final spot from group.

Whereas Group F is a three way race with Sri lanka and New Zealand favorites to go through to semi-finals after a dismal performance by Pakistan. I hope the ICC will take into consideration these factors for the next edition of world cup or Champions trophy.

The thing about T20 cricket

Posted by Cricinfo - 3 weeks, 2 days ago in T20 World Cup

From Arvind Panchal, United States

Probably T20 is still in its nascent stage at the international level and probably things will change further in the years to come, but a few basic things that have emerged out of T20 world would probably remain the same. And I hope so, because that is good for cricket. One of such things is the end of dominance of a few teams over others.

Compare it to Test Teams and the One day teams, where we have definite favorites going into a series or tournament. Agreed, upsets are a part in those formats too, but not to the same extent as we have been seeing in T20. After all, the Australians have ruled the world of Test and One day cricket for almost a decade now.

Continue reading "The thing about T20 cricket"

June 6, 2009

Beer chaos at The Oval

Posted by Cricinfo - 4 weeks, 1 day ago in English cricket

From Richard Seeckts

"It wasn't until I got there that I realised one of the 20s was the duration in minutes of the queue for beer." PP of Kent, 2008.

On the evidence of last week’s Surrey v Sussex match, things have got worse, not better, in 2009. Twenty20 games at Surrey’s south London ground are advertised as turbo-charged cricket. The experience in the stands has not been so thrilling.

Spectators visiting The Oval for ICC World Twenty20 matches should be reassured that "the problem with the (bar) tills has been rectified and we have had no further problems". This is wonderful news, though it comes too late for those who endured woefully inadequate bar provision at last week's Surrey v Sussex Twenty20 match, when the recent dry spell took on another meaning.

That Tuesday evening saw people wanting an after work pint at the cricket queuing for up to half an hour to be served. 'Man waits 25 minutes for beer' is not, in isolation, a matter of great concern to anybody. However, 'World's oldest Test venue fails to cater for crowd of 7,500' doesn't sound so clever. The problem with standing in a queue for 25 minutes during a Twenty20 game is that you miss about seven overs of action, or one third of an innings. And if you fancy a second, or third pint during the evening, you'll see less cricket than on a good day at the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium.

I don’t know the exact nature of the alleged (and now resolved) bar till problem, but I do know that Surrey CCC infuriated many spectators last week, compounding their blanket ban on taking alcohol into the ground by making it virtually impossible to obtain inside. Surrey claim that the ground was one third full, and that five of seven public bars were open. It’s an interesting claim when the shutters were down on every drinks outlet bar one (pardon the pun) at the Vauxhall end of the ground. If true, it doesn’t bode well for an Ashes Test in August.

Whatever the cause of the chaos, all major sports venues have an obligation to cater for their paying customers swiftly and efficiently, enabling them to optimise their time watching the main event. When getting a drink becomes the main event, something has gone horribly wrong. Tickets are not cheap at The Oval, a cheeseburger and chips costs £8, a pint of beer £3.50, and a replica shirt is £39.99, if your favourite colour happens to be brown. The public deserves better.

The Oval was, however, amply prepared for the queues at the bars to develop into full-blown riots. 190 security / stewards were in attendance, gloriously intimidating in their fluorescent jackets, many radio-linked to Big Brother and ready to pounce on any sign of drunken (fat chance) or inappropriate behaviour. Most of the spectators were family groups on a half term treat or professional types in suits who had just rolled out of their offices. An east London football derby it was not, and yet there was a steward for every forty spectators.

Needless to say they had no riots to crush, perhaps we should have asked the 'Green Team' to fetch the beers for us.

June 5, 2009

The Gautam Gambit

Posted by Cricinfo - on 06/05/2009 in Indian cricket

	Gautam Gambhir has played a key role in India's recent victories © Getty Images

from Sriram Dayanand, Canada

On the 20th of August 1969, the Beatles finished recording the song “I Want You (She’s So Heavy)”, marking the last time all four band members were in the same studio at the same time. Indian cricket’s “Let It Be” moment came in Nagpur on the 10th of November, 2008, the last time Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Saurav Ganguly and VVS Laxman would be on the field representing India in a Test match for the final time.

Since 1996, these four names had been music to ears and meant brilliance, class, imperiousness and the sheer artistry of batsmanship to cricket watchers here, there and everywhere. But not all bands are perpetual in their existence like the Rolling Stones. All things must pass and a time comes in the life of every band when their musical collaboration will cease to exist. But unlike the Liverpudians imploding due to their own internal fissures and frictions after they recorded Abbey Road, the breakup of Indian cricket’s Fab Four came after a chorus and at times, a crescendo of public opinion that seemed to deafen the senses.

The swift and unsettling exit from the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean was the beginning of the whispers, which amplified into arguments and it was not too long before it was a national free for all. The fallout from the acrimonious departure of their erstwhile coach Greg Chappell, who they thought was just a fool on the hill, added fuel to the fire. Two new words entered and dominated Indian cricket’s jargon for the next year - “Juniors” and “Seniors” - and the country seemed to be in a tizzy trying to expedite the granting of retirement privileges to the quartet. Even the mailman and the taxman piped in with their opinions about who should depart first and when. Cricket experts and writers the world over waded in needing no prompting and poured their supply of lighter fluid into the inferno which burned eight days a week.

Continue reading "The Gautam Gambit"