Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
40 Over Quarter-Final v Somerset
#21
I dont think its totally rubbish, the people I speak to have different opinions. I dont think you should judge it on whats happened so far.
Reply
#22
Problem is you can easily make things too complicated and sports works best when they are a simple game you can describe in 1 reasonable length sentence.
Chris, don't ask why Windy. No please don't. No.

Music: http://trip-tv.blogspot.com/
Me: http://mixing-and-matching.blogspot.com/
Reply
#23
(09-06-2010, 02:57 PM)Paul Wrote: I dont think its totally rubbish, the people I speak to have different opinions. I dont think you should judge it on whats happened so far.

I dont. I judge it on being a rubbish idea. My problem is that I cant see a situation where this actually makes the game more interesting.
Supporter of the 2014 County Champions
Reply
#24
I think it has potential as a mini-version of a traditional 2 innings per side FC game.
Chris, don't ask why Windy. No please don't. No.

Music: http://trip-tv.blogspot.com/
Me: http://mixing-and-matching.blogspot.com/
Reply
#25
Im still intrigued by how Duckworth-Lewis will work!
Reply
#26
(10-06-2010, 09:41 AM)Kim Wrote:
(09-06-2010, 02:57 PM)Paul Wrote: I dont think its totally rubbish, the people I speak to have different opinions. I dont think you should judge it on whats happened so far.

I dont. I judge it on being a rubbish idea. My problem is that I cant see a situation where this actually makes the game more interesting.

Ok, lets see,

Side1. scores 100/2 off 20
side 2 scores 130/3 off 20

The next innings is going to be more intesting that it would have been if side a were still batting the 40 overs... I think so anyway.
Reply
#27
An alteration to the conditions of play could be along the lines of the following.

Whichever side wins the toss has 2 choices

Bat 1st AND last

Field 1st (possibly leading to being asked to follow on after the 2nd innings of the match by the other captain if your team were, say, 60/70 runs behind)

By allowing a side to bat 1st and 3rd you risk ending up with sides losing before theyve fielded twice. My idea would make that less likely.
Reply
#28
No then you are just adding extra complexity to it.
Chris, don't ask why Windy. No please don't. No.

Music: http://trip-tv.blogspot.com/
Me: http://mixing-and-matching.blogspot.com/
Reply
#29
Which is kinda what they will keep doing with T20 anyway to keep it interesting and vibrant as the format has no real chance of longeivity.

Its what they have tried to do with 50 over cricket, all these extra rules about powerplays (although I quite like the new batting powerplay in truth) but the idea is that cricket is not simple anymore and has to be complicated by all manner of external factors so that the event is more televisually attention grabbing but less relaxing and thus an excellent vehicle for big sponsors and advertisers, coloured clothing was mostly about this too.

Its what they are doing with Test Cricket - more external factors such as referrals = more advertising potential - rather than just leaving the game alone as a simple game to watch and enjoy in a relaxed mode, we have to go over and over umpire's decisions, zooming in on the stumps, the edges of the bats etc.

Cricket is a game that requires a certain level of intelligence to get into in the first place, but once in, the cricket spectator has an array of things to think about but it basically becomes a simple, relaxed game to follow when the weather is nice.

All the extra complexity TV and big business has brought to the sport, makes it less enjoyable for those already hooked and must make it even more tricky to get into in the first place. From my perspective admittedly.

Im trying to trace the exact moment in time when the ECB pronounced cricket 'open for business' as it was not like this when I followed cricket in my youth (late 80's early 90's).
Reply
#30
It looks like the split innings format is not going to happen here but will do in Australia:
http://www.cricket365.com/news/story/620...it-innings.
Reply
#31
There really needs to be only two formats of cricket - T20 and 4 / 5 day cricket; both played across the season. Keep it simple........... no need for split innings or 50 overs with 15 overs of boredom included.
Reply
#32
(12-06-2010, 12:00 AM)Warleybear Wrote: There really needs to be only two formats of cricket - T20 and 4 / 5 day cricket; both played across the season. Keep it simple........... no need for split innings or 50 overs with 15 overs of boredom included.

They play 55 overs in the Birmingham league.

There is room for all manner of formats so long as you don't overcomplicate things.

In fact, there is nothing to stop county cricket having 1 competition which embraces multiple formats. This happened in the early 1990's when we had a mix of 3 and 4 day matches during the season.

If you want, you could have 1 competition that starts off as a 50 over contest in April then turns into a 20 over contest in June and then towards the end of the season turns into a 40 over contest.

The Minor Counties Championship, for example is a 3 day competition played every other Sunday from June to August but the final is played over 4 days!

On this basis my latest proposal is

16 championship matches a season

16 limited overs matches a season
(The 1st 4 played as 40/40 matches)
(The middle 8 played as 20/20 matches)
(The final 4 playes as 40/40 matches again)

tot up the points from the 20/20 matches at the end of July to obtain a 20/20 finals day between 4 counties - no need for Quarter Finals.

tot up the points from all 16 limited overs matches in September to obtain 4 sides to play semi-finals and then a Lords final in September.

32 match regular season. 80 days playing cricket.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)