MUMBAI INDIANS!!!!!!!!!

chicken 'n chips Wrote:

---

> I just can't get myself to like 20/20
>
> Test cricket for me everyday of the week


Myself bru, test cricket number 1 any day of the year!!!

T20 is a batman's game. Everything is against the bowler.

You might as well have no fielders.

That match was so unbelievable.that it felt like it was scrIpted:S

It justs not cricket....()

Is 20/20 "cricket" ?? Should just have a bowling machine and catches in crowd count !!! Over the history of cricket, the ball has remained the same (slight change from two piece to four-piece) but bats, boundaries, field restrictions, bowling restrictions, etc have changed to benefit batsmen...even in test cricket, in the last 10/15 years, we have seen the most batsmen with 50+ averages compared to any other time in the history of the sport...

Something is seriously wrong with cricket with the imbalance between batting and bowling and it is fast losing any appeal to me as a viewer...there are many who disagree with this opinion and it is their right to have a differing opinion...I'd much rather watch rugby where the players compete on a largely equal footing despite the bias exhibited by referees...

Cricket is everyones game,imo.
A bowler has 6 balls and over, 4overs in T20(24b), 10 in ODI(60), unlimited in test, to get batsmen out, where as a batsman only gets 1chance..if he messes up, he is out!gone, kapush!!!!!!

Fielders, candrop a ball, and catch the next 3( dropped 4gtten), wicket keeper can catch and stump.

Batsmen r helped, yes, most definitely-but, let's not 4gt in all sports ppl are helped.
Goal Keepers are helped all the time in football, esp of high balls, penalties,etc.

In Rugby, teams defences are protected so much, dt even when a try is scored, the ref gets to go back 3/4 moves back to see if there was any infringements...

Are bowlers not helped when the fieldrestriction overs are finish?
Or when they are able to set their own field. Imagine if there was only a standard field setting? Bowlers now, are so skilled that it is scary, it is an art and intelligence. I disagreeeven with all theexpert punditson TV,that say cricket is abatsmens game. Cricket is agame of 3disciplines,beit test, odi, T20....u have to make ascore and defend a score, attack or contain. Easy.

When I have been in Mumbai I pretty much only see Indian looking people so not sure what this thread is about.???

Jet lee Wrote:

---

> That match was so unbelievable.that it felt like
> it was scrIpted:S

Probably was

The difference with the various forms of cricket is that the shorter the match, the greater the luck influence and less the skill!
Also agree with the batsman bias!!!!!!!!...................if no bowler is allowed more than 10 overs, in 50 over cricket ,why not restrict any one batsman to the same.............would prevent one batsman winning a match virtually all on his own!!!!!

Bats nowadays have made a mockery of the game...the ball is still 150 odd grams but the sweet spot on bats are now much larger allowing mediocre batsmen to mishit boundaries off great deliveries...shorter boundaries have also not helped in that mishits land in the stands rather than in the hands of boundary fielders...and only four can be on the boundary to cover an area that is quite large...doesn't take much of a hit with the bats of today to get the ball over the in-field and into the vast gaps in the outfield...

20/20 cricket was done to make the game more marketable to American audiences due to television revenue that can be generated in that large market...just hasn't taken off as 3+ hours is too long for those audiences to hold their attention especially when sports like baseball, and basketball are long established...

Lastly, yesterday's match did play out like a Bollywood script...just that few Bollywood movies are done with complete scripts available at the start of a movie...they have a rough outline and then amend and adjust as they go along to get to the 3 hour mark...()