"How shit you must be if I got you out twice!"
-Paul Harris to Andrew Symonds, Perth 2008

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Have a read

Ian Chappell wrote a piece on Cricinfo regarding ODI's. It was the title that caught my eyes:

My feelings exactly. It has some new perspectives. Like this one:

There's only one reason to play cricket and that's to win the contest. You won't always achieve that pleasing result but players will have fun trying if the captain strives to make the contest interesting. When a fielding captain's mind is clouded with negativity, the game can become tedious, and if spectators feel that way, then spare a thought for the fielders. At least the fan can go to the bar or, in the worst case, get up and go home; the player has to stay on the field and endure his punishment. 

And this one:

The administrators can't legislate to make players better or captains more imaginative; it's immaterial if you play 40 or 50 overs a side, or split the innings in two halves, or play a two-innings limited-overs game. If one team is vastly superior to the other and one captain is desperate to win and the other is hoping he doesn't lose too badly, then two things are assured: the result will quickly be a foregone conclusion and the game will lose any semblance of excitement at about the same time. 

Click on the link to read the rest of it. It's worth your time.


Anonymous said...

Tha man is absolutely right. I really think psychology in sport makes a big difference. Also, don't change the format of the game to try and get more people watching, if you play good cricket they will come.

For example, some say tests are too long and boring yet it is always difficult to get Ashes tickets at either end of the world and when the match goes to a 5th day the queues to get in are enormous - this is because everyone knows it will always be a good match.

Purna said...

I know, everybody is looking for some formula these days. T20 formula, ODI formula, Test formula...and no one wants to take risks, play according to the situation at hand. The bloody Saffers are a big example. They didn't even TRY and get a result out of the last test!

Anonymous said...

I agree with him. And I like one day cricket, I always have. I find it more interesting than 20/20 as the narrative has more time to dip and turn.

The Aussies have been playing pretty safe cricket for a while now and they are learning that these mediocre totals won't do against decent teams. In some ways, I'm not sure that these losses are such a bad thing.

Purna said...

Lou, I actually have yet to meet anybody who think ODI's should not be played anymore. I don't understand why the cricket boards go on and on about it.