The party is over, the first World Twenty20 Series is over. The final between India and Pakistan was a tense a thrilling game right up to the final over.
As an American, raised on a fairly steady diet of English culture, Cricket is one thing that has remained elusive in my understanding of the English. It’s only in the recent Internet age when it was even possible for me to see a game a cricket, or find websites that (finally) got me the information to understand the game.
I’m not one to watch sports on TV. I generally believe sports are to be played, not watched. Still, in my effort to understand Cricket, I’ve spent some time recently watching as much as I possibly could. Most of the English games I’ve seen are Test and ODI (One Day International) against India. A couple Australian Twenty20 games and as many games as possible out of the World Twenty20 Series.
Having watched all three forms of Cricket in rapid succession, I’m mystified at comments like this:
KARACHI, Sept 23 – Former Pakistan captain Javed Miandad has warned that the continued promotion of Twenty20 cricket poses a threat to the traditional bastions of the sport, particularly at test level.
“They (the International Cricket Council) are turning cricket into baseball. In their bid to further commercialise and globalise the sport they are ruining its traditional character and spirit,†Miandad told Reuters on Sunday
from ESPN => Miandad issues warning over impact of Twenty20
An English friend of mine went further, his comment was, “It’s an abomination against the sport of Cricket.â€
And I read an even more bizarre comment from a current cricket player (can’t find the exact quote) that said the Twenty20 formt wasn’t real cricket, it was just a demonstration of the raw talent of the team members.
Maybe I don’t understand Cricket, but isn’t it the talent of the players that makes the difference in any form of the game? Or any sport for that matter?
All this seems like sour grapes to me. Just looking at the test matches reveals mostly empty stadiums, and, certainly the audience isn’t the same from day to day. Even ODI is 7 hours long. There is no stadium seat on this planet properly designed to contain a human butt comfortably for 7 hours.
Twenty20 improves (yes, I said it, in my opinion, improves) on this by reducing the length of the game to about 3 hours, and picking up the pacing. I do think some of the fielding restrictions are a bit of a mistake
The ICC even thinks they might get Cricket to crack the US (and China, but who cares?) market with the Twenty20 format – and I think they might. Test cricket, no chance. ODI, only in highlights, like golf, but Twenty20 stands a chance.
I really am mystified at the animosity to the Twenty20 format, and if anyone can enlighten me as to why I’d appreciate hearing it.
Oh, by the way, India won, by 5 runs, in the last over.
Some Cricket info from our friends at Wikipedia: