Cricket: ICC World Twenty20 tournament Sept 2007 in South Africa

zing said:
Good lord, stop with this rubbish "I watch only meaningful games.. this is ruining the sport.". I'm enjoying it, you're picking it apart needlessly when you could've very well opted to not watch the game. It might be shit, whatever, but if all you could do as an Indian watching India play Pakistan while the match was reaching an amazing ending was bitch over the internet, you're fecking weird.

I was on the edge of my seat, so were ALL the other people that I know here watching the match. Quit with this sanctimonious bullshit.

You'll probably reply with a laughing smiley or some shit.
Click to expand...

It's hardly that. This is making it closer to baseball to make it more Yank-appealing. Cricket is a very complex game, probably more so that any other and requires a lot of teamwork and planning. Tests is the real deal and one dayers are fine for the odd light hearted series. 20-20...no thank you

Never mattered to me in a long while about an Indo-Pak match. All the false sense of rivalry is only a commercial agenda to make the sport more appealing and give it a sense of traditionalism like the Ashes

mehro said:
How the feck did Pakistan not hit the stumps even once? And this bowl out shit is fecking gay. A hit out would have been a better idea. One over each. Which ever team scores more wins. This hitting the wickets crap is absolute nonsense.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Hitting the stumps from the 30 yard circle is more of a 'shoot-out' than this bowl out bollocks. It could take a bit more planning and time but atleast it wouldn't be this gay
 
ZIDANE said:
Err lads the seeds have already been done it doesn't matter where in the group you finish.

Look at the first post of this thread, it explain it a little in there.

The groups are done because the only matches left tomorrow are..

Sat 15 - 12:00 GMT - New Zealand v Sri Lanka
Sat 15 - 16:00 GMT - South Africa v Bangladesh

WI and Kenya have already been eliminated in both groups as they've played 2 matches each and lost.

Check the first post if you don't get it...

1st Group
South Africa
New Zealand
England
India

2nd Group
Australia
Pakistan
Bangladesh
Sri Lanka

EDIT - Fixture list of the above group matches as proof ;)
Click to expand...
What the feck are you talking about?

Super eight groups will be

A1, B2, C1 , D2 and A2, B1, C2, D1

India being D1 will have A2 most likely to be Bangla, B1 ie Aus and C2 with will be winner of SRL or NZ.

Edit: just saw the BBC link. That's gotta be a mistake, whole seed non shit. makes no fecking sense. feck off
 
Salvation said:
Never mattered to me in a long while about an Indo-Pak match. All the false sense of rivalry is only a commercial agenda to make the sport more appealing and give it a sense of traditionalism like the Ashes
Click to expand...

It's the other way around. There used to be a real sense of rivalry before 2000. Still remember the 96 QF and the first test series between the two after 15 years. It has been killed or mellowed down by over commercialization, a series between the two every year and whole lets spread the message of friendship non sense though cricket.
 
Whoopie...it seems Zidane's got it right. What a shit format....

India's not reaching the semis...
 
zing said:
Good lord, stop with this rubbish "I watch only meaningful games.. this is ruining the sport.". I'm enjoying it, you're picking it apart needlessly when you could've very well opted to not watch the game. It might be shit, whatever, but if all you could do as an Indian watching India play Pakistan while the match was reaching an amazing ending was bitch over the internet, you're fecking weird.

I was on the edge of my seat, so were ALL the other people that I know here watching the match. Quit with this sanctimonious bullshit.

You'll probably reply with a laughing smiley or some shit.
Click to expand...

Imagine if they started a new version of football with no goalies to cater to Yanks. How would you feel about that?

I found the game quite exciting, because it was the first time there was a meaningful contest between bat and bowl. The conditions didn't favour the batsmen so the bowlers actually played a part. Huge run chases with lots of 4s and 6s can get boring after a while.

The only bad part of the game was the nonsensical bowl out. Are they trying to make cricket like football? Maybe they'll bring in goals next and the batsman has to hit it past a wicket keeper.
 
crappycraperson said:
Whoopie...it seems Zidane's got it right. What a shit format....

India's not reaching the semis...
Click to expand...

Yeah they did the seeds before the start of the group matches, I don't know why they did it this way though. I've updated the first post so it explains it a lot better now - I'll add the upcoming matches later...

Anyway...

Sri Lanka just won NZ by 7 wickets...

I said before I wanted to see how they play in this form and I really do think they will go far in this tournament, if not win it, you can never count out Australia though.

The next match is the last of the group-stages - doesn't matter really the teams are playing for pride...

South Africa v Bangladesh
 
SRL looks really strong indeed. Both them and aussies are defy through to the semis from that group.
 
crappycraperson said:
It's the other way around. There used to be a real sense of rivalry before 2000. Still remember the 96 QF and the first test series between the two after 15 years. It has been killed or mellowed down by over commercialization, a series between the two every year and whole lets spread the message of friendship non sense though cricket.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the general consensus which to me matters for feck all

Pakistan have probably edged India out in those encounters, especially at Toronto
 
That bastard Shoaib cheated in The Kolkata Test iirc...blocked Sachin while he was taking a single...

India-Pak matches are always great to watch...20-20 ruined it for me completely though...still, it was a half decent match because the bowlers had some assistance.
 
Salvation said:
Yes, that's the general consensus which to me matters for feck all

Pakistan have probably edged India out in those encounters, especially at Toronto
Click to expand...
We won the QF...infact have won all the WC matches. Don remember who won most of the Toronto ones. You don't seem interested in cricket, still feel compelled to comment about it, strange....
 
We won two of the Toronto serieses iirc...Ganguly took something like 16 wickets in 5 matches...best of 5-16...amazing bowling.Sachin was the captain then..called him his 'secret weapon' in the post match interview.Debashish Mohanty was around those days....as was Vikram Rathore and Debang Gandhi...oh happy days.
 
crappycraperson said:
We won the QF...infact have won all the WC matches. Don remember who won most of the Toronto ones. You don't seem interested in cricket, still feel compelled to comment about it, strange....
Click to expand...

Yeah. Back then it had characters. Since Steve Waugh I can't recall any

Donado said:
We won two of the Toronto serieses iirc...Ganguly took something like 16 wickets in 5 matches...best of 5-16...amazing bowling.Sachin was the captain then..called him his 'secret weapon' in the post match interview.Debashish Mohanty was around those days....as was Vikram Rathore and Debang Gandhi...oh happy days.
Click to expand...

Abey Kuruvilla, Nilesh Kulkarni, Deepak Chauhan

I met the tall git once. Looked lost to me even then
 
Pakistan plan new Premier League

Pakistan have announced plans for an international Twenty20 competition to be held in October 2008, featuring foreign stars and six franchised teams.

It will be different from the domestic one played for two years in Pakistan.

"The Pakistan Premier League is part of the International Champions League, approved by the ICC, and will be run by five boards," a spokesman said.

Each team will comprise four foreign players, four regional players and the rest retired and under-21 players.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/other_international/india/6996609.stm

Obviously linked to the report the other day (post 122)

So far that's India, Australia, England/Wales, and now Pakistan making it four boards - who's the fifth?

It's definitely taking off now - bigger than I thought it would...
 
Kuruvilla used to be one of favs or atleast I backed him to hilt to make it big.

Some really awfully players have represented India, especially during the period Sachin was captain. I remember Ankola the fat cnut who later started doing tv shows. Paras Mhambrey is another one, he is supposed to India A's coach now.
 
I find it ridiculous that some people are posting that "India v Pakistan" is a media hype thing.

:wenger:

Anyway, India v NZ today. Hopefully we win.
 
Here's hoping the cricketers can get some revenge eh, albeit in a different sport.

It's gonna be tight whatever happens i reckon.
 
When is Christmas in India? Because those last few overs were absolute gifts, we should have never made over 170. Should be a good game now
 
Agarkar eh!

I'm sure there are better cricketers in India at this moment in time

He's been an embarrassment all summer
 
Sultan said:
Agarkar eh!

I'm sure there are better cricketers in India at this moment in time

He's been an embarrassment all summer
Click to expand...

He's got big ears.

As for 20/20. . . I wonder how it'll affect Test cricket in the long run. One Day cricket has been bad enough, especially on test playing nations outside of England and Australia.
 
malcolm31337 said:
Bad bowling in the end from India cost them the game. Bit hats off to Vetorri, showing how effective spin bowling can be.
Click to expand...

India don't look very good in this form of the game.

Reckon Sri Lanka's got a great chance. . .along with South Africa.
 
Spoonez el Grande said:
He's got big ears.

As for 20/20. . . I wonder how it'll affect Test cricket in the long run. One Day cricket has been bad enough, especially on test playing nations outside of England and Australia.
Click to expand...


I think what's obvious is 20/20 will eventually replace the longer one-day version of international cricket...It's doing what 50 over limited games were originally designed to do.
 
Sultan said:
I think what's obvious is 20/20 will eventually replace the longer one-day version of international cricket...It's doing what 50 over limited games were originally designed to do.
Click to expand...

Well I actually agree with that. The thing is the 50 over game is very dull in the middle overs. . .which goes against the whole point of the game. Let's be honest, it's always been a bastardised version of the game. . .and the only enjoyable part of it was the last 15 odd overs.
 
Spoonez el Grande said:
Well I actually agree with that. The thing is the 50 over game is very dull in the middle overs. . .which goes against the whole point of the game. Let's be honest, it's always been a bastardised version of the game. . .and the only enjoyable part of it was the last 15 odd overs.
Click to expand...

the middle overs of the match might be boring in the sense that not as many runs are scored but its often when the best and most technical cricket is played. It's the part of the 50 over game I enjoy most, as it is most often what wins the game.
 
Spoonez el Grande said:
Well I actually agree with that. The thing is the 50 over game is very dull in the middle overs. . .which goes against the whole point of the game. Let's be honest, it's always been a bastardised version of the game. . .and the only enjoyable part of it was the last 15 odd overs.
Click to expand...

Cricket is in a quandry.

Traditionalists do not want to compromise the way the game is played, yet without these forms of Cricket the sport would have serious difficulties if it was left to live off gate reciepts from longer versions of the game.
 
Kiwi_fan said:
the middle overs of the match might be boring in the sense that not as many runs are scored but its often when the best and most technical cricket is played. It's the part of the 50 over game I enjoy most, as it is most often what wins the game.
Click to expand...

As Sults pointed out. . .it's not the aim of the game. If you want proper technical cricket, then there's only one form of the game you should watch. Test cricket. That said, I don't agree at all. The middle overs are mundane. . .and all follow the same pattern. In fact the whole game has the same pattern, ad nauseum.
 
Sultan said:
Cricket is in a quandry.

Traditionalists do not want to compromise the way the game is played, yet without these forms of Cricket the sport would have serious difficulties if it was left to live off gate reciepts from longer versions of the game.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe that's true. But do you think cricket wouldn't be able to produce money if it wasn't for OD cricket? The Subcontinent has emerged as a power house over the last 15 years. . .especially financially. But I wonder if that would've been possible without one day cricket.
 
Kiwi_fan said:
the middle overs of the match might be boring in the sense that not as many runs are scored but its often when the best and most technical cricket is played. It's the part of the 50 over game I enjoy most, as it is most often what wins the game.
Click to expand...

That's not what the younger fans want though, it's not just about Cricket anymore, spectators want the attraction of music, bands, dancers, barbecues etc...

Can we just blame the Yanks?
 
Spoonez el Grande said:
Well, maybe that's true. But do you think cricket wouldn't be able to produce money if there wasn't OD cricket? The Subcontinent has emerged as a power house over the last 15 years. . .especially financially. But I wonder if that would've been possible without one day cricket.
Click to expand...

Cricket would die a very quick death if it wasn't for the One Day stuff...

India/Pakistan are suffering the same fate as our county scene, there is very little interest in the life blood of Cricket. It's only the money from TV and the Cricket boards which has helped keep it going financially.
 
This 20 20 is crap cricket, I dislike it. There is no technical side to the game and only one type of gameplay. You don't get a feel for how good bowlers actually are and there seems to be an un fair advantage on the team batting second. The 50 over game is my personal favourite but I guess I've grown up with it being an equal form of the game so don't appreciate test cricket as much. And Spoony I don't agree with you regarding the middle overs all being the same, and like it usually determines the outcome of the match. Batters might try and take it to the bowlers in an attempt to boost the run rate, they might attack one bowler and not the other, or they might shut shop and conserve wickets. There is similar variety with the bowling through these stages as well
 
Sultan said:
Cricket would die a very quick death if it wasn't for the One Day stuff...

India/Pakistan are suffering the same fate as our county scene, there is very little interest in the life blood of Cricket. It's only the money from TV and the Cricket boards which has helped keep it going financially.
Click to expand...

Our country scene has been dead for 2 and a half decades. Back in the old days Lancs used to pull in over 20,000 regularly.

And I don't get that though. The game is a religion in those parts(Asia), regardless of one day cricket.

Biggest shame over the last decade and a half has been the demise of Windies cricket.
 
Kiwi_fan said:
This 20 20 is crap cricket, I dislike it. There is no technical side to the game and only one type of gameplay. You don't get a feel for how good bowlers actually are and there seems to be an un fair advantage on the team batting second. The 50 over game is my personal favourite but I guess I've grown up with it being an equal form of the game so don't appreciate test cricket as much. And Spoony I don't agree with you regarding the middle overs all being the same, and like it usually determines the outcome of the match. Batters might try and take it to the bowlers in an attempt to boost the run rate, they might attack one bowler and not the other, or they might shut shop and conserve wickets. There is similar variety with the bowling through these stages as well
Click to expand...

Yes, it's crap. . .but so is the 50 overs stuff. Both forms are NOT cricket. So if I had a choice to plump for one it'd probably be 20/20. And that'll probably be the cash cow from now on. . .and eventually you'll see death of the 50 overs game.
 
Spoonez el Grande said:
Yes, it's crap. . .but so is the 50 overs stuff. Both forms are NOT cricket. So if I had a choice to plump for one it'd probably be 20/20. And that'll probably be the cash cow from now on. . .and eventually you'll see death of the 50 overs game.
Click to expand...

That's my biggest worry. Why do you hate the 50 over game so much? I know many cricketing purists who enjoy both forms of the game; I think it's good to have variation in cricket.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.