http://desicritics.org/ Superior South Asian bloggers on Culture, Media, Politics, Sport, Business, and Technology. en Copyright 2006 by the authors Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:07:37 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss BC custom software http://desicritics.org/2008/02/22/005804.php#comment-322364 Raj... there is however a monopoly on the part of the BCCI, which i have no problem with, but which, as guardians of the sport in India, they must stay worthy of... T20 as a format is dubious for reasons that i have discussed earlier (the post is linked in this article) - it is not as many people suggest a compressed ODI game, just as an ODI game is not a compressed Test match. The reference to Packer was purely a reference to the quality of cricket it produced. In that sense it did no disservice to the sport. No other sport in living memory has abused its own format and rules as easily as limited overs Cricket has. Ultimately it is T20 and ODI cricket that Test cricket is in competition with. ODI cricket has already caused Test series to be reduced to a token two tests per series in most instances. It remains to be seen what T20 will do.. Its obvious that it is too early to say what T20 will do to cricket.... but the argument here is based primarily on two concerns - the poor format, and the position of BCCI as the guardian of the sport as against just another company seeking to get into the entertainment business. 322364@desicritics.org Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:07:37 EST http://desicritics.org/2008/02/22/005804.php#comment-322333 well u are wrong on kerry packer altogether. When packer started in late seventies, he had same dilemmas: 1) tarnshin pure cricket 2) not gonna work. It worked and it was famous fr 30 full years tat we still look forward to 2008 world tri series goin on now which was by product of the packer series. Now 30 yrs frm now ppl(meanin the general joe of india) will say 20-20 is better than test cricket and ofcourse 50-50 wud have become extinct. So lets wait and watch. 322333@desicritics.org Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:26:51 EST http://desicritics.org/2008/02/22/005804.php#comment-322332 well u are wrong on kerry packer altogether. When packer started in late seventies, he had same dilemmas: 1) tarnshin pure cricket 2) not gonna work. It worked and it was famous fr 30 full years tat we still look forward to 2008 world tri series goin on now which was by product of the packer series. Now 30 yrs frm now ppl(meanin the general joe of india) will say 20-20 is better than test cricket and ofcourse 50-50 wud have become extinct. So lets wait and watch. 322332@desicritics.org Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:25:22 EST http://desicritics.org/2008/02/22/005804.php#comment-322330 Too early and difficult to guage it's impact. What worries me most is its impact on Test cricket. But we will see....wait and watch,,,,,in the meanwhile there is an interesting Test match between SAF and Bangladesh. I have a feeling BD will win this one (their first against a leading test team) 322330@desicritics.org Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:14:54 EST http://desicritics.org/2008/02/22/005804.php#comment-322328 "The game is shortchanged because its best exponents are reduced to participating in a farcical format which does not allow any real contest between bat and ball. The spectators are shortchanged, because they see a team sheet with some of the greatest names in the game, only to find that most of them are over the hill, playing a format which is better suited for under 12's." You seem to arrogate to yourself the power to decide what's good for the game, the players and the spectators. If the players don't want to be auctioned, they can say so and stay out. If the spectators don't want to see the match, they have the option of staying out. Where's the question of being short-changed? There's no coercion or false claims. 322328@desicritics.org Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:53:43 EST