While taking the Labrador for his walk on Saturday morning, it dawned on me that I’d completely forgotten about the first Twenty20 International between South Africa and Australia, which South Africa managed to win by 4 wickets.
I hadn’t necessarily intended to watch the match from the Wanderers ground in Johannesburg, played early Saturday morning our time, but I usually have a pretty good grasp of what cricket is being played around the globe.
Actually, my wife would argue it’s too good a grasp. (And to the cricketers out there, do you hear the same tone as I do when the words “I’m a cricket widow” are mentioned?)
Anyway, this minor lapse in the telepathic cricket calendar got me wondering about the international status of the shortest form of cricket, its place in the grand scheme of things, and really, does anyone give a bugger about it?
Think about this. In virtually all the major cricket playing nations of the world – and probably even some of the minor nations – domestic Twenty20 competitions are killing it, easily drawing the biggest crowds, television audiences, and of course, revenue.
Competitions based on counties, states, provinces, and now particularly corporate owned franchises, exist and succeed on most continents.
Texan billionaire Allen Stanford did his best to create the ultimate corporate (and somewhat self-indulgent) cricket competition in the Caribbean; that was of course until the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fraud investigators caught up with him.
But not even the fallen Stanford can compete with the bigger and much more corporate juggernaut that is the Indian Premier League (IPL).
Though despite all this domestic success, and ongoing planning for future growth in the various markets, the international game remains quite small, limited to one-off games or token two-match “series”. The four-year T20 World Cup cycle has been created, but generally, T20 Internationals are played as lead-ins to the “traditional” limited overs series.
I don’t particularly mind that the international games are limited in number, but I’m thinking that they either seem to be getting lost among the standard 50-over matches, or more likely, the T20I matches are just losing their gloss.
Last week’s news surrounding the relocation of the 2009 IPL tournament reinforces my theory.
Because of the high security demands for the month-long Indian general elections, the IPL has been forced to temporarily ignore what the “I” stands for, with the tournament to be now played in South Africa from April 18. With the final locked in for May 24, a staggering 59 matches will be played in just 36 days.
And then, once all the players heads stop spinning, the T20 World Cup begins in England, at Lord’s on June 5.
But will anyone be still watching by then, or will we all be Twenty20’d out?
It would seem to me that the obvious push to make T20 cricket a legitimate international game – and it’s even been suggested that T20 is precisely the vehicle to finally bring China and the US aboard the global cricket train – could actually have the opposite effect.
Could it be a case of the domestic competitions killing off the international game?
Remember too, that we still haven’t played the inaugural Champions T20 League yet, a tournament that was to have brought together the top teams from England, South Africa, Australia, Pakistan, and the IPL, but was postponed indefinitely after the December 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Also, planning is theoretically still under way to establish a Super 14-style Southern Premier League from 2011.
Where will all this T20 fit into an already crowded Test and ODI schedule?
Surely, logically if not logistically, something has to give.
One-Day International cricket must remain to maintain that bridge between the pure, traditional Test Match game, and it’s infant, bling-wearing sibling.
So if the corporate/domestic T20 competitions around the globe show no sign of retreat, then maybe it’s the international version that can easily be dispensed with.
And perhaps then, my telepathic cricket calendar won’t be so overloaded.
Murray
Guest
I completely agree. 2020, or twenty20 if you will, should be used as a cash boost for domestic competitions and for an all stars style tournament such as the IPL played over a short period in between major international series. Two a year maximum of these can be accomodated Clever scheduling needs to ensure that no major cricket seasons are affected, which thanks to the imperial global spread of cricket, there is always sunshine somewhere in the cricketing world. Also the short nature of these games means they are less weather effected and thus can be played at times when no other cricket realistically can. Get rid of the Cricket world 2020 that is a meaningless exercise of taking punter's money. We have that prospect to 'look forward to' in England when I would rather the ashes tour was longer, with proper two week breaks and the usual tradition of playing against the counties. Save 2020 as a format of a fun festival of all stars cricket.
ONSIDE
Guest
Brett McKay Yeah,theres a bit of pub talk about the suggestion.Thats the thing with these conversations you want to say something even though you know its ridiculous.But on the other hand.....!!!!!!
Brett McKay
Expert
Onside, you're right, it would be a ratings bonanza in both countries, but I wouldn't like the see the Ashes decided by a ODI, and Brian, especially not by a T20I game. If after 25 days of Test cricket, the Ashes series is deadlocked, then that's a pretty fair result for me..
drewster
Roar Pro
I would think 2 x T20 internationals per tour is quite sufficient. With test matches and ODI's, there is surely enough International cricket played and the more there is, the more first class cricket suffers with a lack of class players available. Leave the majority of the T20 where it is and if other countries catch on then so be it!, Let the corporates buy a franchise or 2. Test Cricket will always be the ultimate in any form of the game and T20 will always be a slogathon with negative bowling and fielding tactics in my book anyway. Great entertainment value but not a true test of an international cricketer.
Brian
Guest
I find T20 as exciting as ODI. Its pretty much the same without the boring 10-40 over mark. Now cricket is basically a 5 day game so I would finish off the ODI and have only T20 and Tests instead. Personally I cannot remember watching an exciting ODI since the 1999 WC semi. Imagine the Ashes coming down to a T20 - there's some TV ratings for you
Cracker
Guest
I wasn't sure how to take 20/20 when it first came out but given the nature of the game I was surprised when teams seemed so dejected after losing a game. It seemed like a bit of hit and giggle where it didn't matter who won. I have a passing interest in 20/20 and believe that it is a good way of raising the profile of state cricket in Australia. However the administrators must be careful about overkill, and they appear to be doing a pretty good job with touring teams limited to one or two 20/20 games among the one dayers and tests. The over exposure can occur with all of the tournaments being dreamed up all over the place. At the end of the day the great cricket moments you remember tend to be those from test matches and occasionally from one dayers. The day after watching a 20/20 game you have forgotten what happened.
ONSIDE
Guest
Brett McKay You are right. To me its like a slow developing deep seated computer virus. Just a thought;what would happen if the ODI's against England were included as counting towards the ASHES. Or for that matter any international series. Legitimise ODI's. Why not. Play a Test match, followed by a ODI. and so on . Just imagine the ASHES coming down to the last ODI Imagine the TV ratings.They'd probably be higher than Twenty/20 in CURRYMAI And try buying a ticket to the game.............good luck !
Brett McKay
Guest
Onside, you may well be right about T20 being a fad, but it's a fad that will theoretically be around for at least the length of the billion-dollar TV contracts..
ONSIDE
Guest
The ODI is a TREND. Twenty /20 is a FAD
Brett McKay
Guest
Millster, I'd think losing the 50-over game would be a horrendous loss for cricket, it would take out that major step between 5-day and 3-hour games. And if that happened, Tests going the distance would become as rare as hen's teeth. I think there's a place for all three forms, but I'm not convinced we need SO MUCH of the T20 variety. You can have too much of a good thing. If in five years time, we've lost some of the meaningless ODI tournaments, but T20 is still in high demand domestically, then the calendar will probably have a nice balance about it. For eg, is there any reason for the current 5-game ODI series in South Africa to be stretched over three weeks??
sheek
Guest
Brett, I'm showing my age, & the ever widening gap between myself & today's younger generation.....just like a ship moving steadily away from harbour & land! I was 14 when the first international one-day match was held (albeit as an afterthought) in early 1971. I remember the old-timers poo-pooing it as "not real cricket". Ahhhh....."history repeats". The names may change, & also the nature. But the circumstances repeat. Now I'm one of those old fuddy-duddies deriding T20 as "not real cricket". And dammit, I'm not backing down! I'm just as stubborn as the old farts of the 1970s!
Millster
Guest
I must say without all the shouting I agree with Onside. Why would the rest of the world want to replace a good, quality run sporting type with another less good and more peculiar one? The only good that will come of Twenty/20 is that it will squeeze out and kill off the 50 over version of the game.
ONSIDE
Guest
WHY WOULD THE USA ,CHINA, AND THE REST OF THE NONCRICKETING WORLD CONSIDER 20/TWENTY WHEN THEY ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO A FAR SUPERIOR TIME PROVEN PRODUCT,...........BASEBALL.
ONSIDE
Guest
TWENTY /20 IS TO CRICKET WHAT WORLD SERIES WRESTLING IS TO MARTIAL ARTS.
Brett McKay
Guest
Chop, that was kind of my point. If China and the US are to take to T20 cricket, then lets put US sides in Caribbean comps, and Chinese teams in the IPL in necessary, but let's not kid ourselves trying to bring them in by hurriedly expanding the international version. Thee's only so many days in a calander year, and most of them already have cricket on them!!
Chop
Roar Guru
T20 might be the answer to getting exposure in America and China, but I think if it is over played it will be the death test cricket (or ODI for that matter) and as a cricket traditionalist I would much rather watch a good days test cricket than anything else. Test cricket is actually a contest and T20 is he equivalent of a home run derby in baseball. The poor bowlers, bowling in pitches design to bounce nicely and go gunbarrel straight to give batsman the best possible chance to smash the ball into the crowds.