Sometime into Brad Haddin’s forceful innings in the opening match of the Big Bash tournament he opened his stance and with elegance and power smashed a ball over the bowler’s head for a six.
As the ball soared away into the night sky the roars of the crowd grew louder and louder the further the hit carried.
As I watched this I realised that the crowd was really following the contest. And they were appreciating the skills being revealed by the batsmen (Haddin particularly) and the bowlers.
Stuart MacGill got a huge roar of approval when he bowled Matthew Hayden with a sharply breaking delivery.
The comedian Robin Williams once described Test cricket as baseball on valium. The Big Bash is more like baseball on steroids.
David Warner, in his fantastic knock against the Melbourne Stars, belted 102 runs off 52 balls. He hit an astonishing six fours and six sixes. About a quarter of all the balls he faced went to the boundary, and an eighth went over the fence.
In the earlier era Babe Ruth was nicknamed ‘the sultan of the swat’ for his home-run hitting talents. Warner is a similar type of hitter. But in a cricket context, the impressive aspect of this Warner’s hitting is that he seldom slogs.
As the cricket commentators might have said and will say, virtually all the Warner boundary hits were real cricket shots.
The hits down the ground against Shane Warne (who claimed, correctly, that he felt he was bowling well) were beautiful strikes. There was a textbook placement of the feet, the full face of the bat and a lovely, straight, powerful follow-through.
I am an ancient, as many readers of The Roar will have noticed. Many years ago I had the pleasure of sitting on the Hill at the world’s best cricket ground, the SCG, and watching the great Neil Harvey belt around a good South Australian bowling attack in a Sheffield Shield match.
The highest praise I can endow on Warner is that watching him on Saturday night (from a box in that same Hill area of yesteryear) brought back memories of Harvey’s batting.
There was the same stocky build and left-hand stance. The same aggressive, cocky approach to all of the bowlers. The same attitude that every ball was a potential four or six. There was the same twinkle-toed footwork. And the same flashing, slashing shots off the front foot and back foot.
The point here is that Twenty20 cricket is real cricket. It is not an equivalent of, say, Sevens Rugby, which is a different thing essentially to the longer version of the game. Twenty20 is condensed cricket, the way condensed soup is real soup with the water taken out. Similarly, the longeurs of the longer forms of cricket are removed from the Twenty20 mode.
And from the evidence of the first two matches (admittedly a small sample), real cricketers will flourish playing this form of the game. It is a batsman’s game, in that bowlers are restricted to only four overs while batsmen can play out an entire innings.
The longer form of the game, for its part, is really a bowler’s game, in that you have to dismiss 20 batsmen for an outright win.
Aside from the inherent but generalised objection from cricket devotees to any radical changes to cricket schedules and formats, the argument against the Twenty20 format is that it represents a triumph of commercialism over the integrity of a real sport. There is an element of truth in this argument. But it needs to be remembered that cricket started as a gambling and commercial game.
The earlier tours such as that of W.G.Grace to Australia in the late 19th century were commercial ventures, with the money going to the entrepreneurs and the playing star. Grace was brought out to Australia by the Lilywhite company as an alternative when their most lucrative talent, Charles Dickens, took ill.
And it was the new technology of the railways in the late 19th century that led to the development of the country cricket circuit. Pay television, a latter-day equivalent of the railways system, has provided the platform for new developments in all the mainstream sports, especially cricket.
My objection or worry is whether the shortened form of the game will act like a type of lantana weed and smother out longer forms, especially Test cricket. It is imperative that Cricket Australia use the Twenty20 game and formats like the Big Bash to provide the income and resources (in terms of player development and crowd interest, for instance) to increase interest in Test cricket.
There is also the consideration about how ‘tribal’ the designated teams will be. Will youngsters and their parents go to watch the Melbourne Stars when Shane Warne finally gives away bowling? Will the appeal of the Sydney Thunder wane when David Warner is not playing? Or will these teams, and all the others in the tournament, develop a following that transcends the players in a particular side?
The relatively poor crowd turnout at Sydney and Melbourne gives the marketing gurus a challenge that needs to be met if the tournament is to be a continuing success.
At the game itself I must admit that it was difficult to follow what was actually happening, in terms of runs per over and the other important stats in this form of cricket. The main scoreboard was virtually taken over with advertisements. The side scoreboard on this main board was not particularly informative. Nor was the small scoreboard on the side.
My suggestion is for the ground announcer to give out the details of where the game is at after every over.
The players should have their names on their clothing, too, so spectators can tell who they are.
Nor do we need (non-metaphorical) fireworks before the start of the innings. At the SCG, the game had to be held up for a short time for the smoke to clear.
I am sure that the marketing people will fine tune these matters as the tournament progresses. What they need to understand is that the format stands and falls on the quality of the cricket. The game’s the thing.
The fireworks and the cheer girls and all the other hoopla is just that – hoopla. It soon palls. But performances like Warner’s superb innings remain in the memory and will bring supporters back for more.
The Big Bash needs quality, intensity, and interest in its play. And so far the cricket has been excellent, both the batting and the bowling. More than the marketing glitz, it is this that augurs well for the future of the tournament.
ceifaroey
Guest
heres the deal regarding expansion. 1st expansion all 5 major cities re-introduce their state teams to to make it a 2-team city(ies). - perth warriors - perth scorchers - adelaide redbacks - adelaide strikers - melbourne bushrangers - melbourne renegades - melbourne stars - sydeny blues OR blitz - sydney sixers - sydney thunders - brisbane heat - brisbane bulls now regarding tassie: launceston is slightly smaller than hobart. so - launceston tigers - hobart hurricanes once that blooms, the second expansion should look at covering more demographics. 2nd expansion - canberra comets. (has a large enough population and is too isolated for fans to travel to sydney or melbourne) - northern territory crocodiles (a huge potential market with its isolation and no other professional sports teams in the city) if they succeed 3rd expansion - gold coast dolphins (altho it is very close to brisbane its has half a million people and is the most growing city in australia) - townsville suns (like darwin it has a massive drawcard as it is very geographically isolated to brisbane etc and is quite a large city being the unofficial capital of far north queensland) if that succeeds, expand no more as all of the markets has been covered). here are the problems - newcastle (altho it is a large city of half a million people it is too close to sydney and its teams to warrant a team) - geelong (the same theory as newcastle) - wollongong (too small and as above) - auckland; wellington; christchuch (a awesome idea but make it flourish in australia firstly as NZ has its own comp) last notes: - the BBL name is gay; the name "big bash" encourages the circus theme it is known as and its clearly not a circus, its simply a form of cricket. look at the one-day form, when it started with the world series cup by packet it was ridiculed as being a 'circus', know it is accepted as a normal game, per se. anyway not to digress why don't the call the league the ACB (australian cricket board), or the ACL (australian cricket league) - it is all very well to have teams in luanceston, canberra, twonsville, and gold coast, but what about cities that don't have a proper cricket or aussie rules ground as you can't play cricket at newcastle stadium as it is rectangle, and newcastles cricket ground is not way up to standard to host a professional match, it'll be like playing a afl game in a a bush town- it won't happen as the ground isn't up to standard, - heres an idea lets drop the one day format and replace it with 20/20 period as one day cricket is struggling these days. following on from this idea, why don't the australian cricket have 1 single comp with the 'test' format and the 20/20 format incorporated into one competition. from this a each team will play a 'series' or 2 games over three days. the first 2 days is a sheffield shield match with each team only having one innings each over 2 days (as normally in sheffield shield a team is bowled out within 90 overs anyway), and following that game the 3 day is a 20/20 game played between the same teams. this is similar to the current sheffield shield and ryobi cup series as it is. - the 20/20 form is not a joke, as essentially the fundamentals of the game never change weather its 20/20 or test matches. batting, bowling and fielding, its simple. anyone with half a brain would not play a test match and swing at every ball bowl to them knowing they got all day to consolidate a score, and the shots they play would not be as risky but more calculated. they are still cricket shot: square cut, off drive or hook shot = fundamentals. - cricket is australias national sport as it has not competitors like afl = nrl. more grassroots programs and changes need to happen before soccer will be australia summer sport and afl and nrl with be the most popular sports australia wide. - take a leave out of major league baseball and how they run their game.
cubb20
Guest
CA needs a big bash for an idea that it is largely based around getting predominantly has been or relatively unknown cricketers to play in teams which most cricket lovers have no connection with. Unfortunately for them in drawing up their launch plans the marketing gurus believed they could do a cut and paste job by borrowing from the IPL. It is a different market boys! Early crowds are disappointing. Don t believe the BS about TV audiences. If this is what they can achieve after a big scale launch watch it go down hill from here. The saddest thing is that CA in trying to grease their palms with more cash have shown little regard for other forms of cricket including dumping the successful state based 20/20 Big Bash.
Russ
Guest
Sheek, only a little more complicated; but I don't understand why we complicate it at all. Test cricket needs no such complications. You'll have to explain further what you mean by "develop all-rounders". Is not the point of sport to have the best possible contest? And would that not be provided by unlimited overs from the best possible bowlers? Watching part-time hacks get worked around with ultra-defensive fields is one of the things that turned me against ODIs. I never said my partner cared about cricket... merely that I could convince her to walk to the MCG. I'd have a lot less trouble if the MCG had a decent cafe, or maybe a weekend farmer's market when the Shield is on...
lolly
Guest
He would have trained in the nets for the past four years with Indian players at Delhi. He opens the batting with Sehwag. Can't see how anything he is doing could be a secret to them and it's good captaincy practise for him.
sheek
Guest
Actually, as much as T20 disturbs me for the negative influence it might have on traditional, longer forms of the game, I must admit I like the idea of Big Bash League - BBL. It fits!
sheek
Guest
Russ, How is this complicating things further? One bowler can bowl six overs, no-one else can bowl more than 4. Even today's generation can work that out without a calculator - barely! You still need a minimum 5 bowlers because the the idea is to develop all-rounders, even the quasi-type. The game is already favouring batting. By allowing the best bowler an extra 2 overs evens things up ever so slightly. And you're lucky your partner goes to the cricket with you. The only time my wife enquires about sport to me is to check the date if a function she's planning (as an events co-ordinator) clashes with any major sporting event. Other than that, she couldn't care less about sport. Oh, & she likes the Olympics for the glam & drama.....
Rellum
Roar Guru
20/20 does change the game. The contest between bat and ball is now reduced to a point where it is not significant to the outcome. 20/20 is more of a home run competition.
turbodewd
Guest
Id like to rename the BBL to something we arent to take seriously. Perhaps the PCA or PCL - Professional Cricket Association/League or simply T20L
Brett McKay
Expert
also true..
Rellum
Roar Guru
Much better. Much better.
Russ
Guest
Sheek, agree with that as a growth plan. Would suggest (West) Sydney Squatters and (North Melbourne or Maribyrnong) Migrants as team names.
sheek
Guest
Turbs, For starters, change state to capital city, bar Tasmania (so as not to inflame the north-south divide). That gives you 6 teams as a base. Sydney Blues, Melbourne Bushrangers, Adelaide Redbacks, Perth Warriors, Brisbane Bulls, Tasmania Tigers. The second Sydney team should perhaps be the Mariners or Colonials (probably more acceptable to Convicts). Even Old Salts in preference to Mariners. The second Melbourne team could well be called Diggers. But ensure the Returned Services League (RSL) is made abundantly clear Diggers refers to the gold mining era. The RSL is unbelievably touchy about the use of the name Diggers. Newcastle Miners is good, & Gold Coast Dolphins already play in the Brisbane district premier cricket comp. Canberra Comets already exist, so add them along with Geelong Cougars (retaining the cat theme for the region). Forget NZ for the moment. So this is how you could grow it. The team names & colours would be the same for all forms of cricket. Sydney Blues (West) Sydney Colonials Melbourne Bushrangers (East) Melbourne Diggers Adelaide Redbacks Perth Warriors Brisbane Bulls Gold Coast Dolphins Newcastle Miners Canberra Comets Geelong Cougars Tasmania Tigers
jameswm
Guest
True. But when you have to start playing veterans in what should be a future players team, to play the veterans into form, it's time to move said veterans on.
Brett McKay
Expert
you can't ditch Hobart, Turbo, that's ridiculous. And there's as many viewers in thw ACT as Tasmania, so your numbers wouldn't change..
Brett McKay
Expert
There's certainly merit in him not playing James, but by the same token, I suggested to a couple of mates over the weekend, that Ponting and Hussey SHOULD be playing for the exact reasons you don't want Warner to. They'd get as much out of a tour game as they would a few days in front of a bowling machine..
jameswm
Guest
Surely it would be the Brisbane Rednecks;)
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Matt F Australian Football has the concept of the Lightning premiership, very similar to those pre-season games you mention,which will occur again next year, and everything is the same except it's cut right down to two halves of 10 to 15 min, such that the game becomes blindingly frenetic, rather than just plain frenetic. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, one year the AFL actually ran a Lightning premiership prior to the start of the pre-season cup.
jameswm
Guest
I thought of that Steve but bowlers can hold a lot back. I think the bowling team gets a much bigger advantage looking at the batsman.
Big Steve
Guest
The other side of the argument is he will get to have a look at the indian bowlers. Id assume they have all seen each other in the IPL so its probably not a big deal either way. Mickey Arthur last night was pretty funny when the fox lady asked him if Warner would play on boxing day. I think he said it would be useful to have warner there on boxing day.
jameswm
Guest
3 is the biggest problem by far. I don't think 1 has much relevance, and Warner can elect not to bat and be a fielding captain - not that he would. Once Warner cemented his spot, the selection panel should have got together and pulled him from the game. What do you think Brett - should he play?