What to do with weather shortened T20 games?

Actually, there's a T20 World Cup every 2 years and it would be great to see up to 20 teams competing. World Cups are important events as the ICC receives revenue from them and distributes the dividends between full-members, associates and affiliates. It would be great if the ICC was more committed to globalising the sport. Both investing in associates and affiliates and promoting the idea of inclusion in the Olympics where nations like Russia and China would start funding the sport domestically. I can see the pattern emerging for international cricket is a 4-year-cycle of T20 World Cup/ODI World Cup/T20 World Cup/Olympic Games around August/September, yearly Champion's League in October and exclusive windows for domestic T20 leagues and international tours (test/T20I/ODI) scattered throughout the year. I can't see a test championship ever getting up. Sad but true... the sport of cricket needs to raise $$$ to keep functioning. It can't exist on air and sentiments alone.

I can't even use the word tournament to describe this T20 world cup. I'd say its more of an Aquatic Lottery.

"Becoming"? Everything the ICC does is driven by money. Which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if, in the spirit of entrepreneuralism they were trying to create great products and grow the sport. Sadly, the easiest way to make money in cricket though, is to schedule a lot of India games. So the future tours program, and tournament structures are driven by the over-riding need to cripple Sachin in meaningless contests. Turns out he is surprisingly hardy, although he had the good sense to bail on international T20. On Boundary Rider's article. I'm with rules. Get the first 10 overs done as a priority, then play whatever overs can be completed (but more than 4). If both sides haven't played the same number of overs, call it on the first half. Split games would be more interesting too, because the risk-taking that characterises the second half of the 1st innings, is (more often than not) when the game is won or lost.

The format of the tournament is such that it allows a weaker team to sneak to the super-eights if they win one game or even without winning one. Also if a top team has one bad day against a low ranked team they are out. This is surely not fair. Also the other day West Indies had restricted Ireland to 129 in 19 overs. However the game was washed out due to rains. Here West Indies had a better net run rate bcoz Ireland lost by a bigger margin to Australia. Had Ireland scored a few more runs in their loss to Australia they would have been in the Super Eights without doing anything to deserve it. Also had the Ireland vs Australia match been after the Ireland vs WI match then again the Windies would have been at Australia's mercy to get a berth in the next round. Not fair at all.

Why on Earth does the 50 over World Cup go for months and the T20 is done and dusted so fast. Seems topsy turvy to me. With a shorter game you need more games to decide the best team. To eliminate the luck factor in deciding the best team of the tournament. Why is there a T20 WC every year. Should it be every 4 years and more extensive. All these questions puzzle me. I feel like cricket is becoming a confusing disorganised rabble run by $$$.

I hate these shortened games, it is no longer about who's the best team then but more about who's the indidvidual who has the luck on the day. You go out for 7 overs (42 balls!) and get lucky or not. It is best to cancel the game if it cannot be replayed, it is ridiculous that a result is based on 42 balls. In ODI's 20 overs is a match, it should remain 20 overs minimum.

The T20 world cup shouldn't have been scheduled in the middle of the wet season in Sri Lanka. Of course it's going to be wet. A minimum 10 overs per team should be the limit.

The bit I hate with T20 is the constant music between every over. Do we really need the same 5 songs played loudly every over.

Let me say that I don't regard T20 as having much to do with cricket at all, but actually see less of a problem with the 7 over match than the article's author. At least both sides knew the situation before play began. The Australia - West Indies game is another issue, the game is quite different when only one innings is signbificantly shortened; this is also true with mid-match, and match ending, delays in the longer limited game. While Duckworth-Lewis does a reasonable job of determining the situation, it seems to fail more when the original length of a game is shorter. Using the extra day to continue a match is something that should be explored more in all limited overs games, whether they start at 20 or 50 overs. With 20 over tournaments it is theoretically easier. Teams could play a morning match the next day before the first scheduled match of the day (a triple header for TV) and fly on to the next destination that afternoon - not much later than initially planned. The longer limited overs game is oofficially known as "Limited Overs" cricket, not "One Day" cricket, because some of the early games were completed on a reserve day. Its not like there is no precedent for it. And, just pehaps, T20 organisers needs to accept that sometimes "no result" is the only result possible.

Unlike ODI I agree the rain-shortened T20 is a farce. This is because the game is so short you can often plan to beat an opponent from behind. If an AFL or NRL game was cut short the result is null because anything else is unfiar - likewise for Test cricket or tennis. I would say if there is not enough time for 40 overs it should be a draw.

Should be at least 10 overs each or the game should be declared abandoned either as a draw or replayed. On a side note they should change the rules to the following Once a team reaches their 10th over and/or the first five wickets have fallen, the teams swap batting. This way you get 4 individual innings and rather than just chase down a batting total there's a great flow as you bat, field, bat then field again.

TV and other logisitcal issues make it hard to replay the game the very next day however however the minumum number of overs needed in T20 is 5 a side which is ridiculous. Surely it should be at least 10, probably 15? The main reason it's only 5 overs a side is so that the organisers can say that a result hapened therefore you can't get a refund on your ticket.