Still have the hangover.....
0 Comments Published by Apocalyptus on Monday, March 13, 2006 at 11:49 AM.
I'm still not able to come to terms with this :
http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/rsavaus/content/current/story/240507.html
What a match !!!
Simply unbelievable !!!
However.....
No doubt it was a cliffhanger and a remarkable match in its own right. But, ‘the greatest ODI ever’? Naaaah…….don’t think so.
Even without taking anything away from Gibbs, Ponting, Hussey, Smith and others I just can’t agree to the fact that it was the ‘greatest’ ODI ever.
Cricket is all about bat v/s ball, not bat v/s bat or ball v/s ball.
If a one-day match which had teams scoring 434 and 438 could be termed as the ‘greatest ever’, so can be a match which had teams scoring 45 all out and 38 all out. Is that really good cricket?
In our childhood days when we used to play gully cricket, chasing targets of 150 in 10 overs wasn’t a big deal. Nor was defending a team total of 25 successfully.
Now, if the quality of international cricket comes down to that level, then it’s just not good for the game, is it?
True, I took a while to come to terms with what happened at the Wanderers on Sunday but it wasn’t because I thought it was the ‘greatest ODI ever’….it was largely because it had set me thinking. Honestly speaking, what I believe is , if this is the way cricket is going to be in future then it’s just not good - neither for the game, nor for the lovers of the game.
It’s no longer a game between batsmen and bowlers. Batsmen are dominating all the proceedings. The thrill is missing.
If there are 87 fours and 26 sixes hit in a span of 100 overs, where will that cheers and joy and thrill and excitement come from everytime the ball crosses the rope?
It just reduces the value of each boundary.
Boundaries are just not 4/6 runs, they are special shots, executed by talented skillful professionals and cheered by the spectators. Rise in quantity takes down the quality.
If longing for the days when 240/250 used to be considered as good totals means being ‘old fashioned’ , then I don’t mind being one.
Playing a classy cameo on a difficult pitch, bowling a dream spell on a batsman-friendly wicket … these are the real beauties of cricket, the great game (not so ‘great’ nowadays). These things are vanishing from the game and we, the ones who love these are getting deprieved more often than not from what we actually want to see in the game.
I would love to see matches like this (imaginary, of course): Aussies scoring 249 (Ponting 100, Pathan 4/37, Patel 2/29) at Perth and with McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Symonds all charged up, India chasing it successfully in 49.4 overs for the loss of 7/8 wickets with Sachin not out on 102 and McGrath taking 5/41….where there would be good batting as well as god bowling performances. Once the batters would be on top, once the bowlers.
This is what the beauty of cricket is. Period.
http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/rsavaus/content/current/story/240507.html
What a match !!!
Simply unbelievable !!!
However.....
No doubt it was a cliffhanger and a remarkable match in its own right. But, ‘the greatest ODI ever’? Naaaah…….don’t think so.
Even without taking anything away from Gibbs, Ponting, Hussey, Smith and others I just can’t agree to the fact that it was the ‘greatest’ ODI ever.
Cricket is all about bat v/s ball, not bat v/s bat or ball v/s ball.
If a one-day match which had teams scoring 434 and 438 could be termed as the ‘greatest ever’, so can be a match which had teams scoring 45 all out and 38 all out. Is that really good cricket?
In our childhood days when we used to play gully cricket, chasing targets of 150 in 10 overs wasn’t a big deal. Nor was defending a team total of 25 successfully.
Now, if the quality of international cricket comes down to that level, then it’s just not good for the game, is it?
True, I took a while to come to terms with what happened at the Wanderers on Sunday but it wasn’t because I thought it was the ‘greatest ODI ever’….it was largely because it had set me thinking. Honestly speaking, what I believe is , if this is the way cricket is going to be in future then it’s just not good - neither for the game, nor for the lovers of the game.
It’s no longer a game between batsmen and bowlers. Batsmen are dominating all the proceedings. The thrill is missing.
If there are 87 fours and 26 sixes hit in a span of 100 overs, where will that cheers and joy and thrill and excitement come from everytime the ball crosses the rope?
It just reduces the value of each boundary.
Boundaries are just not 4/6 runs, they are special shots, executed by talented skillful professionals and cheered by the spectators. Rise in quantity takes down the quality.
If longing for the days when 240/250 used to be considered as good totals means being ‘old fashioned’ , then I don’t mind being one.
Playing a classy cameo on a difficult pitch, bowling a dream spell on a batsman-friendly wicket … these are the real beauties of cricket, the great game (not so ‘great’ nowadays). These things are vanishing from the game and we, the ones who love these are getting deprieved more often than not from what we actually want to see in the game.
I would love to see matches like this (imaginary, of course): Aussies scoring 249 (Ponting 100, Pathan 4/37, Patel 2/29) at Perth and with McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Symonds all charged up, India chasing it successfully in 49.4 overs for the loss of 7/8 wickets with Sachin not out on 102 and McGrath taking 5/41….where there would be good batting as well as god bowling performances. Once the batters would be on top, once the bowlers.
This is what the beauty of cricket is. Period.
0 Responses to “Still have the hangover.....”
Post a Comment