|
|
|
| |
 |
Views
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
Like many other cricket followers I was slow in embracing the newest
and shortest version of the game. It has been played at the domestic
level for some time now and it was only a matter of time before it
graduated to the international level. Sure enough New Zealand and
Australia played the first Twenty20 international at Auckland in
February 2005 but the game did not exactly spread like wildfire.
However a few internationals were played between countries and the ICC
saw in the format surefire family entertainment value which could
spread the world over with proper marketing. And the inaugural Twenty20
World Cup has indeed served enough notice that it is here to stay
beside the more traditional forms of the game Tests and ODIs.
It is only during the competition in South Africa that I have closely
followed the novelty of Twenty20 and certainly as far as on the spot
entertainment value is concerned it’s a winner. It runs for nearly
three hours about the same time as an Indian commercial movie. And like
most films the matches too can be termed as time pass. You see them,
enjoy them for what they are worth and quickly forget about them. The
ICC should be careful in promoting Twenty20. Too many such games should
not be played and the format should be supplementary to Tests and ODIs.
An overdose of it could certainly be counter productive.
But the Twenty20 World Cup has certainly attracted the crowds and no
doubt a large TV audience the world over. All the razzmatazz associated
these days with promoting an event has been in unmistakable evidence
and the organizers have left no stone unturned in seeing to it that the
spectators are entertained – if not by the cricket then at least by the
jiving dancers just outside the playing arena! It would be a mistake
not to take Twenty20 seriously. The more euphoric among its supporters
have portrayed it as the future of the game. Certainly it has a place
in the years to come and can’t be dismissed as just a passing fad.
I for one have found much to commend it. I don’t mind admitting that I
was not very supportive of Twenty20 initially and I certainly did not
want to see just fours, sixes and big hits continuously being rammed
down the audience’s throats by over indulgent batsman at the expense of
bowlers who would be little more than willing slaves. One can’t really
appreciate a format which is lop-sided in one party’s favour. At least
that was what I was led to believe by those more well versed with the
niceties of the game. On the contrary what I have seen (and this is
written just before the semifinals) is nothing so one sided in the
batsman’s favour.
Oh sure, it has been raining sixes at the various
venues but that’s to be expected when the duration is so limited. The
point I want to emphasize is that the bowlers have not exactly been
willing slaves just there at the batsman’s bidding. It may still be a
batsman’s game – which version of cricket is not – but there is a place
for the bowlers in Twenty20. For example we were given to understand
that 200 would be par for the course in an innings but in a vast
majority of matches the total registered has been anything between 140
and 190, Totals of 150 have been defended and in some games such scores
have been passed only after the side chasing has encountered anxious
moments. There have been several four-wicket hauls with these bowlers
not even being expensive. Besides a bowler has picked up a hat trick
and you don’t expect such feats associated with a format supposed to be
totally dominated by the bat.
The point is that it is not just the bowlers who face the pressure of
being hit for fours and sixes every time. The batsman too is under
pressure. There is just no time to get your eye in with the result that
the slog starts virtually with the first ball. Under the circumstances
a miscued or rash stroke could well be the order of the day and this is
where the bowler scores a point. A couple of dot balls and again the
batsman is under intense pressure to get a move along and this also
could result in a dismissal. Okay, so Twenty20 is not the highest art
form. Skills and intricacies are at a premium. But watching the bowlers
frustrate the batsmen by bowling yorkers, by pitching the ball at the
pads and giving him no room to get away with the big hits for which he
is all too eager has also been quite an experience. The batsman for his
part has to be extra innovative and enterprising even more than in ODIs
and this frequently has led to an engrossing contest. Perhaps it is
only for the moment for one is not likely to recall these matches with
much fondness but there is a role for Twenty20 in cricket. How big or
important a role is for the ICC to decide.
|
|
|
|
|
More Views by Partab Ramchand
