Re: Why the complaints?
- From: Mike Holmans <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:04:29 +0100
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:31:12 -0000, gokhalen@xxxxxxxxx tapped the
keyboard and brought forth:
On Sep 14, 5:20 pm, Mike Holmans <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Congratulations to India and Pakistan for an enthralling game of
cricket. Fantastic bowling and fielding performance by India to defend
141.
Personally, I enjoyed the bowl-out too. Except that it was obvious
India were going to win it when they had the sense to pick slow
bowlers instead of pacers for it. Though I suppose it was still quite
gratifying to see them prove it.
To each his own.
I can't understand what people are complaining about.
If the game was decided by six bowlers bowling to empty (no batsman)
wickets, then it was a farce. No form of the game is played by bowling
to empty wickets, why should it be decided that way?. This is the
equivalent of a football game decided by a penalty shoot out without a
goal keeper. The finish was ridiculous.
A far better way to settle it, IMHO, would be to have a five over
contest after a tied twenty-twenty.
In other sports where they play on, both are equally tired and equally
loosened up. In cricket, half of the side batting second would have
effectively wound down since they were out and thought they had no
further part to play. Bringing in some form of extra time to decide a
tie would lead to inevitable complaints that X, Y, and Z had had
plenty of time to rest and were really fresh when they batted again or
that A & B had had immediate treatment for their injuries and were in
no condition to play again and how unfair it all was.
Imagine for a moment what happens when England play Sri Lanka and
Jayasuriya has to retire hurt after scoring 108 off 43, which is
matched by Pietersen's 113 off 49 as both sides reach 217/7.
Jayasuriya is unfit to bat for SL, who are crushed as KP swipes 65 off
his 20 balls of the five over extension. Or alternatively imagine the
same scenario with KP as the injured party. I won't even try to
imagine what happens when it's India's star batsman who is injured and
there are an alleged billion disappointed fans (although I'll bet it's
really only about 850 million actual fans, the rest being too young or
too weird to follow cricket).
The bowl-out may not be particularly attractive and is what we might
call un-cricketly, but it is pretty difficult to argue that it is
unfair to one side or the other, whereas I can't think of any form of
extra time arrangement which isn't likely to lead to widespread
wailing and gnashing of teeth over the horrible injustice of the
terrible extra time rules when one team inevitably loses.
Cheers,
Mike
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why the complaints?
- From: arahim
- Re: Why the complaints?
- References:
- Why the complaints?
- From: Mike Holmans
- Re: Why the complaints?
- From: gokhalen
- Why the complaints?
- Prev by Date: Re: Cricinfo is becoming increasingly embarrassing to read
- Next by Date: Re: Bowl out is a farce
- Previous by thread: Re: Why the complaints?
- Next by thread: Re: Why the complaints?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
