SA Footy

Is there anyone on this forum who actually rates 20/20? Well, if you do it appears that the NSWCA does not agree with you. With the Blues plunging down the ladder in both forms of the game an opportunity to give a grade cricketer from Sydney some exposure against first class cricketers has been discarded in favour of a tawdry publicity stunt.

NSW has elected to play Rugby League great, Andrew Johns in it's 20/20 team for the 'match' against the Redbacks in Newcastle. Some of you might have watched 'Joey' batting in the nets..facing up to Nathan Bracken who was bowling at about quarter pace and not doing anything special. Joey was living up to his name jumping all over the place and getting hit more than Bill Ponsford in the Bodyline series. Shaun Tait has already said he won't be giving Johns any favours and rightly so, but I'm sure what is left of the worst attack in the domestic scene (at the moment anyway) bowling at half pace would have fully prepared Joey for what the Redbacks will throw at him.

While I admire Johns' courage, I deplore the stupidity of the NSWCA on this one. It should be a top little earner though, and I suppose that is all 20/20 is about...junk cricket for the ADD generation.

regards,

REB

You needed further proof?

I think ALL limited over cricket is shite.

great call REB..... a disgrace and blight on the game NSW.......
will the redbacks give Johncock a game????
Bringing the game in to disrepute..... a DISGRACE

Agree. 20/20 cricket just isn't cricket. CA using the prime time part of the summer on this form is annoying.

rod_rooster wrote:You needed further proof?

No, I was providing further proof.

regards,

REB

Aerie wrote:Agree. 20/20 cricket just isn't cricket. CA using the prime time part of the summer on this form is annoying.

The next Shield match at the Adelaide Oval isn't until March 1-4

Well judging by Johns' efforts on the Cricket Show at lunch time - he'll be out pretty quick.
He looked shocking, and the NSW boys weren't even giving it to him full on.

NSW will go into that game with only nine wickets. It's a given that Johns won't last six balls.

pafc1870 wrote:

Aerie wrote:Agree. 20/20 cricket just isn't cricket. CA using the prime time part of the summer on this form is annoying.

The next Shield match at the Adelaide Oval isn't until March 1-4

Are you serious?? Why such a long break between Shield games?? I guess it gives our Redbacks a chance to find form from somewhere.

RoosterMarty wrote:
I guess it gives our Redbacks a chance to find form from somewhere.

Heh heh.

regards,

REB

20/20 Cricket is a great way to showcase the talents of the game.
It's Cricket at it's purest, & will be THE format of Cricket played in 20 years time- we'll play England for the Ashes in this format.






The Earth is flat.
The moon is made of cheese.

We might as well look there REB, we can't get any worse.

RoosterMarty wrote:We might as well look there REB, we can't get any worse.

RUBBISH!!!!

magpie in the 80's wrote:

RoosterMarty wrote:We might as well look there REB, we can't get any worse.

RUBBISH!!!!

I went to the first 20/20 game at Adelaide Oval last year where the Warriors beat the Redbacks.
The crowd was chocka (New thing in town) & it was a good night, but care factor was zero!
Sooner or later the novelty's gonna wear off & it'll be abolished except for exhibition games
versus the Crows or whatever!
Cricket purists are against ALL kinds of limited overs matches but I tend to disagree!
Tho I love the Test Series, some of the most exciting games of all time have been One Dayers...
Argueably Kerry Packer saved Australian Cricket in the late seventies by introducing World Series
One Day matches to the Aussie public's ever decreasing attention span.

Snaggletooth Tiger wrote:Argueably Kerry Packer saved Australian Cricket in the late seventies by introducing World Series One Day matches to the Aussie public's ever decreasing attention span.

One day cricket was around before this, albeit not in such a saturated fashion. Indeed, the proliferation of it in England contributed to the decline of that nation as a Test power. Kerry Packer saved cricket by paying players what they were worth.

McAlmanac wrote:

Snaggletooth Tiger wrote:Argueably Kerry Packer saved Australian Cricket in the late seventies by introducing World Series One Day matches to the Aussie public's ever decreasing attention span.

One day cricket was around before this, albeit not in such a saturated fashion. Indeed, the proliferation of it in England contributed to the decline of that nation as a Test power. Kerry Packer saved cricket by paying players what they were worth.

Correct. also the first one-day International was played between Australia and England in the 1970-71 season, 7 years before Packer's WSC.

McAlmanac wrote:

Snaggletooth Tiger wrote:Argueably Kerry Packer saved Australian Cricket in the late seventies by introducing World Series One Day matches to the Aussie public's ever decreasing attention span.

One day cricket was around before this, albeit not in such a saturated fashion. Indeed, the proliferation of it in England contributed to the decline of that nation as a Test power. Kerry Packer saved cricket by paying players what they were worth.

Correct. also the first one-day International was played between Australia and England in the 1970-71 season, 7 years before Packer's WSC.

McAlmanac wrote:

Snaggletooth Tiger wrote:Argueably Kerry Packer saved Australian Cricket in the late seventies by introducing World Series One Day matches to the Aussie public's ever decreasing attention span.

One day cricket was around before this, albeit not in such a saturated fashion. Indeed, the proliferation of it in England contributed to the decline of that nation as a Test power. Kerry Packer saved cricket by paying players what they were worth.

Correct. also the first one-day International was played between Australia and England in the 1970-71 season, 7 years before Packer's WSC.

** Sorry about the triple post, God only knows what happened there

Adelaide Hawk wrote:** Sorry about the triple post, God only knows what happened there

Well Hawk, you got your point across!
My memory only goes back as far as 1979...
I was just stating that Packer was the one who brought it to the masses!