Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ZeeshanM
@ Farhad come'on seriously? a 56-ball 127 and a 55-ball 94? Doesn't it seem a bit too much? Soon there will be a score of 300 in IPL. This is just getting comical day by day.
|
I completely agree, actually. The elimination of any real long term strategy in the match kills it. But you cant argue that the batsmen get any
direct advantages in the game. Its the same pitch size, same field size, and same field restrictions. As a matter of fact, it can be argued that the field restrictions are actually fewer in T20 than in ODIs. Only 6 overs out of the 20 are powerplay overs (thats 30% of the innings). With ODI's, its 20 out of 50 (40%). Like I said earlier, the only reason we actually see these scores in T20 is because it allows the batsman to play their shots without having to worry too much about the repercussions (i.e. the side being bowled out). Is that a good thing? It depends on who you ask. I dont like it because I'd much rather see a well crafted, planned innings. Others might prefer T20 because its a more "raw" form of cricket thats not so much in the head as it is in pure ability. Kinda like baseball...