Was MCG the right venue for T20 match???

[sanketh84]

guys,
thoroughly dissapointed to say the least after watching the T20 match. which makes me wonder if one of the biggest grounds(possibly the biggest) was the ideal venue for the match, with the huge huge boundaries at the MCG requiring a combination of power, perfect timing and placement to find those boundaries??? I also think we had seen a taste of the nature of the wicket during the 1st test match. do u think the organizers were more interested in the 85,000 ticket sales rather than the enjoyment of the spectators? I mean the previous 2 T20 encounters between the 2 teams were so exciting that I was expecting to see many more 6's and those crazy unorthodox shots... regardless of which team wins... b4 u think i'm upset about india losing,i'm more upset i didn't get more of what i wanted to see . This game is all about seeing batsmen hit those huge 4's and 6's, do u think the organizers missed a trick?? maybe at the least the boundaries could be roped in much further??? any south african sized stadia in australia??....maybe the aussies here know???

[Rachael]

Gilchrist didn't hesitate about playing expansive shots... and I count at least 12 attempts at big shots from the 22 balls he faced:

0.4 Pathan to Gilchrist, no run, headrush outside off, Gilchrist playing and missing a wide one  
0.5 Pathan to Gilchrist, FOUR, stroked through the covers, glorious shot on the top of the bounce  
2.5 Pathan to Gilchrist, no run, wide outside off, driven hard to cover where Harbhajan stops it well and is naturally booed for his efforts  
2.6 Pathan to Gilchrist, FOUR, on off, and oh hello, that's a lovely piece of timing as Gilchrist stands and delivers the sweetest drive through mid-on. He made that look too easy  
3.3 Sreesanth to Gilchrist, 2 runs, a huge outside edge as Gilchrist tries to drive out over covers and the ball goes aerial, landing just short of third man  
3.4 Sreesanth to Gilchrist, 1 run, short and cut down behind point  
4.3 Kumar to Gilchrist, 2 runs, short ball moving away from the left-hander outside off, cut high through the gully region  
4.5 Kumar to Gilchrist, no run, driven into the off-side ring where it's cut off at cover  
4.6 Kumar to Gilchrist, no run, outside off, cut into the covers and Gilchrist nearly puts his fellow batsman in danger with a late call of "No!" ... as he was talking to Nine. That would have been an interesting, not to say rare, dismissal  
6.3 I Sharma to Gilchrist, 1 run, outside off, cut down through third man  
7.2 Kumar to Gilchrist, SIX, outside off and Gilchrist booms that through fine leg with a huge hook which came right of the middle and flew five rows back  
7.3 Kumar to Gilchrist, OUT, he goes for the big one again, holing out at long-on, and is well caught, low in front

If you like the big hitting... that should have satisfied you: a big hit is still a big hit even if it doesn't clear the rope!

[sanketh84]

nah...not really...i know there were a couple of sixes and few fours in the aussie cricket....and not one convincing boundary by the indians. what i expect to see in T20 is the ball sailing into the stands and ball crashing into boundary ropes. the perth T20 between aus and nz had some good hitting, but i reckon the MCG is much bigger than WACA, the wicket here was on the slowish side and the outfield not that quick, so the aussie batsmen were more than happy to knock the ones and two's with an occasional boundary to coast to a comfortable victory. if i wanted this stuff, i cudve skipped watching this pretty much inconsequential match and if i was a spectator i wud be real upset over waste of money.... for the aussies the only consolation wud be the resounding victory. the indians looked like they didn't take it serious enough!!!!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by sanketh84

what i expect to see in T20 is the ball sailing into the stands and ball crashing into boundary ropes

If a good bowler sends down a good delivery... and a batsman lofts the ball over the infield with an exquisite shot that would have sailed into the stands at a small ground... is the spectacle really diminished by the ball landing in the outfield and being chased down by a fielder on a bigger ground?

Surely the quality of the "hit" is a matter of how well the ball is struck: whether the result is 1, 4, 6 or out strikes me as neither here nor there.

[Milo]

Many of India's cricket shots would not have yielded any better results on the beautiful batting strip (and immensely short boundary) of Ampleforth school. India bated appallingly. To mention the size of the pitch is missing the point; the stumps were hit, batsmen hit to mid off-on, Sehwag watched himself get run out - what more do you want?.

[Milo]

Originally Posted by Rachael

If a good bowler sends down a good delivery... and a batsman lofts the ball over the infield with an exquisite shot that would have sailed into the stands at a small ground... is the spectacle really diminished by the ball landing in the outfield and being chased down by a fielder on a bigger ground?

Surely the quality of the "hit" is a matter of how well the ball is struck: whether the result is 1, 4, 6 or out strikes me as neither here nor there.

Oh Rachael, cricket is not about runs scored is it? You would happily watch (or listen to) cricket played in the nets wouldn't you?

[Warne]

I miss the good old days when 250 used to be an imposing total in a 50 overs match. Pitches which have something for the bowlers make the limited overs match more exciting & it's absolutely disgusting to see pitches where even 350 is not a completely safe total. And, every ground has its own characteristics, the MCG has always been big & it should remain so.

India, however, were spanked so hard that I hardly noticed how the pitch played or not.

[greg]

Surely adapting to conditions should always play a part anyway for both batting and bowling so if you have a bigger ground you have to be selective with where you try to hit the ball in the air.Likewise if there is a shorter boundary on one side of the wicket the bowler adjusts his line.

Boohoo,just because India got whupped someone uses a lame excuse about the outfield being too big.

[sanketh84]

i'm not trying to make excuses Greg.... if this was an ODI or a test match u wudn't have seen this thread at all.. but u know coming to what we expect from a T20 match specially after the T20 worldcup in south africa...i'm sure it was never gonna live up to that. for the last time i'm not trying to make excuses we lost...probably we'd have a match out of it if the ground was smaller or the boundaries roped in. it was played like a compressed ODI of sorts.

[acker]

Originally Posted by sanketh84

i'm not trying to make excuses Greg....

It sounds like you want to reward smaller hitting.

That is not in the spirit of the game.