Last year Australia and England faced-off in a Twenty20 in which England batted first and won by 100 runs. Yesterday, Australia won by a similar margin against South Africa. Both were one-sided contests because, in my opinion, the touring side cannot field their ideal Twenty20 combination because Twenty20 specialists dont't travel with the touring party. However, the home side can field their best Twenty20 team. So, my question is - what is the point of organising these no contests? I certainly wouldn't go to the ground and pay to see a no contest. How long before fans wake up to this fact and what will the cricket boards do to ensure they organise competitive contests in future?

what's boring about 20/20 is its hardly ever a contest. For example the other night within 2 overs of the S.A. run chase it was obvious there was no way they could win. so half the game is irrelevant.

totally agree glad to see someone has gotten to my train of thought. Thank You Admin.

ya, thats a very good point. I agree.

Which Twenty20 specialists did England field? Lewis? I can't see any others that would be regarded as specialist Twenty20 players. If you were going to go in the direction then surely Blackwell would have been in the side, he's a hard hitting player and can hit sixes easily, perfect twenty20 player.

__________________
Watch this for a perfect about.
James May

From what I've seen of Twenty20, fielding ability is very important. Close fielders need to gather the ball quickly and cleanly and effect runouts. The outfielders also need to be athletic to run and dive for catches. All fielders must be good catchers. How is Blackwell's fielding ability?

I dont see how many teams can pick the 2020 specialist sides as some eg Aus dont play and others like England very rarely have the international players playing. The domestic England side would be something like (not in order) Loye, Law, Blackwell, Pothas, Cork, Keedy, Mascharenhas, Tremlett, Kirtley, Brown, Shah with possibly Carberry, Clarke, Read or Prior pushing for selection.
This is nothing like the England side and, if anything, the Australians had played more 2020 than the England team. In reality, plenty of 2020 games are one sided, and maybe its more likely that,with better players, any chances to put the opposition out of the game will be taken. The national sides wont have weak bowlers to milk at 10 an over like counties do. There will be the entertaining games, but in 3 matches it is hardly a balanced sample to say it wont work. I didnt see much of the Aus SA game, but in the Eng Aus game it was generally said at the time that Australia lost because they got their batting tactics wrong and tried to blast 4s and 6s too early in the innings and got themselves out. The target was not exceptional, although their recent effort was, and with time teams will adapt to the game and so get closer matches.

Hes not too bad, but not great. Hes never going to be a whippet around the boundary but people like Keedy can be very successful in the game despite not being able to field. His batting and bowling would probably get him picked for any domestic side or a representative of them, and being posted at 3rd man or cow corner wouldnt be a big loss, especially given his arm. Very few people can hold their place in teams based on all 3 aspects of their game (batting, bowling, fielding) so usually 2 of the 3 will be enough. Players like Andrew Symonds (the only one I can think of beyond doubt, Flintoff if you want to keep a slip in and Collingwood possibly) are very thin on the ground.

New Zealand played South Africa in a 20twenty game last year in Johannesburg which NZ won. I don't see the touring side being at any more a disadvantage than a ODI touring side.

i think 2020 should be played a little to begin a one day series