"Teams that are outclassed in five-day matches and even 50-over games are much more competitive in Twenty20. India offer a good example of this. The shorter the format of the game the more dangerous they become," Ponting said."Some of their batsmen -- Yuvraj Singh and M S Dhoni are classic examples -- can hurt you more in shorter games, because their is less opportunity to find ways of picking apart their techniques," he while adding that "Form in Twenty20 really doesn't count for all that much".Having said so, Ponting also dismissed India's successful journey to the T20 world title, attributing it to more luck and little skills."I am not as cynical about the game as I once was, but some negatives still nag at me. There is so much luck involved in this shortened form of the game; it's not always going to be the best team that wins."I guess that's true of all sport but it seems to be accentuated here... Little wonder, then, that the tournament has been unpredictable, with many locals stunned that previously unbeaten South Africa was eliminated so comfortably by India," he said.
With this background in mind, here is achettup
31 comments:
Some hasty words from an unforseeing past will haunt. I'm sure there will be some more coming this way...
Reap what you sow and all that SB :)
I absolutely agree with Ponting about T20 and India's win there. I also agree with his basic argument about techniques. He's basically right - in purely cricket based terms.
I can also see that this is not a good time for Ponting to be making this argument. Is there a link to these comments?
Thanks for posting... :) :)
KD,
Not sure I agree.
The only cricketing argument Ponting can really make is that the longer the format of the game, the more discipline required, over an extended period of time.
Teams who can consistently show discipline will fare better. Teams without the discipline will do worse.
T20 does not require players to be disciplined.. Test cricket does.
Each format of the game requires a different temperament - the skill set is inherent within the player..So is class.
Luck is what you make of it.
Cheers,
KD,
Put differently, T20 is a 100 metre sprint. Test cricket is analogous to a marathon.
Same basic principle ( of running) but very different mindsets, muscle groups, approaches, aptitudes.
Cheers,
I'm with Kartikeya. While it's true that different temperaments will thrive in the different formats, it's also clear that upsets are more likely to occur in one day than five, and much more likely over 40 overs.
Either way, form in T20 doesn't count for too much outside T20, and there is some truth in Ponting's comments. Hopefully he realises they appy more to his own team now than they did to anyone else at the time he made them.
Forget Punter and his ramblings - he's a bloke who doesn't know where his next win will come from.
I'm absolutely gobsmacked dumbstruck - Harbhajan Singh got a Padma Shri!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF who in their inane sense would even recommend the bloke. Even if he takes a 100 wickets each year till he retires, he doesn't deserve it. Sorry but there needs to be some sort of sanctity to the award. Who next - the bloke next door ????
Jonathan,
The whole concept of an upset is premised on one thing - that a T20 or a ODI give you a result at the end of the day.
Force the same conditions on a Test match, that there be a definate result by the end of Day 5, and the concept of upsets will show up just as frequently in Test cricket.
I could be wrong, but thats just me :)
Cheers,
Tifosi Guy,
"A batsman is so much covered with protective gears that one might say [Sachin] Tendulkar is playing if I go in the middle to bat."
MS Gill, the Indian sports minister, clearly feels today's cricketers have it far easier than those of the past
Jan 23, 2009
If our honorable Spors Minister thinks people can mistake him for Tendulkar, surely that explains why Bhajji is considered for thye Padma Shri :)
Cheers,
I think Bhajji got a PadmaShree for inspiring Botha!!
http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/cricket/botha-makes-a-fist-of-the-captaincy/2009/01/25/1232818248703.html
I guess now the Aussies can again blame India for this loss.
;-)
On a serious note I do agree he does not deserve that award.
Only MSD does :-)
I dont know why Kartikeya continues to support Ponting. A game is a game. Test, One day, T20. Everything has different rules. If you dont like the rules, dont play. Its like someone in the Mumbai Marathon saying he lost because they ran on the Vashi Creek Bridge, instead of the JJ Flyover. You need to adapt. And Ponting did that with alacrity when IPL happened. Does he have different standards and rules for sledging too, in different forms of the game ?
Homer, nice one.
Ricky Ponting's assertion about luck playing its part in sports is best said by him. he is afterall teh same guy who scored lots of centuries thanks to dodgy decisions and dropped catches. most hundreds of his will have too many chances. Luckiest batsman in modern cricket.
well it shows one thing - Rev Punter has been eating huble pie for a while now - and his new diet has only just begun.
Leela,
Those damn Indians!!! And them damn MSD groupies!!! :)
Cheers,
ugich konitari,
I agree with what you say - different game, different rules, different approaches.
and lol about the sledging rules :).
Thanks for your comments and welcome to the blog :)
Cheers,
Raj,
Ouch!
Cheers :)
awww look Naresh, if you are questioning his diet, you have no right to be in the same room...
Cheers :)
Hey Homer, wish I'd seen those comments earlier, trust Ponting to have made the most damning of the lot. I specifically remember Gilchrist being sour about India's success and making a dig about all the prizes and awards the players got. I think it really hurt them because they didn't win every single cup on offer, which they seemed to take for granted.
I'm guilty of again changing topics. Here's two interesting links on the latest Symonds affair.
Link 1 : What's the bet this bloke isn't going to be writing again on that newspaper ( look at the last paragraph :) )
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24971396-5017479,00.html
Link 2 : Uneffing belivable this can even be written about . How daft are officials!!! What are they waiting for - to get smacked by the bloke himself or be abused by him before bascially telling him to sod it off!!!
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24971841-5006069,00.html
Cheers!!
achettup,
The post was meant as a lead up to your post - sine you mentioned Gilchrist and Symonds, I thought Ponting's observations were the perfect lead in to what you had to say.
After all, Ricky Ponting is the starting point for all commentary on all sorts of issues. He is, after all, captain, coach, batsman, bowler, fielder, umpire, third umpire, curator, selector, resident philosopher, poet, writer, shrink, match referee, commentator and special commentator, all rolled in one.
Cheers :)
Tifosi guy,
By Symonds own admission, the racist chants in India did not affect him.
And I do wish CA had pressed on for justice for Symonds - I would have loved to know how they could have proved anything conclusive in a he said she said situation with no evidence to support either contention.
And no, Mike Proctor's "I believe only one side was telling the truth" and lack of due process would not cut it.
Andrew Symonds is Cricket Australia's problem. And the Deccan Chargers.
Good luck to both of them.
Cheers,
this is rubbish, Ponting is just trying to distract the media from focusing more on the Australian cricket. To say luck hasn't played a part in Aussies success is to lie. Who can forgot Gibbs and the dropped catch in World Cup 99?
By the way I came across your blog while I was searching for cricket fans. Have written a short post on the sri-lanka india series. Would be interesting to see your feedback. Some tips to improve my writing skills would be cool too.
Keep up the good work!
I don't agree, Homer. If Bangladesh plays better than Australia for one day and Australia play better for four, then Australia win one Test match, or win an ODI series 4-1.
Yes, there are also draws in Test cricket, but's that not really the issue here, since the same arguments apply comparing the 50 over game with T20. As you say, different rules and different (riskier = more dependent on luck) approaches. Ponting was using this simple fact to downplay India's performance, but his own words come back to bite Australia more.
Hello dear blogging friend.
Cricket with balls has now moved, true story.
We are now at cricketwithballs.com.
, so if you could update our address in your blogroll that would be great.
Ofcourse if you already had us down as .com, never mind.
Cheers.
Thanks for your kind words Vertino and welcome to the blog
Cheers :)
He does make a valid point. T20 does not allow a thorough examination of a batsman's skill.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot ,what he said about Yuvraj and Dhoni then applies to Warner and his ilk now.
RGB,
And yet, the best T20 batsmen are the batsmen who excel in all forms of the game.
And comparing Yuvi or Dhoni with Warner is a non starter - Dhoni and Yuvi can change gears, Warner cant.
Cheers,
Not necessarily. There have not been enough T20 internationals to draw conclusions.
But if you consider the last IPL season Marsh,Watson and Pathan were among the successful batsmen.
Marsh is yet to play Tests and given that he averages 34 in FC it is difficult to imagine him doing so in the near future.
Watson is not a regular in the Test team and averages less than 20.
Pathan is yet to cement his place in the ODI team and is no where on the horizon for a Test spot.
Attacking test playing batsmen will be successful in T20 but not necessarily vice versa.
I am not comparing Yuvraj or Dhoni to Warner. There cannot be any comparison.
But both Yuvraj and Dhoni are yet to prove their test credibility.
RGB,
U agree with you on "Attacking test playing batsmen will be successful in T20 but not necessarily vice versa."
However, I think there are two separate arguments here - one of the ability to play and the other of consistency.
Marsh has 4 FC centuries, Yusuf Pathan has 4, Yuvraj has 2 Test 100s, Dhoni has 1.
All of them are capable of playing the long innings - the question is about their consistency.
Warner, on the other hand, does not have either the temperament or the ability to eke out a FC 100.
Ponting's assessment was on ability - which was well off the mark.
Cheers,
Yes they have big scores in Tests or FC but not as often as in T20.
They can hurt you more as Ponting says in T20 due to the nature of the pitch and the restrictions on bowlers and fielders. Not unlike Bevan in ODIs.
Yuvraj and Dhoni may do it in Tests in future but so far have not.
Also I think ability is to produce the big scores consistently.
Post a Comment