Changes in ODIs proposed
This article in Rediff talks about radical changes to be made in ODI cricket, in attempts to make it more interesting.
Quoting the article, "Though the on-field strength of players must not exceed 11, a captain can substitute a player who he feels is not performing well."
"It could be anybody -- a wicketkeeper, batsman, fielder or a bowler.".
Yea, in India's case, it could be the captain too. Sigh!. Sad, but true.
Personally, I feel the entire issue of ODIs to be too cinematic. As if cricket is to be taken as an "entertainment" and not as a sport (Note: I am not even broaching the subject of twenty20, ten10, etc. They are beneath the idea of discussion). How is that we (as people) are able to enjoy classic test cricket (the real version of the game IMHO) and still feel that we get too bored watching ODIs?.
Quoting the article, "Though the on-field strength of players must not exceed 11, a captain can substitute a player who he feels is not performing well."
"It could be anybody -- a wicketkeeper, batsman, fielder or a bowler.".
Yea, in India's case, it could be the captain too. Sigh!. Sad, but true.
Personally, I feel the entire issue of ODIs to be too cinematic. As if cricket is to be taken as an "entertainment" and not as a sport (Note: I am not even broaching the subject of twenty20, ten10, etc. They are beneath the idea of discussion). How is that we (as people) are able to enjoy classic test cricket (the real version of the game IMHO) and still feel that we get too bored watching ODIs?.
posted by tt_giant at
2:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home