World Cricket II

**Plum** · 28th November 2011, 04:51 PM

Look at how Swann peddles "40 overs or something"

. Who on earth plays 40 overs at First Class sides level? I'll give you 3 guesses

. In essence, he is batting for replacing 50 overs format(followed by all other nations at domestic level) with 40 overs format(played only by England). If that is not agenda, I am the queen of England

**Google Adsense** · 28th November 2011 04:51 PM

**P_R** · 28th November 2011, 05:01 PM

True. They had a reasonable ODI team in the early 90s. Even on Godforsaken subcontinent tracks they managed to do quite okay. But even then it is not something they remember or value much. For instance the Kumble-Kambli series in '93 when India thrashed England 3-0, was followed by a ODI series which England drew. But you can ask any English fan which they remember. You won't even see it as a debating point to counter any Indian gloating about the test trouncing.

And that I argue is because ODI was little more than an interesting sideshow when compared to Tests, regardless of how well England fared in it. Of course winning a world cup would have been good but even that, I don't think, would have made the kind of 'mindset changing impact' that many think it would have.

That is what I see in Swann's comment. Annoyance about Champion's trophy taking precedence over Test championship- which we've been salivating on, like, forever. It has little to do with what format they have the best shot in.

OTOH where I see poRumal is in BBC's remark

one-day cricket remains such a lucrative form of the game, especially in the subcontinent.

I don't disagree with that though

**P_R** · 28th November 2011, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by Plum

Yes, I believe one of the limited overs format has to go. And I'd sacrifice the ODIs.

Twenty overs-la ten wickets-A? Atleast adhai 5 wickets a side-nu mAtha sollunga.

Originally Posted by Plum

But avan solRadhum nAn solRadhum vERa reason illaiyA?

therla. It seemed an innocent comment to me.

Originally Posted by Plum

Btw, even in Guardian, which is about as liberal a site as English can get, people truly beieve in their #1 T20 status.

Oh

Wonderful. Dean Headley, Mark Ilot, ellAm strike bowlerA sagichikkittu vaazhndha engaLukku idhu oru aanandham

Originally Posted by Plum

You don't get more reasonable people in England than Guardian readers so I don't believe that Emglish supporters are not proud of their #1 status in Twenty20.

I'll defer to you on that then. enna irundhaalum naanga invent paNNa format, adhu naala oru attachment irukkalaam. Some thAthAs must be twirling in their graves.

Originally Posted by Plum

Look at how Swann peddles "40 overs or something"

. Who on earth plays 40 overs at First Class sides level? I'll give you 3 guesses

. In essence, he is batting for replacing 50 overs format(followed by all other nations at domestic level) with 40 overs format(played only by England). If that is not agenda, I am the queen of England

His whole thing is a reaction to Test championship being edged out by the blade Champions trophy. adhu ennamO room pOttu cunning-plan yOsichu, PR apparatus-ai mudukki vittA maadhiri neenga sollAdheenga 'ngREn.