Re: Ricky Ponting remains unconvinced on Twenty20 concept
20/20 is a new format. That does not mean it's an inferior format, just a different format. No matter what the format is, cricket is about a team making more runs than the other team in the allocated overs/time. It's simple math; however game dynamics change depending on the number of overs/hours. It's not about the intangible traits such as class or style or elegance; they are byproducts. A Tendulkar will not be regarded a great batsman if we was not scoring thousands of runs at a fast pace. If this format does not suit Dravid, than it does not mean that this format sucks, it's Dravid who is not suitable for this format.
This format will allow the teams to become more competitive and counter-intuitively it will force them to always be on top of their games. This game is about responsiveness, reflexes and fast thinking. If Imran Nazir is a tullaybaaz, he'll be out of the team in a few games. Imran Nazir could be better than Dravid in 20/20 but might not compare to Dravid in test matches.
Do you think rapid chess is fake? Heck even I might stand a chance against Vishwanathan Anand if I get 1 year for every move.
Failure to contain tullaybaazi just means you are not bowling with a correct game plan. Various bowlers have proven in this tournament that you can bowl effectively without surrendering 6 sixes in an over. Even in baseball, there are some players who you would consider to be "tullaybaaz" (Vladimir Guerrero for example). But no one dismisses his success just because he virtually swings at every pitch. Likewise, no one should dismiss the success of Yuvraj and the likes.
good points