I was not taken in by Twenty20 as I felt that this was just a slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am extravaganza. A combination of curiosity, media blitz and convenient timings (mostly 9.30pm starts) got me kind of interested and after seeing a couple of these games, I can say that I am a convert. That India ended up winning has aided the process of conversion!

I had felt this often about basketball, where the teams stay close to each other in scores over three quarters, and perhaps even a bit into the fourth. And that the game is finally decided in those last five minutes. Twenty20 is cricket's equivalent.

In normal 50-over one-day cricket you see fast-paced batting in the first 10 overs, then some consolidation, wicket conserving, soft pace-setting over the next 30 overs before a final onslaught again in the last 10 overs. Twenty20 is all of the above without the middle 30 overs!

'You would think it would basically be a batter's game and indeed it is. But you still see some inspired bowling performances'


You would think that it would basically be a batter's game and indeed it is. But you still see some inspired bowling performances. The likes of RP Singh and  Irfan Pathan have put in wonderful spells. What the bowlers don't have is the luxury to settle down to line and length. They need to get it right from the first ball and that usually means a yorker or two.

There are sixes (six in an over from Yuvraj Singh) so anything that is remotely short has a chance of being walloped over the ropes. The bowler's best chance is to pitch it up and aim for the yorker. This is unlike ODIs, where to some extent, short balls also work. Because the batsman is more conscious about not losing his wicket there may be another 20-25 overs to bat through. In Twenty20 batsmen are far less concerned about their wicket.

Fielding has to be top class on the ground and in catching as well. The catches by Dinesh Karthik against South Africa and Harbhajan Singh at the boundary were s good as any I have seen on a cricket field. On the batting front a team is always in the game. Even from 30-5, a team could potentially end up with 150 which could be defended. So if the tail wags only for 5-10 there could be valuable runs.

I guess there is no established strategy to the game yet. The captains and the coaches are experimenting with bowling changes (with just four overs per bowler, how do you give the bowler multiple spells?) or the batting order (everyone at the crease is potentially a pinch hitter). The strategy will come as they play more and learn.

Sri Lanka and South Africa did not make it to the semis despite being very good teams. One bad move can mean defeat because there are no second chances. From a spectator's point of view, the format is good, three hours entertainment and then it's all over.

And meanwhile from India's point of view, MS Dhoni appears to be a lucky captain. We have won the World Cup in his first outing as captain, and he has now been elevated to be the captain of the ODI side to play Australia. That should be interesting, captaining young kids is one thing, but leading a side with heavyweights like Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and Saurav Ganguly will be a real test for him.

Will Twenty20 have a knock-on effect for cricket? Post a comment below or submit an article to Sportingo.