One-dayers taste better than fast food T20 cricket
OPINION: Idealistically, I should be in camp with Trevor Bayliss.
It might only require a pup tent to accommodate both of us, but the England coach’s desire to get rid of Twenty20 internationals tugged enticingly at my heartstrings.
Prior to attending both the recent T20 clash between New Zealand and England at Seddon Park and Sunday’s ODI - as part of my job - I had far deeper interest in the longer-form of white-ball cricket. I knew on Sunday I was going to witness a deeper array of skills, a more intriguing contest.
But I’m acutely aware I’m part of the minority.
Age is a factor. I was weaned in the 1970s on an almost exclusive diet of the nourishing gruel of test cricket.
In the ‘80s, I rapidly acquired a taste for the pjyama game - 50 overs per side, played under lights in coloured clothing, it was akin to the allure of coke and hamburgers.
When Twenty20 cricket emerged, I wasn’t seeking fast food - I wanted something healthy, something better for me.
International T20 cricket has however grown into a a complex beast.
Australia’s triumphant triseries side featured only David Warner from the test squad that had headed to South Africa to play four tests. The selection of the team that starred in NZ was partly dictated by domestic T20 form, partly by what encounters are deemed more important.
How paramount the T20 triseries was in the world cricketing arena could be adjudged by the trophy Warner received following Australia’s dominant victory.
Seven-year-old footballers have received more impressive man-ofthe-match awards than that. We could have given Davy a McDonald’s happy meal voucher and it would have been less shameful.
Bayliss wouldn’t have had a trophy, or a series.
‘‘I wouldn’t play T20 internationals,’’ he said recently.
‘‘I’d just let the franchises play. If we continue putting on so many games there’ll be a certain amount of blowout, not just players but coaches as well.
‘‘If you want to play a World Cup every four years or whatever it is, maybe six months before you get the international teams and let them play some T20 internationals.’’
His frustrations likely spring from recent developments where batsman Alex Hales and legspinning allrounder Adil Rashid have quit red-ball cricket, making themselves unavailable from country four-day matches and tests.
Those personal decisions can spring from dual reasons - the increase in T20 internationals makes for a taxing year-round programme for the players, but they - and the worldwide domestic leagues, spearheaded by the IPL, make the cricketers an awful lot richer.
As much as I’d like to jump under canvas with Bayliss, realistically, I have a foot in both camps.
New Zealand coach Mike Hesson proposes a common-sense riposte, focusing on the ‘‘revenue generation issue’’.
‘‘In some countries that’s not as big a deal but for New Zealand Cricket, to get 35,000 people to Eden Park or whatever it was the other day, is huge for us, huge for the game and huge for the promotion of the game.’’
Embarrassing trophy aside, Hesson feels T20 internationals had plenty riding on them.
‘‘Too right. Every international you play is incredibly meaningful,’’ he said. ‘‘You’ve got guys that only play T20 and that’s their chance to play international cricket, so I think absolutely it’s meaningful.’’
I see them more as moneyspinners than meaningful, but they’ll continue to be a ready-made meal internationally.