Society determines need for T20 cricket

RICHARD Edwards’ article titled ‘Must T20 be embraced to ensure survival of club game’ on October 20 is realistic about what will eventually happen to the club game.

I foresee that in the next 10 to 15 years that only the top two teams in the major clubs will play league cricket as we know it. Unless clubs fold, then smaller ones will play T20.

Why is this so? The economy has changed rapidly over the last 30-40 years and many people have to work all kinds of inconvenient hours that militate against regular commitment to a sporting team over a weekend.

Many more people are also trapped by the game’s cost which can put off aspiring players.

The millennial generation and the one afterwards have grown up with more instant entertainment not least with social media and are less likely to embrace an activity that last five to six hours.

Attention spans are shorter and T20 only takes around three hours to complete which will suit modern family life better.

Youngsters are now less likely to relate to traditional Sunday cricket where there are no points at stake. Playing for pleasure seems to be lost on youngsters who do not fully appreciate that getting a bat or a bowl in a friendly is a better way to learn from mistakes than in the harsher environment of league cricket.

One can go on about the reasons for the likely changes but one possible effect overlooked by Mr Edwards is that if T20 cricket takes over many experienced administrators will become disenchanted.

They will not like the game’s new format and will quit the game, leaving an administrative shortfall.