• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

The End of the 16.4?


Quite good fun IMO. Could do with sorting the graphics out on TV to be a bit clearer for me - use teams colours rather than standard ones.

The calling it the 16.4 is getting a bit dull now though. Like fielders shouting chalk it when someone gets one flush on the toe of their bat.
 
Carteron said:
Quite good fun IMO. Could do with sorting the graphics out on TV to be a bit clearer for me - use teams colours rather than standard ones.

The calling it the 16.4 is getting a bit dull now though. Like fielders shouting chalk it when someone gets one flush on the toe of their bat.
Click to expand...
It's a contemptuous term for a superfluous and ridiculous tournament which is draining money from the game. T20 is the tournament for those who prefer high tempo, short form cricket.
 
Parkside said:
It's a contemptuous term for a superfluous and ridiculous tournament which is draining money from the game. T20 is the tournament for those who prefer high tempo, short form cricket.
Click to expand...
I think it’s interesting when T20 was first introduced, certain traditional fans had contempt for that too and would not call that by it’s proper name, , they used to call it hit and giggle and not proper cricket.
 
Voice of fair play said:
I think it’s interesting when T20 was first introduced, certain traditional fans had contempt for that too and would not call that by it’s proper name, , they used to call it hit and giggle and not proper cricket.
Click to expand...
There was nothing new with T20 ,overs cricket had been the lifeblood of club cricket for years,; it was the blaring music and loud clothing that the traditional followers found unnecessary and irritating. Emphasis is on hitting with the loud music accompaniment only there for amusement sic giggle so I'm bewildered that some find the expression annoying.
The contempt for this new folly,which is 16.4 traditional overs,is it's superfluous, a drain on finances to the detriment of the red ball cricket.In England by far the biggest revenue stream is test cricket which requires 4 day red ball cricket to maintain it.
 
Parkside said:
There was nothing new with T20 ,overs cricket had been the lifeblood of club cricket for years,; it was the blaring music and loud clothing that the traditional followers found unnecessary and irritating. Emphasis is on hitting with the loud music accompaniment only there for amusement sic giggle so I'm bewildered that some find the expression annoying.
The contempt for this new folly,which is 16.4 traditional overs,is it's superfluous, a drain on finances to the detriment of the red ball cricket.In England by far the biggest revenue stream is test cricket which requires 4 day red ball cricket to maintain it.
Click to expand...
Aye 20 over cricket played in whites and just confined to club cricket was ok as long as you didn’t get too excited and enjoyed yourself too much.

yet trying to attract new blood to the game with the same 20 over cricket with some different clothing and some music to help that process along, annoyed people and all of a sudden wasn’t proper cricket and a giggle

Even though exactly the same game.

kind of says it all!!
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
There was nothing new with T20 ,overs cricket had been the lifeblood of club cricket for years,; it was the blaring music and loud clothing that the traditional followers found unnecessary and irritating. Emphasis is on hitting with the loud music accompaniment only there for amusement sic giggle so I'm bewildered that some find the expression annoying.
The contempt for this new folly,which is 16.4 traditional overs,is it's superfluous, a drain on finances to the detriment of the red ball cricket.In England by far the biggest revenue stream is test cricket which requires 4 day red ball cricket to maintain it.
Click to expand...
This is where the 16.4 thing is exposed as a bit childish. The evening cricket I played back in the day was 15x8. Since T20 became a thing at elite level most of the leagues have switched to 20x6. But I don’t think that made the older evening format I played a joke. It was essentially the same.

The same with the hundred. It’s an unnecessary format tweak for an unnecessary tournament sure. But that it uses five ball overs is the least of its worries.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Aye 20 over cricket played in whites and just confined to club cricket was ok as long as you didn’t get too excited and enjoyed yourself too much.

yet trying to attract new blood to the game with the same 20 over cricket with some different clothing and some music to help that process along, annoyed people and all of a sudden wasn’t proper cricket and a giggle

Even though exactly the same game.

kind of says it all!!
Click to expand...
Disappointed in you, Vofp. Credited you with not descending to sarcasm. The razmataz appeals to the modern generation,so be it, The boring old farts like myself find it irritating and not the traditional or proper type of cricket, so be it. Any genuine cricket lover will recognise the financial benefit of T20 and its appeal to the younger generation. They'll find the longer form boring and,no doubt,think of its followers as BOFs. I fully understand that and find it amusing.Certainly wouldn't have take offense.Each to their own.
Fleagle said:
This is where the 16.4 thing is exposed as a bit childish. The evening cricket I played back in the day was 15x8. Since T20 became a thing at elite level most of the leagues have switched to 20x6. But I don’t think that made the older evening format I played a joke. It was essentially the same.

The same with the hundred. It’s an unnecessary format tweak for an unnecessary tournament sure. But that it uses five ball overs is the least of its worries.
Click to expand...
I find the 15x8 interesting.Was never aware of it in this area.Can just remember 8 ball overs in Aussie 1st class cricket.
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
Disappointed in you, Vofp. Credited you with not descending to sarcasm. The razmataz appeals to the modern generation,so be it, The boring old farts like myself find it irritating and not the traditional or proper type of cricket, so be it. Any genuine cricket lover will recognise the financial benefit of T20 and its appeal to the younger generation. They'll find the longer form boring and,no doubt,think of its followers as BOFs. I fully understand that and find it amusing.Certainly wouldn't have take offense.Each to their own.

I find the 15x8 interesting.Was never aware of it in this area.Can just remember 8 ball overs in Aussie 1st class cricket.
Click to expand...
What I am saying mate, whether it’s T20, test cricket, 4 day cricket, 50 over cricket or indeed 100 balls, whether it’s played at club, county or international cricket it’s played by 22 players on a 22 yard pitch it’s the same game and all the skills on show have their own merits and should be appreciated and not belittled because of other issues

I can appreciate great play and great cricket and applaud it, at all formats irrespective of anything else.

Not sure that the case with all looking for excuses to not appreciate great skills on show.

You even had people on threads not giving Maxwell massive credit for one of the best innings ever and hardly anyone is giving India credit for possibly the best tournament performance ever by a cricket team in a major competition such is the way people look at things at times
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
What I am saying mate, whether it’s T20, test cricket, 4 day cricket, 50 over cricket or indeed 100 balls, whether it’s played at club, county or international cricket it’s played by 22 players on a 22 yard pitch it’s the same game and all the skills on show have their own merits and should be appreciated and not belittled because of other issues

I can appreciate great play and great cricket and applaud it, at all formats irrespective of anything else.

Not sure that the case with all looking for excuses to not appreciate great skills on show.
Click to expand...
It's variations of the same game and red ball cricket and white ball cricket require different skills. White ball cricket is more batter friendly undoubtedly. What I'm saying is individuals have the right to choose which type of cricket they prefer. Because I don't wish to watch cricket accompanied by loud music it's a non sequitur to say I'm belittling the skills displayed In that format.
 
Parkside said:
It's variations of the same game and red ball cricket and white ball cricket require different skills. White ball cricket is more batter friendly undoubtedly. What I'm saying is individuals have the right to choose which type of cricket they prefer. Because I don't wish to watch cricket accompanied by loud music it's a non sequitur to say I'm belittling the skills displayed In that format.
Click to expand...
Well yeah of course and I have never had the slightest of issue with that.

It’s the superior, snobbery way some ( not necessarily you) belittle other formats and look down on them that I object too, that has happened with T20, and now does with the hundred (sorry 16.4;)).

Good cricket, is good cricket no matter what the format or who plays that good cricket.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Well yeah of course and I have never had the slightest of issue with that.

It’s the superior, snobbery way some ( not necessarily you) belittle other formats and look down on them that I object too, that has happened with T20, and now does with the hundred (sorry 16.4;)).

Good cricket, is good cricket no matter what the format or who plays that good cricket.
Click to expand...
I certainly think that the skill set required for red ball cricket is superior to that for white ball cricket but that doesn't imply snobbery nor is it belittling T20. I enjoy T20 thanks to the mute key.I take a light hearted view to it but again that's not belittling it.
I certainly look down on the Hundred but we won't reiterate that.
Chill out.😀.It would be a pretty boring and pointless forum if we all held the same viewpoints.
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
I certainly think that the skill set required for red ball cricket is superior to that for white ball cricket but that doesn't imply snobbery nor is it belittling T20. I enjoy T20 thanks to the mute key.I take a light hearted view to it but again that's not belittling it.
I certainly look down on the Hundred but we won't reiterate that.
Chill out.😀.It would be a pretty boring and pointless forum if we all held the same viewpoints.
Click to expand...
It’s all fine mate, as ever enjoy the debate, personally I think the skills developed in the short format game are much more varied and continue to develop as each year goes by and imo those skills have made their way to the test arena and enhanced that game for the better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top