³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

Soutik:
First off, my best wishes to the people of India in the winning of the Cricket game with Sri Lanka...

-dennis

As someone from a nation not particularly interested in Cricket in any form, and with only a modest passing interest myself, I have to say the recent World Cup got a lot of fans here in Scotland, and I personally found it a very interesting format, maybe the limited over format should be the norm?

The tournament certainly did the sport proud and it won many followers. I was a little disappointed though to see that the next World Cup will be sending the likes of the Irish packing. How will these teams improve if they are not given opportunities? Is that the idea? By exclusion we have an elite. Ireland surely deserve better.

An England fan in Colombo

Soutik -Nearly 70 million people watched the pulsating India - Sri Lanka final on television. I am not sure how you came up with this 70 million figure or is it 700 million. Cricket mad India’s population itself is 1.2 billion, in that more than 60% of the population are less than 30 years old. So I am not sure whether the 70 million viewers is anywhere near the actual number of viewers.

Judging by my visit to India during a test, the likely figure is 70 million TV sets and 700 million viewers. I've always preferred the one day format over 20/20 as there is at least a chance of seeing tactical play in the 1 day game. Also 20/20 is likely to see the same sort of thing that happened with Premier League, where all the money stays with the top few clubs and nothing left for the other divisions.

I thoroughly enjoyed this world cup far more than the 2007 tournament in the Windies. I have always felt the 50 over game encapsulates the game's finer qualities more than the 20 over game and with a greater accessibility (and marketability) than Test match cricket. In the 50 over game, the batsman still has the chance to play himself 'in' rather than come out ready to bludgeon wildly, furthermore I would rather see a batsman produce a quality century rather than just the flurry of boundaries which many 20/20 lovers extol. Finally, the bowlers, particularly the spinners have more of a place in this form of the game than in the 20/20 form as this world cup has demonstrated. However I would not read too much into the author's remarks about the unprecedented records set in this world cup because these sub-continent pitches were 'batter-friendly' tracks which negated the more normative pace attacks favoured in ODI cricket and hence the augmented batting cards.

All in all, I would like to see the ICC not playing six or seven match ODI series as while this allows the game to be taken to more venues in a given country it creates a tedious feeling among the TV followers who after a long Test series probably prefer a short and sweet 3 match series (one week) compared to another fortnight between the same two teams.

Soutik, you seem to have been off-concept--else you would have understood that to Indians cricket is like football (the proper game, not the body-crash one with lots of kevlar armour misnamed this by Canadians and Americans) to Brazilians; there is no way it will die!

Cricket is always bin in Countries like India. Coming to ODI legends like Sachin Tendulkar, Shane warne, Muttiah, Wasim Akram, etc got life to cricket, I feel 50 over format and 20/20 are exciting than any other sport. Test matches should be stoped to save Cricket.

According to Guardian’s Barney Ronay, 1.4 billion people watched the world cup final.

Hello Soutik from Florida: Your column brought back memories of when I played club cricket for several teams in my native Birmingham. Those Saturday afternoons when, always weather permitting, I displayed my mediocre batting and average bowling skills. It reminded me that I once tried, without much success, to explain the game to the members of my civic club in Jupiter, Florida. After 30 minutes of talking about the game, and explaining that some games lasted five days, as in Test matches, I had succeeded only in getting lots of laughs from the audience. Anyway, it was lots of fun. One more memory is of watching cricket played on matting in Colombo, then Ceylon, while I was serving in the Royal Navy in World War II. It's good to know that cricket is indeed alive and well.

I am pretty sure you are wrong about the number of people who watched the World Cup Final on television. Are you suggesting in all of India only 70 million watched the match ?

I'm shocked only 67.6 millions people watched the final. That's only 6% of the India population. Should be a lot higher that that. I thought it would be around 1 billion people would have watched the final in India.

This Cricket World Cup in the sub-continent has been excellent. One of the best world cups of all time. The best country India won the world cup. This tournament shows ODI cricket is not dead and still very exciting.

This world cup was indeed super successful but then doesn't it leaves the message that India must do well to keep the 50 over format alive? I am little skeptical what would have been the fate of the world cup had India didn't do this well.
Having said that, there is no doubt that as long as the current Indian players play up to their potential, they will continue to reach new milestones.

Irelands exclusion is a sad day for cricket. They've shown themselves to be consistently equal to (and perhaps even superior to) Zimbabwe over the last 4 years. Surely the most sensible (and fair) option was to cut the number of participating teams to 10 but have a qualifying event for 2 of the spaces. That would give more meaningful cricket - for a team like Zimbabwe/Ireland/Netherlands it would be their world cup final - and a less protracted tournament. We're left with the possibility of one of the top 10 ranked teams not even having the opportunity to qualify. Qualification should be based on merit, not based on privilege. Sad and shortsighted.

Was this really a "World" Cup? Out of 200-odd countries in the world, we had 14 teams competing, including 4 associate members of the ICC and 10 full members, two or three of which are mostly outsiders. The West Indies, by the way, is not even a country.

There's nothing to gloat about when a team emerges "World Champions" in this confined world of cricket. It's time for fans to adopt and follow more healthy sports, those that give them ample aerobic exercise, test their teamwork skills and are globally accepted!

your blog says 70 million people watched the game on television ,worldwide it is probably clser to 700 million

as an Indian naturally I was over the moon with India winning was sad for Sir Lanka also. Howver I am reserving most of MY ANGER with ICC to dropping Ireland from playing next World Cup. Ireland played so well and they need all the mateches on the big circuit and not just for usual suspects. ICC PLEASE DONT DISTROY OPPORTUNITIES FOR IRELAND who really do desereve to play Test matches and World Cup matches. Thanks.

Completely agree with #14, that's the way it should have been! Feel sorry for Ireland ((

Why did ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ withdraw the article on Anna Hazare'e anti- corruption movement ?

Mr. Biswas, how about commenting on things that matter ?

Did Sonia & her kin buy out ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ ?