It Is Dangerous Idea Of The Cricketer Turned Administrator !

“Is it not cricket and if you want to enforce out such idea that is dangerous for real ( Test ) cricket. If you advocate such idea then
make it individual not the team game as the
T20 cricket format. Yes the shortest format and it is going to reduce in shorter, shortest format….T10, F5, One-1 and rediclously one -one ball.😂😂😅😂😂😢😢😢😢😢
Why if you think about time issue and the shortest format then one ball each from both the individuals is the shortest form .
And if there is a time issue for the people then what is need to watch the game . If you are the fan then on the name of entertainment shouldn’t be the issue of the time.
Cricketer like Sourabh Ganguly is advocating and preferring T20 format is tragic and this kind of thinking is dangerous for the game.
If we observe out the T20 format then there are some serious situation it has. Yes there are 20 overs from each side. It means 120 balls each from the both side. In each team there are 11 players in the playing squad. And in it there are 5 specialist batsmen, one wicketkeeper, one all rounder 4 bowlers as the pacer and spinner. It means if we talk about the batting field then 11 × 12 = 120 balls. I mean each batsman gets only 12 balls in his part to face or or to score. And if the openers play all 120 balls then there is no scope for another batsmen. If the openers play 10 match and they remain not out in these 10 matches by playing all 20 overs then what about the rested batsmen. Yes in them 6 are generally not specialist batsmen because their responsibility is different . Yes 4 batsmen have to bowl only because they are bowling specialists. One is all rounder and his responsibility is to bat and bowl it means not special bowler and not special batsman and his job isn’t full guaranteed. It is so because there are countable all rounders in the Test cricket history who have performed their task successfully. And if we talk about the T20 then there is no need of any specialist in the game because each player gets only 12 deliveries to score, each bowler gets 24 balls to deliver and for this kind of job there is no need of any specialist. As a batsman you need to swing the bat because there is no time you have to stop the ball because you have only 10.90 balls in your part and if you play more indirectly you reduce the chances of other and reduce the balls in counting. Such as any batsman can bowl like the bower-batsman yeah just 24 balls. And if we divide 120 balls for the each bowler then 10.90 balls do parted in each share for the bowler. In the T20 we have seen that the use of pinch hitter is got successful. And non specialist openers like Sachin Tendulkar, Sourabh Ganguly, Virender Sehwag, Sanat Jaysurya , M Gretbatch , Shiv Narain have remained so successful in F50 and T20.
What I want to focus out through this mirror …?
Yes shortening the game isn’t good for the real game of cricket. Having 11 players in the game aren’t justified to have the action if two or three players perform well then there are no or less chance for the rest of the players then why the format needs 11 players. And what is the need of field restrictions and other kinds of limitations. Filelding point of view and bowling-batting of view there is no wage no sweating for the maximum players. So in the T20 format there should be 5 players overall . Yes all should be all rounders . And if there are 5 players then 24 balls each and there should be the rule if the batsman couldn’t play 24 balls then the remaining balls would have been expired itself. And such as in the bowling each bowler has right to bowl 24 deliveries and it is essential for each bowler to bowl his 24 balls’ quota. Due following this scale the game would be equally opportunity prone for all players and the Cricket Board has to pay salary only to 5 players and in this way it would save money in its treasure. And in this kind of format no replacement of substitute and due to this rule the players will keep themselves fit totally. I know we are running in the materialistic era and money is utmost desire of the man whether it is on the name of entertainment , politics , religion or any profession. But it is not justifiable that you put the real or fundamental form in the danger that we are watching in present that many cricketers do prefer T20 and franchise cricketer only to amass money. Yeah tell me what is the difference between Kerry Pecker and ,ICL -Big- Bash, IPL which have crooked the game and money making is their motto. See many cricketers reject their nation’s side and prefer to play IPL only to gain money. It means for them money is greater than their motherland or nation.
If the real cricketer who became the BCCI boss and favours T20 then it is dangerous for the game cricket and there is no difference between the non-cricketer administrator and him. Before Sourabh Ganguly non cricket playing personalities have held the envious post most of the time so we can’t blame on them but Mr Sourabh Ganguly is a ground or root level cricketer turn administrator so his remark or attitude to have T20 is serious and fatal for the real game the Test Match.
*NK Sevak “Sanatan “