Planetcricket Journalism Contest No.2: - Congratulations ronaldo7777

[barmyarmy]

Members were asked to vote for a suitable topic and then submit articles to be voted on anonymously.
This thread will contain the articles and a poll; any discussion of the articles, which one you voted for etc should be in the original thread.

The second topic to be written about was "Cricket: A batsmans' game?". The articles follow:


Article number 1 - IloveGilly

"Cricket, a game consisted of three important aspects to create one of the most popular sports around the globe. Bowling, fielding and lastly batting. Can this game really be a batsman?s game?

To start off, the average game of cricket in known for the two main aspects of the game which portrays cricket? Bowling and batting. But is there an unbalanced favor towards batting somewhere down the road? Or could there possibly be a reason too why the game of cricket is being described as a batsman?s game.

Batting is considered important in every class of cricket. Whether it is test cricket or our newly created Twenty20 cricket. Then again, what is cricket without runs?

The first issue that could be one-sided is ?why do most captain?s bat first most of the time?? Could it be because there is some kind of an advantage batting first or could it just be better to bat first? Nowadays it seems that the world?s cricket pitches are of high quality and of high expectation, this has no doubt set a standard for world cricket. What does this do? This creates the perfect setting for the batting team. This can tell us a lot of things. It can justify that batting is usually more important when it comes to winning the toss or this can just tell us that batting is simple the better option.

If batsman have a larger affect on the game that would conclude to the point that scoring would be quite high. For the past year this has been proven on countless occasions in the ODIs. The first was Australia?s emphatic lost against South Africa after Australia set the record of the highest score of 434 but soon after SA set the new highest ODI score of 438. This set a tone for some horrible bowling figures, but this wasn?t the end of the 400 reign as Sri Lanka?s infamous high score of 443 set an even newer tone to ODI batting. Not that long ago SA created another score of 418. In all these games the bowlers just couldn?t do anything.

Not all of the last year has been high scores; it has resulted in some class bowling in the champion?s trophy and showed that high scores aren?t everything with the compiled amounts of low scores and proving that wickets being even more vital than runs. Another thing that has changed during the last year is use of the ?Power play? feature. Was this an attempt to raise the run-raise even more or was it designed as a tactical move for the bowlers especially to help support them in faster wicket taking?

Another part of the game that makes up cricket is the audience. What do they come to see? Entertainment. How is entertainment created? Runs, runs and even more runs. This creates a setting of under-rating and under-appreciating the class of bowlers. A five wicket haul isn?t as appealing as a century to the viewing audience and there expectations are mainly relied on the scoreboard continuing to tick up, sixes and batting milestones. The likes of seeing fast balls, bouncers, chances and some friendly banter aren?t as exhilarating to the audience as what the batsman can do.

In high scoring encounters the bowlers are always under pressure to maintain the scoreboard. In low scoring encounters the bowlers are under pressure to take quick wickets and maintain the scoreboard, which shows that not only does the batsman play the important role but the bowler does too. You could even say they play an even more important role depending on the look of the game.

The bowler plays a vital role in maintaining the line, length and at the same time trying to get a wicket, the bowling requirements in international cricket nowadays are now of high standards. Underperforming in the game of cricket is treated with the same consequences as batsman. A dropping. So why are they determined so differently when it is clear that it?s not a batsman?s game?

The only conclusion we can come to is that Cricket cannot be described as batsman?s game. Coming to the point that the bowler?s role should not go under rated. We cannot mistake the game of cricket as a batsman?s game because of the runs they make or even the higher amount of entertainment they create. We wait for the era that the men holding the ball are considered a part of cricket equally among the men holding the bats."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 2 - skateboarder

"Since the emergence of Twenty20 in England in 2003, questions have been raised as to whether cricket is fast becoming a batsman?s game. As in most cases, there are plenty of points to both support and destroy this hypothesis. With a furrowed brown and evil stare, I?m almost certain Australian Mick Lewis would agree. He has the proud record for the worst ever bowling figures in an ODI ? 0/113. Ouch. That was taken on the day that a record was broken and then broken again as South Africa beat the Aussies at Johannesburg, chasing a score of over 400 with just one wicket left. You certainly wouldn?t have seen that in the old days! So, is there actually any evidence, any basis to this claim? I?m curious.

We often hear commentators on the telly talking about how a run rate would rarely exceed 3 an over in the mid 20th century and before. After all, you can almost bet your life that that the late great Sir Don Bradman didn?t amass an average of 99.94 in tests at a run a ball! The Don is an extremely good example of the evolution of our favourite sport. This was a man who played on uncovered wickets. Rain, sleet and snow used to belt down onto those pitches. Conditions like those undoubtedly favour a bowler. That?s why they used to get a tingle inside at the word ?sticky wicket?. But Bradman faced up to it and conquered all. You have to be a bit patient obviously, but he got the job done. Maybe this was a man that proved to others that you really could bat on these types of wickets ? so an entire world of cricketers set about the task and ultimately, cricket became a batsman?s game. The bowlers had been found out, their weapons destroyed and now? it was they on the back foot. Was there any way back?

Rarely, and match by match it gets even rarer, does a pitch favour a bowler these days. These days we walk out to the middle and see a white, rock hard, sometimes firm, track that brings the ball up to the bat with surprising ease and aids scoring shots. Bowlers, maybe even just once a year, would like to emerge from the dressing rooms and lay their eyes on a pitch that resembles a finely cut lawn. A pitch that will swing around corners like those unhampered pitches they used to have at school. In Jamaica in 1998, a test match between the West Indies and England was abandoned because it was seen to be dangerous for the batsmen. For once, the bowlers had the wood wielders right where they wanted them and the game is called off. Typical. This has to be a batsman?s game now.

Start of the fourth paragraph and I still can?t think of any evidence to support a claim that the bowlers have some sort of advantage at all. The list continues of the batsman?s game though. How about the new power play ruling in ODIs? For twenty long overs in an innings the bowlers can?t move the fielders to ideal positions. The batsmen know that there will always be a gap. Always. 250-300 scores have replaced scores between 150-200 for a good day?s one-day work. What next? Based on the events of lat Match at the Bullring it?s going to get worse.

As a bowler myself, the evidence that has been slammed like a concrete wall into my face above on the advantages for a batsman and the complete lack of any evidence supporting my advantages just makes me want to end. I?m going to go sulk in a dark corner for a few years. Then I?m going to pop up my head up and see just how good the batsmen are getting on then."

 

[barmyarmy]

Article number 3 - ronaldo7777

"It was described as the best One Day international ever. Ten months ago the Wanderers in South Africa were greeted to not one , but two world records. They witnessed eight hundred and seventy two runs at a run rate of over 8.6 each. Australia biffed their way to 434 a world record , only to be undone by South Africa who successfully chased it down. Aussie Mick Lewis would have been wondering what he had done to deserve being butchered for 113 runs off his 10 overs. Was this a sign of the times?. Is cricket a batsmens game?

Looking from a far , the things that stick out in cricket , the ones that live on for years , are the great batting performances. Be it Lara?s 400 , that inspired Botham innings at Headingly 81 or just one Don Bradmans many great performances. Everyone remembers them , the shots they played , their celebration , the lot. There are so many great batting innings out there. But what about the bowlers. The poor sods who get smacked about throughout those innings. Who remembers their performaces. Sure Jim Lakers 19 wicket match haul at Old Trafford. But that was 50 years ago , and there hasn?t been that much since. Sure Shane Warne , what a bowler , bowled some magical spells. But who remembers them specifically. The Gatting ball made him an Icon. But apart from that nothing else sticks out.

Bowlers in their own way are quite lucky. If a bowler is out of form , they can carry on bowling. They can make mistakes , bowl the odd horrendous wide. But they can pick themselves back up and bowl another ball. Batsmen makes one error , one false shot and they may not be in the middle again for days. Bowlers can rally around eachother , and a bowler can be taken off on a bad day. A batsmen has nowhere to hide.

As a bowler you can control the match. The batsmen can only play the ball that you bowl. You bowl him a jaffa , and he?ll have to play your game. In the same way that if you bowl him a full toss and he smashes you for 6 its all down to you.

From a fans perspective there is no real contest. It?s the man holding the willow that does all the work. When Kevin Pietersen leathers the ball over the boundary most fans will applaud in awe of some great strokeplay , rather than comment on the bowler who bowler him the half volley in the first place. If a batsmen was being tied down buy some great bowling , would the bowler get the same applause and appreaciation than a batsmen who is mincing bowlers all over the place.

There is no real answer to the question is cricket a batsmens game. Like most things in cricket , its all down to opinion. Granted batsmen are the people who turn heads , the ones who make the fans look on in awe. But perhaps more credit should be given to the bowlers of cricket. They make the game tick. And from time to time , come up with those moments of magic that will live on in cricketing legacy."

 

[barmyarmy]

And a final reminder not to post in this thread (or your post will be deleted). I can't close it otherwise we can't vote on the poll.
All discussion goes here and voting closes on 24 February.

 

[barmyarmy]

Congratulations to ronaldo7777 for winning PC Journalism Contest Number 2.
He wins 1000 vcash and a very special user title.