Has the T20 World Cup Been a Success or a Failure? Has it been Poorly Planned?😬| Kimber & Harmy 

Man I appreciate your support Will you regularly follow the matches of USA?

@@Green-ou4cg I think I will! I enjoyed the match today v SA despite the loss. I'm even tempted to jump in a plane and go to one of their matches in the islands; I live in Miami so it's a little jump! Also, I am a Phys Ed Teacher so cricket is definitely getting put on my lesson plans for next school year!

Thi video is ridiculous.. These people are sooo orgasmed by flat pitches.... and homeruns they can't enjoy tight games... tight games are not only last over finishes.. tight games are tight all throughout the overs.. where it makes you wonder when are the runs gonna come ,when the wickets gonna fall.. and that's what was made possible by the new york pitch..on the case of timing.. so when matches are hosted in India, aus, England.... there's no timing issue for people who live on other parts of the world? if there is , then logically no WC will be enjoyable..cz some parts of the world will ALWAYS have timing issue.... it's so pathetic that you blame and slaughter an event based on the convenience of your timing... the only valid criticism is the rain . otherwise everything Is fantastic... this has been the most competitive World Cup thus far in world cup history...Unlike other World Cups ..most games were not boring... batsmen were made to feel special whenever they scored runs bcz it was earned... and if you're gonna say dasun shanaka bowling wicket maidens is uncalled for as he is not that good of a bowler... then remember all those runs you saw in IPl and other parts of the world with avg score of 180-200 pitches.. all those batting performances are also not normal and uncalled for bcz they are not qualify batsmen.. runs are fed to them by the pitch......and red ball cricket is obviously a contest between bat and ball... but if you think white ball cricket is not and mostly should be entertainment.. go watch baseball.. or create another sport like cricket but with bowling machines, not bowlers..then you'll get your entertainment.....

@@syeedchowdhury2501 couldn't agree more. two pompous fools spouting nonsense.

​@@pantx0 I admire your passion for the game. Hope that you liked what you saw.

2022 edition was great.

Your spot on just a bunch of elites chatting garbage

who is the majority? how did you come to that conclusion? better not to make claims that you can't back up.

Garbage.

No bhai it’s a boring World Cup

I mean, it is an English radio station doing a podcast with two English men and an Aussie for their UK-based RU-vid channel being recorded in England. It's gonna be a little Anglocentric.

I don't even think Harmy likes cricket. He seems to have that back in my day type of attitude.

Maybe he meant Native Americans ...

locals = not expatriates withing the last 20-30 years or something

Or actual Americans? And not Indians on visas?

Yeah... bro needs to check out what the actual markets are like in North America.

Targeting the expatriates is not necessarily going to the best for long term growth of cricket. Not going to get good quality expatriates all the time

Nah that 2016 World Cup was a boring one, you consistently had scores of 180-200. An ideal game of t20 cricket should have scores of 140-160. The 2007-2010 world cups were very fun. 2022 was great to watch as well. 2021 was the worst, horrendous tournament.

2021 was boring because India was eliminated early right? ​@@rihitjamb3757

@@rihitjamb3757 if all the games are between 140-160 it makes it a slug fest. You need to have variety. Take the IPL(not last season) for example. If you go to Chennai normally it used to be 140 to 160ish, then you travel to Bangalore and it's a 200 run fest. You cannot organise a tournament which thought is lob sided in ones favour. Having variety is what makes the game exciting. All games being low or high scoring games make it boring. I'd say me personally I'd be happy with anything between 140 to 210 in T20 Games. The occasional high or low scoring game is fine but the whole tournament cannot be that

No matter how much you defend ..the concept of t20 cricket is to score as many as runs within 120 balls...it's not about scoring low runs...this world cup has been the worst ever...no hype no interest...even dead ODI world cup looked better compared to this baseball worldcup...test cricket is much much better than this third class t20 worldcup

@@rumba_tumba_zumba_kumba no idea what you're talking about but sure 👍

Exactly 💯, for North American cricket fans who've sacrificed sleep for years to watch the sport they love, this has been a wonderful tournament

EXACTLY

@@PJ-cm8ix All 8 of you

​@@wackyadz06 😂😂😂

True

You can watch the matches on Sling Tv/ Fubo

I think this was the only major mistake made by the ICC. They should’ve stitched up a deal with ESPN considering every WC march was shown on ESPN in the Caribbean. In all honesty, ICC probably didn’t expect USA to go to the second round and the subsequent buzz around the game. I’m sure they’ll have some broadcasting deal for future tournaments.

@@Aart.Vandelay it's a massive mistake if they wanted Cricket to grow here. As it is, it will stay a niche sport for us expats and our kids... And I'm okay with that

How's a match starting at 6 am any good for Indian audiences

What are you on about?

@@ashishmishra3671the New York matches started at 10:30am local time (8pm Indian Prime Time) how on earth do you expect to grow the game starting matches at 10:30am on a week day?

Where do you think ICC getting sponsors from ?? From India, who's gonna watch indian product ads in other regions

Obviously, the sponsors want to make money and there’s no money for anyone if the Indian market isn’t pandered too. The sport is literally 95% sponsored and financed by BCCI+Indian markets, it won’t survive without it.

Will you follow remaining games of the tournament?

I admire your passion given the time zone constraints.

@@Green-ou4cg yes and watch the games which are on at the right time for me!

they even pre-seeded for semi final lol

agreed!

I think people are stuck on this IPL mentality. I love the fact the batters can't close their eyes and swing for the heavens.

@alenbenny7169 The bounce on NY pitch was consistent, It was a slow and sticky pitch. Only few rare balls here and there that misbehaved.If it was deemed as a consistent dangerous pitch with uneven bounce, every team would have complained to the ICC. There would have been few finger injuries at least .

Yeah, PSL is great 😂

@alenbenny7169 You are just cherry picking those incidents. The Incident of Kohli getting out happens everywhere..the ball just gripping and stopping on him.

Agree, Eng would have lost to Scotland if not for the rain.

@@jeevankikahaniya6339bullocks they would

@@jeevankikahaniya6339in your dreams maybe

Def ..dint even realise nz was in the wc ..poor scheduling of sme matches and below average pitches in New York have made it little subdued to watch ..nt getting the heat of the tournament

It rains all through the year in most of the US.. there’s no “rainy season” lol. Summer is usually drier in many parts but for Miami it’s wetter.

You wouldn't be saying that if India had been eliminated because of those pitches.

@@Evil_Clown-eh6jzIndia is a world class team they should have the talent and capabilities to bat and win on difficult pitches.

@@deelonshaw6505 Yeah, they should certainly win against 4 minnows, regardless of the surface. But India needed some bizarre Pakistani brain-fart and a dropped catch from Rohit Sharma's old team-mate to get through with 3 wins. Those weren't very wide margins. Even in the super-8s they have a free run till the semi final, with more minnows..

​@Evil_Clown-eh6jz minnows or otherwise, T20 is and always will be a leveller. Over a 5 day test or even 50 overs, generally, the best team will win. But in a 20 over blast, it all comes down to on the day performance. The USA would *probably* not beat Pakistan over 5 days, or 50 overs. But in 20? They had a far better chance, and they took it

@@humblegamertube true ,, and that the beauty of T20. It provide an opportunity for team to express themselves overa shorter format which is more appealing to no cricket enthusiasts.

@alenbenny7169 The problem with Florida is simply the problem with having the US host a cricket competition in its current immature state. The only time suitable for cricket in New York is summer, and whilst cricket is possible in Florida in summer there is the problem with rain and humidity.. The solution, as solved in Qld Australia, is grounds that are specifically built and designed to drain quickly. The US is currently flat out even getting a suitable ground at all, much less one that is capable of draining quickly. Given games in New York were a necessity, and Florida is the home of US cricket I think that the ICC did the only thing possible and just hoped for good weather. With regards the NY pitch, I'll just repeat that it takes a different skill set, and I prefer the NY pitch to anything in the IPL. I'll also make a comment that I have long said that the biggest problem with Indian cricket is the incompetency of selection and the structure of the competition that adds to the complexity of selection. The one thing that the US got right was their talent scouting. If India could actually get an even moderately competent selection system they would never lose.

@alenbenny7169 "The bounce in any pitch must be consistent." - absolutely not. The entirety of the technique of batting in cricket and the cricket bat itself is designed to counter inconsistent bounce. You play with a vertical ("straight") bat down the line of the ball. The bat has a long batting surface specifically because you could not predict the bounce of the ball. Cross bat shots used to be frowned upon. In any case that is not possible to have perfectly consistent bounce unless you have a soft surface because the seam of the ball will generate inconsistent bounce. The pitch was never described as dangerous, if it had been it would not have been used, that is what the umpires are for and the players would have complained. There have been very few injuries so far in this world cup, it certainly has not been notable feature. And what specifically is the difference between a bowling pitch and a dangerous one? By definition a bowling pitch must be one where the batsman finds it more difficult to predict where the ball is going to go. That must make it inherently more dangerous. "So if a ball which pitches around 2m from the crease bounces over your head in one ball and the next ball it crawls down your bat-that pitch is called dangerous" - what you are describing is excessively inconsistent bounce, the variation of which is greater than the length of the bat. Only the first 2 games of NY were anything like that, and even then I would argue within the normal variation of a test match pitch. "Indian and SA batsmen had to pay the prices with their stats " - what are you talking about? they won all of their games. Or are you talking about their batting averages and strike rates? If so, why? Who cares? "And fun fact is the skill needed to survive in unfit NY pitch is called "LUCK"." - if that is the case why have the final table standings not represented luck whatsoever? T20 has been called a "lottery", and this T20 world cup has certainly not been the case so far. The US beating Pak was the only upset match and Pak played badly. If you are referring to individual batting being luck, firstly that is always the case which is why even great batsmen can get a duck, and secondly the stats in this world cup do not confirm that. The players that performed better did so consistently. "That means he mishit 19 balls in that match... He was just lucky to be there." - no it doesn't. Two of the differences between a top level batsman and an amateur is technique and judgement. A top level batsman knows what shot to play and how to play it to reduce the risk of getting out when mishitting a shot. Pretty much all cricketers from club level to international level have essentially the same hand-eye coordination. What makes the difference is knowing how to play a shot and which one (a third difference is predicting the path of the ball from the bowler's action). The aim is to make sure that a mishit doesn't cause you to lose a wicket, whilst optimising your chances of making a run.

What a load of shite hahaha!

@@chriswatson7965 You've never played cricket, have you?

@@wackyadz06 Yes, but as a bowler. I don't like batting or batsmen.

ICC made the poor decision to put a stadium in NY, an expensive vanity project. Games should have only been in Dallas and Lauderhill.

Yes. And it devalues a win because it only lasts two years

Totals like 110-120 are bad too for a t20 the ideal total should be around 150-160

@@priyanshuverma2749 there’s no such thing as a bad total or a good total. There are bad games and good games. And NY had good games

@alenbenny7169 Spongy bounce is not dangerous. Kohli got out playing mindless shots in all 3 matches

I knew nothing about cricket, but my son and I were intrigued after the US beat Pakistan. We drove 18 hours to Florida to see US-Ireland. There was rain the day before, but on game day there was a window of beautiful weather -- bright sun and warm weather. Three hours after the scheduled start time, it started to rain and the match was cancelled. They had time to prep the pitch and get in at least some play for the paying fans and the curious Americans. But there was absolutely zero sense of urgency. If this is how cricket values its fans, screw it. There are plenty of other sports that are more fan-friendly that we can spend our money and attention on. I should not compare cricket to American baseball (but other potential American cricket fans will). In baseball, the moment it stops raining they haul the tarps off the field and restart the a baseball game, even if the outfield is soaked. Cricket lost two easily gettable fans.

England won the previous T20 World Cup in Australia. They also won a while back in West Indies so your argument is somewhat flawed

@@Robc--jd6yh What did they win in WI🙄🤔? It's very easy to seat in UK n criticise. WI is not a country that too bunch of developing ones. It's always hard logistically to organise WC there. At least ICC started pramoting cricket in US. England and Aus are playing cricket from 100 years...what did both boards do in last 50 years to spread the game in the world? Thank heavens for Cary Packer...who brought money in the game, and thank Indian n subcontinent fans for making British cricketers rich. Look after the kohinoor diamond...😂

@@pixelligence3091 t20 World Cup 2010 was in West Indies and England won it. Just like they won the penultimate one in Australia. So, it’s morning to do with needing things in English time. The problem is India has too much power and yes it was a problem in the past when England had too much power. Wasn’t right first two world cups held in there. Indian cricket should not be able to make West Indies start matches at 10am nor guarantee where they play in the semi final.

@@Robc--jd6yh So the WC that England won in WI was organised well and was absolutely fair huh...😊 Right. So when ECB was powerful, how much Eng n world cricketers were earning? And you talk about broadcasting time n venue...it's because sponsors can get back their investment by viewership dude. Without sponsors n money in the game both Aus n Eng test teams will choose to play IPL n hundred in stead of Ashes. 😂 Talking about clout...why does WTC finals are being organised only in England? Can you please explain?

@@pixelligence3091 it seems you are doing a great job of contradicting and arguing with yourself so I should probably sit back and let you get on with that. I have already said it’s not fair for anyone to have an advantage and that includes England. I agree re WTC. I understand re sponsorship reasons but I’m saying I didn’t particularly enjoy the T20 WC due to the lack of atmosphere in the stadiums. It was too quiet as tickets were too expensive and the timing was suitable for Indian (and to lesser extent uk and Australian) audiences not the locals. So this isn’t an India v England thing or an Australia v Ind thing. I want to watch cricket played in front of a packed crowd. In your responses try to remove the anti English bias you inherently have as it’s not about England.

Are you a thai?

Do you guys not enjoy the matches of Australia What about the craze of the tournament in Australia?

There’s no craze in the US.. nobody knows it’s happening. It’s organized so poorly. Atleast have the matches at night and sell tickets at a reasonable price, not $300.

If you have problem with international cricket then don’t worry. Within a few years cricket won’t be international anymore and t20 club cricket will be the primary.