Twenty20 WC?

Tim de Lisle joins the chorus for a Twenty20 World championship:

"Aside from the Laws, cricket also has its rules of thumb. Rule 1(a) states that if the International Cricket Council thinks an idea is good, there's a fair chance it will be bad. But this rule is in danger of being superseded by a new one: if the Indian board thinks an idea is bad, you can be fairly sure it's good."

May I suggest a corollary: if the BCCI -this new uppity entity that just happens to hold the future of world cricket in its hand - offers an opinion on any topic, some testy journalist will take it to task, unable to reconcile himself to the idea that he's not in Kansas (or Lord's) anymore. (The BCCI's ideas on favoring the Indian cricket team with more time at home during their domestic season is obviously a bad one, as is their suggestion that more cricket be played between quality teams as opposed to meaningless games between no-hopers, watched by few and appreciated by none). Lisle's dismissal of the BCCI counter-argument is a bad one (I don't even think he gets the point being made, or worse, gets it but doesn't want to acknowledge it). And he continues the sniping at the BCCI throughout (without offering new arguments for why the Twenty20 WC is a better way to spend the ICC's time and money rather than improving Test and ODI cricket, not to mention domestic cricket or arranging 'A' tours).

That Lisle is gunning for something is given away by his gratuitous remark about "maidans" in the last section of the piece (and I could talk about how playing cricket in the Indian summer is impossible but why should I? Why would I want to come across as as ignorant as Lisle?).

Read the whole thing for yourself.