A batsman's game

I've seen the future of limited overs cricket, and I'm skeptical about the direction in which the game is moving.

I am, of course, referring to this game, where Australia piled up 434 for 4 in 50 overs, only to lose by one wicket with one ball to spare.

Upon watching highlights of the first innings, I found myself yawning at the procession of boundaries seemingly hit at will. This is quite shocking, as two of my favourite batsmen, Ponting and Hussey, were the ones instigating the chaos. Sixes and fours were flying to all areas of The Wanderers stadium, some, not even off the middle of their charged bats.

At the end of the innings, I found myself asking, "Who would want to be a bowler?"

Especially with the advent of Twenty20 cricket, where pitches are made for batsmen, and the boundaries are roped in even further, there's little point in being a bowler when the game is so unbalanced against them - we might as well replace bowlers with machines. They've become an accessory of the game, as crowds are easily pleased by big hits (and lots of them). As such, curators are more inclined to create good wickets for batting.

The game has been termed by some as the Greatest ODI match ever. I disagree. Perhaps, it was the most surprising result of all time, but I've always viewed cricket as a battle between bat and ball. That day in Johannesburg, it was no contest.