---

In the last couple of days I've had people who know of my fondness for the game of cricket approach me with questions or comments about the Twenty/20 World Cup currently being played in South Africa.

To be frank I haven't had much to say to them in reply because the truth is I have little to no interest in that competition.

I view the event as one promoted by England and South Africa in order to fulfil their ambitions of winning an international cricket competition since along with New Zealand they remain the only major Test playing nations who haven't won the 'real' world cup.

Frankly I see Twenty/20 cricket as little more than a 'slugfest' and can understand why it appeals to the 'lager louts' who enjoy it while consuming copious amounts of alcohol during 'happy hour' in the United Kingdom. The game itself affords batsmen absolutely no time to build an innings and demands that bowlers become line and length 'bowling metronomes'.

I readily concede that it can be exciting and has already proven to be a big money-spinner but in my opinion it threatens to do more harm than good to cricket in the long run. It encourages 'bad cricket' and will hinder rather than help the development of young players.

The proliferation of the so-called 'Twenty/20 revolution' with the current Twenty/20 World Cup and the Stanford Twenty/20 competition early next year will have a detrimental effect on cricket played in the West Indies and Bermuda especially.

Why? Because the batsmen from both national teams already find it difficult to build an innings or occupy the wicket for any considerable length of time and have acquired the reputation of playing injudicious shots far too early in their innings.

Which of these three things does Twenty/20 cricket help to ameliorate? Indeed it encourages them!

If Mr. Stanford really wanted to help cricket in the region he would have worked along with the West Indies and Bermuda Cricket Board and put his money into promoting and rejuvenating the first class game, which is and always has been the 'nursery' for developing class players.

It does not surprise me however that Mr. Stanford chose to invest in the Twenty/20 version of the sport. After all he is an American and the fast pace of the game would obviously appeal to him.

He seems to share the same mindset as those 'yanks' who wanted to break soccer into fifteen-minute periods and widen the goals so as to encourage higher scores.

I sincerely hope that when Bermuda's selectors sit down to choose the players to represent Bermuda in the Stanford Twenty/20 competition they place the emphasis on experience rather than youth, recognizing that this event is not a platform for developing young cricketers but a limited over 'crash, bang, wallop' competition.

In fact I had to chuckle last week while watching Stanford's cricket programme. There was an interview with the young Nevis player Kieran Powell, who played a few big shots during last year's competition, talk quickly escalated to a place in the West Indies Test team.

I thought to myself if the West Indies have stooped to selecting players for their Test team based on performances in Stanford's Twenty/20 tournament then things really have hit rock bottom.

My team

In fact if I had anything to do with it I would select the following players to represent Bermuda in Stanford's competition:

Charlie Marshall (captain), Lionel Cann (vice-captain), Irving Romaine, Janeiro Tucker, Dwayne Leverock, Chris Foggo, Dion Stovell, Glenn Blakeney, Azeem Pitcher, George O'Brien, Kevin Hurdle, Ryan Steede, Dean Minors, Dean Stephens, Manager:- Colin Blades, Coach:- Gus Logie, Physio:- Eugene Raynor.[[In-content Ad]]

---