Talk:Twenty20

message: I clearly remember a 20 over game being played in Australia well before the introduction of 20/20 cricket. It came about because the West Indies team touring at the time got bowled out in a lot less than 50 overs. Although much of the current 20/20 rules weren't in place this clearly predates any of the 20/20 matches that have been played since. It was also some what of a precedent at the time as both teams agreed to come out and play another match on the same day --Orestes1984 (talk) 09:33, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: I removed the free hit rule as an exception from Laws of Cricket, as the rule is also a part of current ODI rules. Bedzzled 04:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then Change the Redirect Free Hit also. It is irritating, if the redirect leeds somewhere, where it is no longer metioned. --89.59.18.149 15:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free hit rule 

message: I removed the comment that Twenty20 had not yet spread to India, and replaced it by a slightly toned-down comment to the effect that the Indians had so far only seen it at a minor level. The reason for the change was that there now have been Twenty20 matches there, for example the Bradman Cup in 2005. Loganberry (Talk) 16:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  India 

message: I've replaced this picture on the right with the one currently in the article, as the new image is of a better quality, and shows more "action". I've also added the article's picture of Andrew Strauss playing in the same game. There's also a cropped version of the Andy Strauss picture which shows him more clearly, but the current picture just seems to "work" better. Cenobite 14:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: If you are copying over a scorecard link from CricInfo, please do not post the live scorecard while the match is being played (indicated by the word "current" somewhere in the URL). As soon as the match is concluded these scorecards are moved to the archive and the "current" link becomes dead. Wait until the link no longer says "current". I've just fixed all the links up until #13. I also think for consistency we should use the cricinfo scorecards, as that is what is used throughout the other forms of the game. Manning 22:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  URL Links to scorecards 

message: I think this list of matches played is fine... for now. However within six months we will have gone from a dozen matches to over 50, and I think the list will become unwieldy. By that point I also think we will need a seperate "Twenty20 Internationals" page... but not just yet. Manning 23:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah agree with that --Mikecraig 00:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: We've reached 50 as on 16 December 2007. I think now is a good time to have a separate page. --Arjunkach (talk) 05:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of 20Twenty Internationals 

message: At the end of Rules, the article reads
"If the number of wickets is equal after the first 10 balls per side, the bowling continues with five overs of multiball, followed by sudden death."
  No problems with the latter link, but, as you can see, the 'multiball' internal link leads to a disambig page that has no mention of Twenty20.  Googling  'multiball "Twenty20"' gets mostly forks of the article.  Searching Cricinfo gets no hits at all.  I suggest that this perhaps may possibly need some clarification. --Shirt58 09:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. I have modified the redlink to point to the simpler multiball (cricket). -- Chuq 09:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Er, you do realise that this was a joke, right? OK, just checking. I'll go remove it now. --62.6.163.83 14:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ouch, that's embarrassing. :( Sam Vimes | Address me 14:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The shame, the shame... If there are any admins out there reading this, can you block me (and maybe also Chuq) from editing anything at all related to Cricket, like, forever? --Shirt58 11:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear.  Lets just delete these revisions from the history shall we? :P  To be fair, at least I pointed it to an article that was non-existent - just like the rule. :P  "Sudden death" sounds less likely but that bit is actually true! -- Chuq (talk) 12:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You say "delete these revisions"? Done! I went onto the internets,  and liquid papered out all our edits on the the Twenty20 "history" tube.  My computer TV screen is a bit difficult to read now with all those white stripes on it, but at least no-one but you and me will ever know about this.  Whew! --Shirt58 10:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Multiball' 

message: Tamil Nadu, winners of the first ever Inter State Twenty20 Cup lead the charge of Indian domestic teams up the Bartercard Power Rankings.
The Inter State Twenty20 Cup was added to the fixtures list half way through the season but thanks to India's shock exit from the Group Stages of the World Cup some of crickets biggest stars took part.
Despite facing players with vast international experience like Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly Tamil Nadu upset the odds and won the tournament with no star players. They enter the Bartercard Power Rankings inside the top ten 7th place, defeated finalists the Punjab lead by Yuvraj Singh find themselves in 18th place.
Mumbai lead by Tendulkar enter the chart in 40th place followed closely by Jharkhand (44th), Bengal (46th), Karnataka (47th) and Rajasthan (48th), no other India sides made it into the top 50.
Does this amount of information about Indian domestic teams need to be included in this section? While the information is undoubtedly useful, it doesn't add much to the description of Twenty20 or the rankings itself, so I feel it may be more appropriate to put it on the Ranji tournament page when it is made. If this information is thought to be appropriate here, then perhaps domestic teams from other countries should be discussed a bit more too. Joldy 14:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twenty20 Bartercard Power Rankings 

message: The article should be moved from Twenty20 to Twenty20 cricket. For the same reason Test cricket isn't called 'Test' and One day cricket isn't called 'One day'. I will move the page in a few days unless i'm making an error. Operating 10:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to Twenty20 cricket

message: ...and shouldn't, at least not any more, since ODIs now have free hits as well. Loganberry (Talk) 02:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Free hit]] redirects here... 

message: Why is importance of this article rated as "Top" while other forms of cricket is rated at "High". I think all forms of cricket should have the same rating of "Top" -- Kalyan (talk) 10:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  importance - Top? 

message: Seems like nothing happened after the previous request for a page move to Twenty20 cricket, possibly due to the existing redirect page having had two edits, so it needs admin help and can't be done by us mere mortals.  Does anyone object to this move being done/requested now? The-Pope (talk) 06:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Support move to Twenty20 cricket.—MDCollins 15:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose. This is essentially an effort to create disambiguation where none is needed. There is only one use of Twenty20 and that is in cricket, therefore it should stay at Twenty20. Andrew nixon (talk) 15:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Support. There is only one use of the term List A yet the article is entitled List A cricket. Jevansen (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move request 

message: See http://idealink.vijtable.com/2009/07/17/associated-press-its-okay-if-we-do-it/
Anyone who has significantly contributed to the lead of the article before July 10th should feel free to file a DMCA takedown notice to the Associated Press. see Wikipedia:MIRROR#Non-compliance_process and Wikipedia:Standard license violation letter 174.21.105.2 (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AP hypocrisy 

message: The records section is completely oudated (August 2009). Also, in keeping with the standard on other cricket articles on Wikipedia, I am replacing it with records that only consider T20 Internationals (i.e.: no domestic matches included).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.88.223 (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records 

message: Any particular reason why any mention what so ever of the IPL is missing from this article in regards to the history & spread? I mean, from a naive viewpoint of wikipedia, I'd have imagined that's something that was a pretty major development in the popularity & spread of this form of the game. KaranJ (talk) 10:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPL missing from history 

message: Records having good references, of matches played on national and international levels should be added. Contributors invited. AchaksurvisayaUdvejin (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  RECORDS 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Twenty20. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.http://www.webcitation.org/64jzfUv2y to http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/match_zone/team_ranking.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:27, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Twenty20. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.http://www.webcitation.org/64jzfUv2y to http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/match_zone/team_ranking.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:05, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The URL wasn't exactly right, but it's fixed now. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 00:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified