David Leggat: T20's serious stuff - and good fun

How seriously do you take T20?

Michael Clarke reckons it is immensely important.

Wrap your mind around this:

"For me, it's as serious as a one-day match or a test match," Clarke said.

"There are blokes in this squad who haven't played test cricket. They haven't played one-day cricket. It's the ultimate for them."

He added that there's "no such thing as a game of hit and giggle ... it used to be about putting on a show, entertaining the crowd. But from a player point of view that is no longer the case."

You might view that as a predictable response from the chap who captains Australia's T20 team preparing for the world championship which began in the Caribbean this morning.

If we're getting all po-faced over T20, then it really is time to gather up the marbles and quoits and head for the beach.

T20 was born out of a desire to entertain; attract new audiences to what was becoming a same-old, same-old game.

Clarke has a point about it being the ultimate for those not good enough to play test cricket (forget the ODI dribble) and there are administrators around the world who will be spluttering at his opinion that it's no longer related to entertainment. That, you could argue, is its raison d'etre.

When T20 becomes jaded, where does the game go from there?

Ten-over contests? Five? Play an entire tournament in a day?

Now we're getting silly. That would make T20 seem positively old school by comparison.

I know a chap who, during the Indian Premier League, simply asks: "Who is playing tonight? The royal blue team against the red, or the yellow mob against the powder blue".

He quite enjoys it for what it is and doesn't get too wound up in its intricacies. And he has got it about right, too.

So how much of the world championship will you be up watching in the early hours, or have you discovered the delights of My Sky?

You can whizz through 40 overs in about the time it takes to eat a couple of slices of toast and have a cup of tea.

When ODI cricket got into full gear there was - and remains - a belief that the shorter game enabled weaker teams to be competitive for longer and close the class gap with their opponents, than in the five-day slog.

True enough, as a whip through the record books will attest.

More so in 20-over cricket where a couple of players can win a game more easily than in the 50-over equivalent.

This week Zimbabwe beat Australia by one run, and then toppled defending champions Pakistan by 12 runs yesterday.

Sri Lanka and New Zealand, their group-B pool opponents, would be wise to be careful.

Then there's Afghanistan to provide a touch of romance. They beat Ireland by five wickets this week. Their rise from division five of the world league to qualifying for the Caribbean bunfight in quick time is remarkable. And they're no slouches either, although they're here for the experience.

Someone asked the Afghans if they feared the prospect of facing South African speedster Dale Steyn in their group-C match in Barbados next week.

Paraphrased, the answer was that when you come from a land where a bomb might go off anywhere at any moment, fear is all relative.

And New Zealand? Assuming they're in the Super Eight they'll be a decent chance, with a proviso: that important figures like Jesse Ryder, Jacob Oram and Kyle Mills stay fit.

Semifinals seem New Zealand's usual lot. This time could be different. It should be fun. Seriously.