TOPIC:

I think you've answered your own question. 20/20 is lucrative for the likes of, for example, Shane Warne and Brad Hogg - way past it on the international scene but able to be of value (perhaps limited in the former).

Shield was once desirable for those looking to continue their cricket - but 20/20 provides a richer, easier living for the professional sportsman - its as simple as that I'd say..

You make some good comments Anchorman, I think the dreaded dollar is killing cricket.

Ordinary players are getting good money to play T20 cricket and this makes players think they are better than they are. This style of game doesnt help their technique, or ability to play good test cricket, it just makes them an earner.

I reckon you will find the big issue is, with the players you named they had to work to suppliment their cricket income while they were playing, so they stayed in the state and played for their state or club side each week.

Now a days people like maxwell make a million dollars from 7 weeks in the IPL, so why worry about playing shield cricket??????????

Bollinger hauritz Haddin still play to name a few Hussey and ponting reckon they will turn out again next season if there bodys hold up. But very good point anchor the Sheffield shield is the feeding ground for our test side and it seems it doesn't rate with players I went to a WA game this season and there was about 100 spectators there a few weeks later I couldn't get a ticket for the big bash cause of a sell out. Sad isn't it