I went to Tuesday's Twenty20 match prepared to revise my criticisms of the format but instead came away feeling entirely justified in my opinion.

I still seems to me that watching Twenty20 is more like watching a litany of mistakes.

Take Adams' and Yardy's ill-judged shots, both entirely unecessary even at the point at which they came in the innings. With the field spread Yardy could have easily pushed the ball into a gap and taken two, instead of losing his wicket for nought.

Similarly the bowling of RMJ, Kitley and Smith - there is no excuse for leg-side wides - which I can only assume come from striving for pace, rather than concentrating on line and length.

Yes there are other factors for Sussex's poor form Bruce Talbot points out but this doesn't change the fact that this form of the game is more about luck than judgement.

And don't get me started on the music - insidious pop and dance tunes played whenever a boundary is struck or a wicket taken. At best it's annoying, at worst downright patronising.

Whichever ageing cabal of administrators that instigated this hellish aural assualt were no doubt attempting to 'appeal to the masses', but end up cheapening the game by trying to make it 'more exciting'.

To genuine fans the game is exciting enough and this represents just one more cynical excercise in attracting pounds and pence.

Three matches, three defeats...which makes tonight's match against Essex crucial for Sussex if they hope to progress any further in the competition.

I'm going to be heading down tonight to cheer the boys on.

After last year's hot tub adventures it will be sobering to watch from the more sedate confines of the pavilion.

So, Twenty20? Well, I'm still not sure about it to be honest - even Mark Robinson called it a "stupid game" in today's Argus.

I would say that it impinges upon the real skills of cricket somewhat - under the pressure of time players must compromise their 'normal' games and look to score with big hits and reckless running between the wickets - sure enough this proves exciting to the spectator - but what we end up watching is not the players executing their skills in the manner of their training, in the ways they've learnt to master the game, which is about considered shot selection and patience.

It's like telling a golfer that he has half an hour to get round the course and then watching him thrash violently at the ball because he's in such a hurry. You're going to end up watching more mistakes than moments of genuine skill.

Esssentially, you're witnessing a different game - one that adopts the same framework, conventions and rules - but a different game nevertheless.

Naturally, there are positives as the format encourages crowds into the grounds, which in turn provides much needed revenue for the sport - but will Twenty20 really convert these people into fans of the 4-day game? In any significant way, I doubt it. If anything it will increase the gulf bewteen 'ordinary' county cricket and its brash cousin and possibly put undue pressure on the former to emulate the fiscal sucesses of the latter.

In this way, it might just prove more of a threat than a support.

Apologies but I've been on a cricket hiatus for a week or so whilst I was doing a spot of travelling around the country with no radio or internet to hand.

Interesting game going on in Canterbury, with Kent making a good first innings score and Sussex now batting. Adams has just gone for 26 and so we need a good knock from someone in the middle order to get decent total. Good batting track apparently but stranger things have happened (just ask New Zealand).

Oh, and well done to Jimmy Anderson for a career best perfrmance in the last test. When the ball is moving in the air and he keeps it pitched up he suddenly seems capapable of fulfilling his potential.

On a more sombre note, I watched an interesting documentary yesterday on Hanse Cronje which was fairly depressing in that it painted a poor picture of the game but never really got to the bottom of the affair, failing to answer certain crucial questions. The really surprising fact was that Bob Woolmer and others were talking so casually about being offered money in this way...as if it was ok to actually hold a meeting to discuss whether the team should accept a $250,000 bribe to throw a match! Surely their response should have been a straight "no".

When you watch any sporting occassion you want to know that every player is trying their all to win the game. Anything else compromises the entire ethos of competitive sport.

A job well done for Sussex, which will give a boost to both Mushy and Colly.

Matt Prior was exemplary throughout and there is no doubt that he will be on the England selector's minds, especially after Ambrose's poor showing in the second Test.

Speaking of which, I spent most of my bank holiday listening to TMS (oh what an action-packed life I lead!). It sounded like they were commentating in the midst of a hurricane such was the force of the winds up in Manchester.

Obviously, England's performance was patchy but they did do really well to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. It just shows what a deliciously strange game cricket can be. At one point I was actually hoping we'd have to follow-on and hence avoid batting last on a deteriorating pitch. Of course, eventually this proved an incorrect assumption as the heavy roller put paid to any demons and England got the runs batting last anyway.
Great to see Andrew Strauss back on form in what was a measured and gritty century.

Not sure what I think of Old Trafford's temporary demise as a Test ground - it's obviously a financial decision, and considering how much time on TMS was dedicated to talking about the relationship between cricket and money, it makes clear the transitionary phase the sport is in...moving, one would, hope to a new organisational model...I just hope the adminstrators get the balance right and not compromise tradition and the nurturing of home-grown talent for quick fiscal gains, as has happened in football.

Personally, I like the fact that cricket is slightly archaic - it means that it has a charm and an appeal that is devoid of cynicism. I understand the need to support its growth through an injection of funds but wouldn't want to see its essence diminished and devalued.

I've just checked the weather in Nottingham and it says there will be light showers today, so we might be looking at losing some play today.

You'd still think that Sussex have a very good chance of wrapping this one up. The seamers did a brilliant job yesterday and we just need an early breakthrough today.

Listening to the second Test on TMS over the internet today - good point made about NZ: that despite the fact that their top order are a touch green, if they do come off and make some runs then there's a fairly solid middle order backing them up, meaning that the Kiwis are certainly capable of posting a big score.

Back to Sussex and my friend Mark and I have been coming up with items that should be on the menu at pub next to the ground:

1. 'Mushy' Peas
2. A Yardy of Ale
3. Nash Potatoes
4. Collyflower cheese

Let me know if you can think of any more...

What a great knock from Matt Prior yesterday, putting us back in the game - that's another timely reminder for the England selectors.

As I write now Luke Wright and Matt are once more steadying the ship after another middle-order wobble...let's hope they can keep it going so we can get a decent lead and then put Notts in tonight to put them under a bit of pressure before the final day.