View Full Version : Why the hell weren't the ODIs played before the Tests?!
King Elvis
15 Sep 2009, 23:53
This is baffling; the One Dayers now lack intensity and interest - the Tests were what mattered, they're finished now, nobody cares about the One Dayers.
Effectively, we've played the Grand Final, and now we're playing the semi and quarter finals; when they don't matter.
The One Dayers would've been the perfect entree to the Test Cricket; they would've built the tension and the drama and excitement, and they would've been played hard and desperately - with each side wanting to gain an advantage before the Test Series.
7 One Dayers is way too many regardless, but if over a 2 week period we'd played 5 One Dayers and then the Tests started, it would've been so much better.
TorresIsGod
16 Sep 2009, 00:20
:thumbsu:
Agreed.
5 at most, over 14 days, perfect, then a week off and get stuck into the 5 Test series.
Even if a side lost the ODI series 5-0, they'd still have the Test series to make things right.
Would have been a much better idea.
Totally agree. It worked so well in 2005, why try and fix it? Also the game is competition against a plethora of other sports now.
OzBomber
16 Sep 2009, 08:13
Completely agree. I actually was really interested in the ODIs back in 2005. Now I don't give a shit. I think they did it so the interest in the UK wouldn't fall later on in the summer with the Premier League on.
They played the T20 WC (or whatever the tournament was called) before the Ashes in the UK.
Without this international tournament they would have played the ODI series before the test series.
Simple explanation really.
7 One Dayers is way too many regardless, but if over a 2 week period we'd played 5 One Dayers and then the Tests started, it would've been so much better.
WTF?
Firstly the ODI and test squads are substantially different, so it would not be possible to lead directly into test series from a ODI series.
We need at least two lead up matches before the first test of any international away test series. Leading straight from ODI to tests is never going to happen. Ever. Stupid suggestion.
Didn't really think too much before posting this thread did you Elvis.
King Elvis
16 Sep 2009, 11:06
They played the T20 WC (or whatever the tournament was called) before the Ashes in the UK.
Without this international tournament they would have played the ODI series before the test series.
Simple explanation really.
They couldn't have had a smaller/quicker ODI Series, so we'd be into the last Test around now?
WTF?
Firstly the ODI and test squads are substantially different, so it would not be possible to lead directly into test series from a ODI series.
We need at least two lead up matches before the first test of any international away test series. Leading straight from ODI to tests is never going to happen. Ever. Stupid suggestion.
Didn't really think too much before posting this thread did you Elvis.
No shit.
I didn't think I'd need to spell it out that we'd have a couple of weeks between the ODI and Test Series for Tour Matches and the like, but obviously I was mistaken.
They couldn't have had a smaller/quicker ODI Series, so we'd be into the last Test around now?
English weather is unpredictable during July and August, never mind September.
Doesn't make sense to push back the Ashes decider into the third week in September simply to accommodate meaningless ODI cricket.
I didn't think I'd need to spell it out that we'd have a couple of weeks between the ODI and Test Series for Tour Matches and the like, but obviously I was mistaken.
Given the logic of your OP I thought it was a pretty safe assumption you had not factored this in.
There was no time to play ODI before the Ashes, and it is stupid to suggest delaying the start (and end) of the test series for ODI cricket.
The fact the CT starts directly after this ODI series is another strong argument for staging these games after the test series.
Shifty1
16 Sep 2009, 13:59
They played the T20 WC (or whatever the tournament was called) before the Ashes in the UK.
Without this international tournament they would have played the ODI series before the test series.
Simple explanation really.
WTF?
Firstly the ODI and test squads are substantially different, so it would not be possible to lead directly into test series from a ODI series.
We need at least two lead up matches before the first test of any international away test series. Leading straight from ODI to tests is never going to happen. Ever. Stupid suggestion.
Didn't really think too much before posting this thread did you Elvis.
The ODI series (actually there were two, the Natwest Series and the Natwest Challenge) were played before the tests and were an excellent lead-in. Kept the interest in the entire series. I do agree that the T20 WC affected the scheduling of this series.
The disinterest in this ODI series is similar to that from the World XI games in Aus after the 2005 Ashes series.
Audacious
16 Sep 2009, 14:18
One of the main reasons the ODI series is boring is because the best players from just a couple of years ago are no longer going around.
If Hayden, Gilchrist, McGrath, Peiterson, and Flintoff were playing it would be a lot more entertaining. Id stay up just to watch Gilchrist bat. But no-one cares about these nuffies such as Bopara, O Shah, (insert 3 other poms whose names i cant remember).
I said it before in another thread, but the glory days of australian cricket has gone.
Shifty1
16 Sep 2009, 14:23
Agree with the above also. Anytime Gilly is in I'm in front of the TV or in the crowd.
Nel Mangle
16 Sep 2009, 20:34
The 20-20 world cup screwed up the schedule.
Normally they would have been played before the tests.
I can honestly say that I havent even followed the ODI series.
Our summers work is done. This ODi series will be forgotten in 2 months time.
Port_Adelaide
16 Sep 2009, 22:53
They may not have fielded their best teams so they didn't risk injury for the ashes?
So you want to sacrifice Ashes preparation to get the ODI's out of the way because you find them boring?
Plus, this leads into the ICC trophy gismo as well doesn't it? I am feeling pretty darn confident at the structure and depth of our one day team right now.
mattymac
17 Sep 2009, 06:55
yeah just wasn't an option due to the t20 stuff. but you're right about it being better. 2005...those one dayers were awesome and really set up the whole summer brilliantly
I am pretty confident both sides agreed on this schedule due to the upcoming ICC champions trophy. I am thinking so we didn;t have to go from ODI to Test back to ODI mode of cricket.
I agree though, england have always struggled in the ODI game and we could of built some nice momentum into the test series.
Howard Littlejohn
17 Sep 2009, 10:29
Yes, the pointless limited overs stuff should have been put to bed first.
But can we really complain? For years Australia has gone with the real stuff, and then followed up with the limited cricket. Not surprisingly England did things in a manner for England, not for Australia. Plus (as mentioned) the 20-20 championships got in the way, and the series is a warm up for the equally meaningless champions trophy.
King Elvis
17 Sep 2009, 12:44
Warney shares my opinion.
Warney shares my opinion.
Warney is a halfwit... do you suffer from foot in mouth as much as he does too?
Ill Chicken
17 Sep 2009, 15:52
One of the main reasons the ODI series is boring is because the best players from just a couple of years ago are no longer going around.
If Hayden, Gilchrist, McGrath, Peiterson, and Flintoff were playing it would be a lot more entertaining. Id stay up just to watch Gilchrist bat. But no-one cares about these nuffies such as Bopara, O Shah, (insert 3 other poms whose names i cant remember).
I said it before in another thread, but the glory days of australian cricket has gone.
Yeah but no one has tried to take up from where there guys left off. No batsman until the innings by Ponting and marginally by Morgan had attempted to dominant the bowling attack, even then it was still a case of waiting for the bad ball.
Where is the explosiveness out of the blocks type batting that is expected? No team is taking risks, chancing their arm and trying to take the game away from the other.
dr nick
17 Sep 2009, 15:58
If warney agreed with the OP, then it's game set and match fellas.
King Elvis
17 Sep 2009, 17:06
Warney is a halfwit... do you suffer from foot in mouth as much as he does too?
Warney might be dumb in some respects, but he's a very intelligent person.
Regardless, your argument is that the schedule of games around the English Tour prohibited the ODIs going before the Tests; and you have a valid point - but that doesn't change my opinion, just that the ICC have stuffed up the scheduling.
This is one of the most lacklustre ODI Series I can remember.
Howard Littlejohn
17 Sep 2009, 19:58
This is one of the most lacklustre ODI Series I can remember.
I'd agree with that, but I barely remember any presumably because they've also been too lacklustre to remember.
King Elvis
18 Sep 2009, 10:15
I guess the only other view is that this Series is purely a warm-up for the Champions Trophy.