Whats better. One day cricket or big bash cricket?

[greatwhiteshark]

Have to say I think the one day World Cup is still the biggest cricket event.
20/20 cricket being played so much has made one day games not as appealing to fans outside of the World Cup.

One day cricket for me but I enjoy watching the slogging of 20/20.

 

[swingdog]

For me (and recognising I'm not the target audience of T20), I find T20 of any kind pretty boring.

It's far too loaded in favour of the batter (short boundaries, big bats = sixes are commonplace). Because of that, it's resulted in a sameness in the pitches which makes the ball carry predictable.

I applaud some of the skills involved (different shots, great fielding, tight bowling), but there's not time to build any drama or context (unless it's already baked in like India and Pakistan).

T20 cricket's a disposable commodity. Enjoy it in the moment but it doesn't mean anything. People compare it to footy or soccer and hope the franchises will build that sort of fan loyalty over time, but those games are played over long seasons (six or nine months) so a narrative has time to build. BBL is just for the kids in the holiday.

Finally, having grown up in the 70s and 80s, I miss the danger in cricket from those days. Give me this:

 

[Art Vandelay_]

ODI's comfortably. BBL is garbage.

 

[NYRB]

For me they are both equal.

There is no doubt about it though, One dayer have evolved significantly from the early 90s (When i first started watching ) to the 2023 Version. Rule changes, bigger bats, DRS. It feels much more like a batsmans' game these days.

Watching this World Cup and a bit of the Marsh Cup last few seasons, has reignited my fire back into 50 over cricket.

Sadly, I think with more franchise cricket around the world and people being alot more time savvy , do feel that 80% of the cricket of a professional will be T20 cricket in future.

 

[The 747]

Prefer to watch T20 internationals than ODI, but comparing the BBL to ODI is nah. BBL is trash now.

 

[frankrizzo]

outside test cricket i think next best thing is a odi on a pitch that has bit in it for bowlers.

 

[largebus]

ODIs on a fair pitch will have more strategy and ebbs and flows but I don't think they're 2.5 times as good, considering the extra time investment to watch one. It's hard to justify sitting down to watch one when it's even longer than a watching an entire day of a Test match. I can't remember the last time I watched one in full simply because I don't often 7-8 spare hours to do so. I regularly watch a full BBL game though.

I think the T20 mentality from a playing perspective has hurt ODIs as well, a lot more soft dismissals and teams getting bowled in under 40 overs.

The fact every single match of this World Cup has been a one-sided snoozefest has done little to help the format's chance of long-term survival. I'd be sad to see it go but I think it needs to.

TLDR; if they could compress the strategy of the 50-over game into 3-4 hours we'd be golden.

 

[Clark G]

ODIs on a fair pitch will have more strategy and ebbs and flows but I don't think they're 2.5 times as good, considering the extra time investment to watch one. It's hard to justify sitting down to watch one when it's even longer than a watching an entire day of a Test match. I can't remember the last time I watched one in full simply because I don't often 7-8 spare hours to do so. I regularly watch a full BBL game though.

I think the T20 mentality from a playing perspective has hurt ODIs as well, a lot more soft dismissals and teams getting bowled in under 40 overs.

The fact every single match of this World Cup has been a one-sided snoozefest has done little to help the format's chance of long-term survival. I'd be sad to see it go but I think it needs to.

TLDR; if they could compress the strategy of the 50-over game into 3-4 hours we'd be golden.

Any merit in Tendulkar’s idea from a few years back?

One-day format needs a tweak of 2 innings of 25 overs per side: Sachin Tendulkar

Sachin Tendulkar feels the one-day format needs to change a little to increase its popularity among fans, suggesting two innings of 25 overs per side can be played to keep it more interesting.

www.indiatoday.in

 

[ioppolo]

Any merit in Tendulkar’s idea from a few years back?

One-day format needs a tweak of 2 innings of 25 overs per side: Sachin Tendulkar

Sachin Tendulkar feels the one-day format needs to change a little to increase its popularity among fans, suggesting two innings of 25 overs per side can be played to keep it more interesting.

www.indiatoday.in

The domestic comp tried this about 15 years ago. It was s**t.

 

[Leeda]

Too, too much cricket....short attention span and well too few cricket obsessed countries.
plus.. as aside....Pat Cummins ain't a captains fingernail....too soft and can't hack the bowler/leader
position...

 

[Blue Arrow]

Most people wouldn't know, they have not seen an ODI for years because Cricket Australia put it behind a paywall.
And now ignore the World Cup.

 

[corbies]

Most people wouldn't know, they have not seen an ODI for years because Cricket Australia put it behind a paywall.
And now ignore the World Cup.

If you don't have Kayo or Fox, I'm not sure you'd have been that interested in following a cricket tournament in October anyway.

 

[corbies]

The WBBL (41k) out rated last nights World Cup match (24k) involving India on Fox. The World Cup was even on the main Fox Cricket channel whereas the WBBL was on 505. If those same Indians were playing for pink or light green in Australia rather than significant matches for their country there would be hundreds of thousands of more people tuning in.

Franchise T20 cricket is clearly what the people want if it's not a match involving Australia.

 

[dumb]

i'm happy watching both, but enjoy that odi's still allows you to skin the cat, play the game in a few different ways.
t20 is just fast and less fast. i get bored of too many boundaries.
as a spectator the dreaded middle overs in an odi don't bother me. different tempo, building tension, laying the platform.
like low scoring test matches, lower scoring odi's can be fantastic to watch as well. i remember being glued to this stinker as a kid

IND vs WI, Benson & Hedges World Series 1991/92, 1st Match at Perth, December 06, 1991 - Full Scorecard

Get cricket scorecard of 1st Match, IND vs WI, Benson & Hedges World Series 1991/92 at Western Australia Cricket Association Ground, Perth dated December 06, 1991.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[ScrappyCoCo]

50 over cricket is extremely important as it is a vehicle for up and coming players and can kind of determine if they are T20 or long form cricketers. Not many of the top test players play much shield so it is decent practice for test.

 

[Gibbke]

I'm 50-overs all the way...didn't answer the poll, assuming the second one was meant to say "over 30's", but let's wait for confirmation...

I was born before the first ODI, and can recall specific games in the first season of the World Series Cup in 1979-80, everything else is a bit blurry before that. So as of today, ODI 4684 between Australia and NZ, I've been paying attention since ODI 75...! I can recall a magazine interview in the 1980's where Kerry O'Keefe slammed one day cricket v first class games, said it would destroy the career of a then 20yo Steve Waugh (!), and the arguments are a little similar here between 50 and 20 over matches...!

Cricket is about the contest between bat and ball. For that reason, T20 can't be taken seriously. A bowler has the chance in an ODI to not only beat a batsman on any given ball through skill with the field backing him up, but also the time to work on a strategy. A boundary should be hard to hit - in a T20, it's not. A bowler should be rewarded if they warrant it - they don't get the chance in a T20, and if they excel, there's usually a shitload of luck or incredible ineptness from the batting side, a virtual coin toss...I knew when the Thunder got rolled for 15 last season that they'd probably take my Hurricanes out later in the comp...and yup, sure enough...!

The best game of T20 I've ever seen was the game after the game where Dave Warner made his debut, a match largely forgotten. Rain affected, South Africa when their bowling was deadly, and chasing only about 130, Australia struggled to get going, and it took Clarke and Ponting, playing like experienced pros at the top of their game, to grind out a win. Those games in the 1980's/90's where teams chased 220 and you knew it would be tough if the required run rate got to 6, those are the best games that have ever been played, because the skill needed was supreme and the magic moments were that much better because of it. You'd have to rate Bevan's innings in THAT match as far greater than the very enjoyable fastest ever ton Maxwell got the other day, purely because of the circumstances. Lance Cairns knocking six 6's in 1983 against Lillee and Hogg on a huge MCG with no rope, that beats Gayle slaughtering Zimbabwe...as a matter of fact, Kapil Dev slaughtering the same team in 1983 would be better by way of comparison. Today, a typically great win revolves around a team chasing a monster target, like Pakistan did a week or two ago, but all you're doing is watching bowlers line up and be slaughtered. The bowling itself assumes an air of futility, and a lot of it, especially in T20, is bloody terrible...full tosses everywhere.

I'd make one suggestion to get ODI's back to being a better contest, which has gotten away from us because the batting has developed so much. Remove the shortened boundaries, all fielding restrictions, and even the cap on the overs a bowler can send down. Fielding restrictions started when England put everyone on the boundary to stop a last ball four in 1979, but while the reaction back then was "cheats!" which was even used as a comeback when England criticised Australia for the underarm incident, today a batsman would accept the challenge...and knowing how tough it would be to get it, that would make it so much sweeter if it came off...

 

[Rabish Binney]

I'm a traditionalist so 50 over cricket for me everyday of the week over T20

I can watch 5 days of test cricket. Rarely watch any T20 matches.

 

[cricketnut14]

I'm 50-overs all the way...didn't answer the poll, assuming the second one was meant to say "over 30's", but let's wait for confirmation...

I was born before the first ODI, and can recall specific games in the first season of the World Series Cup in 1979-80, everything else is a bit blurry before that. So as of today, ODI 4684 between Australia and NZ, I've been paying attention since ODI 75...! I can recall a magazine interview in the 1980's where Kerry O'Keefe slammed one day cricket v first class games, said it would destroy the career of a then 20yo Steve Waugh (!), and the arguments are a little similar here between 50 and 20 over matches...!

Cricket is about the contest between bat and ball. For that reason, T20 can't be taken seriously. A bowler has the chance in an ODI to not only beat a batsman on any given ball through skill with the field backing him up, but also the time to work on a strategy. A boundary should be hard to hit - in a T20, it's not. A bowler should be rewarded if they warrant it - they don't get the chance in a T20, and if they excel, there's usually a shitload of luck or incredible ineptness from the batting side, a virtual coin toss...I knew when the Thunder got rolled for 15 last season that they'd probably take my Hurricanes out later in the comp...and yup, sure enough...!

The best game of T20 I've ever seen was the game after the game where Dave Warner made his debut, a match largely forgotten. Rain affected, South Africa when their bowling was deadly, and chasing only about 130, Australia struggled to get going, and it took Clarke and Ponting, playing like experienced pros at the top of their game, to grind out a win. Those games in the 1980's/90's where teams chased 220 and you knew it would be tough if the required run rate got to 6, those are the best games that have ever been played, because the skill needed was supreme and the magic moments were that much better because of it. You'd have to rate Bevan's innings in THAT match as far greater than the very enjoyable fastest ever ton Maxwell got the other day, purely because of the circumstances. Lance Cairns knocking six 6's in 1983 against Lillee and Hogg on a huge MCG with no rope, that beats Gayle slaughtering Zimbabwe...as a matter of fact, Kapil Dev slaughtering the same team in 1983 would be better by way of comparison. Today, a typically great win revolves around a team chasing a monster target, like Pakistan did a week or two ago, but all you're doing is watching bowlers line up and be slaughtered. The bowling itself assumes an air of futility, and a lot of it, especially in T20, is bloody terrible...full tosses everywhere.

I'd make one suggestion to get ODI's back to being a better contest, which has gotten away from us because the batting has developed so much. Remove the shortened boundaries, all fielding restrictions, and even the cap on the overs a bowler can send down. Fielding restrictions started when England put everyone on the boundary to stop a last ball four in 1979, but while the reaction back then was "cheats!" which was even used as a comeback when England criticised Australia for the underarm incident, today a batsman would accept the challenge...and knowing how tough it would be to get it, that would make it so much sweeter if it came off...

no mention of gavaskar's 36* (174) v england in 1975 which only included one boundary - and that was a 60 over odi !

ENG vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 1st Match at London, June 07, 1975

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get England vs India 1st Match, cricket scorecard, Prudential World Cup 1975 dated June 07, 1975.

www.espncricinfo.com

and a shout out to phil simmons 4/3 (10)

PAK vs WI Cricket Scorecard, 8th Match at Sydney, December 17, 1992

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get Pakistan vs West Indies 8th Match, cricket scorecard, Benson & Hedges World Series 1992/93 dated December 17, 1992.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[juss]

BBL is a league, not a format.

The question should be which do you prefer T20 or One Day cricket. The BBL is just one example of domestic T20 cricket.

I like them both but these days never have time to watch a full ODI whereas a full T20 game I can fit that in one sitting quite comfortably.

 

[swingdog]

I never get the argument, "I don't have time to watch a full test match."

Nobody has time to watch a full test match. That's the beauty of it. It's on in the background while you're doing other stuff. You can drop onto the sofa for a few overs and then go and do other things. Come back when the crowd roars or someone yells "wicket!"

Caveat: dropping onto the sofa for a few overs when Warne came on to bowl was never just a few overs. Constantly thinking, I'll get up after this next one....

 

[juss]

I never get the argument, "I don't have time to watch a full test match."

Nobody has time to watch a full test match. That's the beauty of it. It's on in the background while you're doing other stuff. You can drop onto the sofa for a few overs and then go and do other things. Come back when the crowd roars or someone yells "wicket!"

Caveat: dropping onto the sofa for a few overs when Warne came on to bowl was never just a few overs. Constantly thinking, I'll get up after this next one....

I don't get how you don't get the argument lol.

Is it only valuable because it's on while you're doing other more important or more engaging stuff? Or it's good enough to sustain you for the 5 days play of around 6-8 hours a day?

If I can't watch something fully, that's a negative in my view. I don't watch sport to watch 10% of a match. I'll have test cricket on in the background like everyone, but it's also my least preferred format for that very reason, there's not enough to keep me there for the full match compared to other stuff to do.

 

[ioppolo]

no mention of gavaskar's 36* (174) v england in 1975 which only included one boundary - and that was a 60 over odi !

ENG vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 1st Match at London, June 07, 1975

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get England vs India 1st Match, cricket scorecard, Prudential World Cup 1975 dated June 07, 1975.

www.espncricinfo.com

and a shout out to phil simmons 4/3 (10)

PAK vs WI Cricket Scorecard, 8th Match at Sydney, December 17, 1992

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get Pakistan vs West Indies 8th Match, cricket scorecard, Benson & Hedges World Series 1992/93 dated December 17, 1992.

www.espncricinfo.com

Apparently he thought the draw was a thing in ODIs too.

 

[swingdog]

I don't get how you don't get the argument lol.

Is it only valuable because it's on while you're doing other more important or more engaging stuff? Or it's good enough to sustain you for the 5 days play of around 6-8 hours a day?

If I can't watch something fully, that's a negative in my view. I don't watch sport to watch 10% of a match. I'll have test cricket on in the background like everyone, but it's also my least preferred format for that very reason, there's not enough to keep me there for the full match compared to other stuff to do.

But that's always been true of test cricket.

Nobody had time (or opportunity) to watch all 5 days of a test match. It's a luxury to have that much time or even to have the time and circumstances to watch or tune in to a test match. You have it on in the car on long trips. You can revel in the fact that this is a ridiculous sport (as all sport is ridiculous) spread out over 5 days. Not to mention the building of a narrative that can pay off at the end like no other format.

T20 is for people who value their time. Test cricket is for people who know time is neither valuable or invaluable but just is.

 

[juss]

But that's always been true of test cricket.

Nobody had time (or opportunity) to watch all 5 days of a test match. It's a luxury to have that much time or even to have the time and circumstances to watch or tune in to a test match. You have it on in the car on long trips. You can revel in the fact that this is a ridiculous sport (as all sport is ridiculous) spread out over 5 days. Not to mention the building of a narrative that can pay off at the end like no other format.

T20 is for people who value their time. Test cricket is for people who know time is neither valuable or invaluable but just is.

I never argue one is better than the other, just what I enjoy more and each person would have their own subjective view.

I dont get why people bash one format over the other, it's like your favourite food to eat, everyone has their preference and it's possible to like more than one thing.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Apparently he thought the draw was a thing in ODIs too.

Apparently Gavaskar had the shits up becuase Venkat was appointed Captain ahead of him before the World Cup.

At the time, the Indian team manager GS Ramchand said on TV (and he certainly didn't miss him):-

" It was the most disgraceful and selfish performance I have ever seen. His excuse (to me) was, the wicket was too slow to play shots but that was a stupid thing to say after England had scored 334. The entire party is upset about it. Our national pride is too important to be thrown away like this"

Over the years, Gavaskar has been asked about the innings several times but always skirts around why he batted like he did.

As good as he was, he could be petulant at times. One just has to remember him walking off the MCG when he was given out (and taking with Chauhan off with him).