the death of ODI cricket?

[crownie]

watching the backpage on foxsports and i agree with them that its hard to see the 50 over format staying after the 2011 world cup.

i remember growing up in the 90's and one day cricket was the bomb and winning the world cup was special.

what do people think has been the main issue for its downfall in popularity and meaningless?

Australia's 3 world cup wins in a row and domination?

changing the rules,grounds,pitches to make it to easy for batsman?

or just getting over played?

i remember 5-6 years ago people were concerned about the lull period of 30-50 overs in the innings, i think they were to quick to make a change and go for entertainment all out and making 300+ scores to easy to get and people eventually got bored of the predictability and ease of run scoring.

 

[flight23]

watching a 20/20 game and then watching the 20-40 over period in a one dayer has been a major reason

got a bunch of mates who can't stand cricket but will watch a 20/20

as wrong as i think this is, the majority are bored with a 50 over game, 20/20 compounds this

 

[TheGoatBaron]

20/20 Cricket has been the demise of ODI Cricket sadly. Lot of little kiddies are more into the bash and crash style, rather than watch class and skill.

In England, they have gotten rid of One Day Cricket (I think), and I think more countries will follow suit soon.

We'll soon see a World Cup, but it'll be only in the 20/20 format.

But, I hope if/when One Day Cricket does die, I hope they play more Test Cricket and have 3 or 5 Test series, rather than 2 Test series, which seems to be the norm these days.

 

[Blue Dimension]

England play 40 over cricket and have massively expanded their T20 season.

 

[stmookeyj]

England play 40 over cricket and have massively expanded their T20 season.

Unfortunately for the administrators, seemingly the fans were not turning out in droves to the new format for most of the games. 50 overs will stay as long as the subcontinental bloc want them, and with NZ dropping 2 tests in favor of 3 extra ODI's against Bangladesh in Bangladesh recently I still think there's a place for the 50 over game.

It's just that dumb administrators are clueless over what the balance should be. Ideally it should be MINIMUM 3 of each format per team per home series.

 

[Hellgood]

Yep all about balance. Play less of them and make the games that are played between two good teams and it all becomes interesting again. Who the hell wants to watch a second string Australia play a second string Pakistan in the 7th ODI of an endless summer? But a day nighter clash in a short series between two evenly matched teams with exciting players, who doesn't love that?

 

[King Elvis]

Stop playing ****ing 23 games in a Series against shit teams, and people might care again.

 

[Johnson#26]

A lot of the gimmicks, like the power plays, super subs, and stuff like that which originated in, I think, 05/06, really didn't work well, and IMO made ODI cricket worse, rather than improving it.

The amount of games played in a tournament/VB series didn't help either.

The 04/05 VB series vs the Windies and Pakistan was the one which started to get the wheels in motion for ODI cricket's descent (IMO). Probably the most boring series of all time. Hardly any spice to it (apart from Hogg's 5fa at the MCG).

Prior to that, the VB/Carlton series had some pretty awesome games/finishes. 03/04 saw Aus and India play some classics, until Aus overcame the Indians at the SCG in a rain affected game. India wasn't the same after that. Zimbabwe tried, but couldn't really make up the gap to have three competitive sides. Even in 02/03, with England/SL copping a hammering, most of the matches were pretty interesting, and the 2nd final was a belter in the MCG heat.

Perhaps it's just the fact that the public hadn't really thought of any alternative to ODI cricket, and enjoyed it until T20 opened the eyes to another form of the game.

I'd still rather sit down and watch an ODI than a T20. T20s are just junk, and not real cricket. Anyone can win. Anyone can have a day out. I could bowl pies, but a few mishits/miscues and I have 4fa. It doesn't reward hard work and genuine skill and guile, in comparison to Tests and ODIs.

The fact we have a seven game ODI series vs ENG coming up is good, IMO. It'll be interesting. Even though Australia is woeful to watch/hard to enjoy at the moment.

Brings up a point I've been pondering, though - Australia is so hard to really generate interest to watch. Test, ODI or otherwise. Think about it. Ponting, yes. Hussey, IMO, yes. Katich is always gritty and interesting. Bollinger has a bit of spark. The rest? Boring, duds or just hard to love. That's why the series vs Pakistan last month was so interesting. Paine and Smith. They're the future. They play with spark. Why can't they stay in? Haddin, for example, should not be picked, in Tests or ODIs.

 

[Ill Chicken]

It's the death of the death in the death of ODI Cricket.

 

[XFactor1979]

ah odis!

the old fashioned excuse of pulling in a sickie for a work day to go to the mcg on a work day

 

[Dipper]

i remember 5-6 years ago people were concerned about the lull period of 30-50 overs in the innings, i think they were to quick to make a change and go for entertainment all out and making 300+ scores to easy to get and people eventually got bored of the predictability and ease of run scoring.

I totally disagree with you here, it was the lull period in the mid part of the innings that started the decline of 50 over cricket not the attempts at a solution.

Seeing crappy slow medium bowlers bowling those crappy dobbers (often one at each end) with singles available to either long on or long off or sometimes both with no attempt to take wickets and little attempt to hit boundaries was just shithouse.

And then T20 came along and solved the problem, you just got the first 10 overs and the final 10 put together and did away with the crap bits.

I won't miss it, it had it's day, it peaked in the 80's when it advanced from that naive 70s version and then it became too formulated with coaches getting too smart by the 90's.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Main reasons, all of which have been covered by others:

• The middle overs, neither side really attempts to do anything except let the game coast by
• The rule changes to try and fix the middle overs, worst of which was the super-sub
• Far too many pointless series, and series that are too long. ODI only tours should have been banned over a decade ago, except the World Cup
• And T20 now being there as a viable replacement
• The novelty factor disappeared a long time ago, in the 70s and 80s limited cricket was new, now a couple of generations have grown up with it as a standard part of the game (sadly the main part for many) and have expectations that are not being met

 

[Adrian Shelton]

Plus semi-pissed blockheaded crowds who wouldnt know a real game of Cricket if it hit them upside the head

 

[jackster83]

I prefer the 50 over format to 20/20 but I think they need to reduce the number of games and the number of pointless series. No one cares about us going overseas purely for a 5 ODI series. The world cup is another thing that needs to be revamped (and shortened) as the last one was a complete fizzer.

 

[Blue Dimension]

Blame the ICC for killing the 50 over game. Way too much 50 over cricket is being played. So many meaningless series and matches that nobody cares about.

 

[whats_at_stake]

If people taught split innings trials from Australia marked the end think again...the MCC will be trialling '5ives' cricket which apparently involves multiple split innnings with each innings.

http://blogs.cricinfo.com/thebuzz/archives/2010/08/mcc_to_trial_5ives_cricket.php

 

[Ill Chicken]

Ha. So the game goes from roughly 7 hours to 10 hours?

That is the worst shit I've read so far. Next it'll be a roster of 20-30 players per team.

 

[whats_at_stake]

Not entirely sure how it works- my guess would be team a bats for 15 overs, team b 15, team a 15, team b 15, team a 20, team b 20 or more splits but something like that.

This is fast becoming a joke.