• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Revamping ODI's

S

St Helens RLFC

Guest
So, during the recent ODI farce between England, commentators went on a tangent about how the whole 50 over format needs to be revamped and changes are essential to the future of the sport.

Is this something you disagree with, has the Twenty/20 format influenced the minds of too many too quickly, or are there very legitimate concerns about the future of the sport in limited overs level?
 
Would they be having this discussion if England weren't such a poor one day side? I doubt it.

I don't think major changes need to be made but one thing for certain is that the 50 over format has taken a back seat to Twenty20. One thing to improve the standing of 50 over cricket is to cut back on the overkill of Twenty20. Thankfully the idea of 2 Twenty20 tournaments in the English domestic season was rightfully scrapped. I don't see the need for this Twenty20 Champions League when we already have the IPL.

Overkill can also apply to the 50 over format as a 7 match series was an absolute joke. England have been playing cricket non-stop since May and even then there wasn't much of a break between the end of the ODI series in the Caribbean and the first test at Lords. 2 Twenty20s and 3 ODIs would have been more than enough but the problem is that money talks and there doesn't appear to be much chance of England's playing schedule being reduced.
 
seven match series was indeed a joke. it should have been a 3 match series at most.

the game doesn't need a massive overhaul, but i'd like to see it become a 40 over per side game. 8 overs max per bowler. we play 2 40 over a side 1 day games in club cricket and I think it works well. at international level, a 40 over innings would hopefully nullify the "pushing 1's and 2's and picking up the occasional boundary" part of the innings between say the 15th and the 40th over. hope that makes sense.

i also think they should bring back the keep it simple stupid way it used to be. bowling restrictions for the first 10 overs and that's it, no stupid powerplays. the powerplays just confuse people.. it's a bit like rugby, not everyone wants to know the intricacies of all the rules, they just want to watch a game and have fun doing so. the same should be applied to ODI's as they were fun back in the 80's and 90's.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (InsaneAsylum @ Sep 24 2009, 12:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
seven match series was indeed a joke. it should have been a 3 match series at most.

the game doesn't need a massive overhaul, but i'd like to see it become a 40 over per side game. 8 overs max per bowler. we play 2 40 over a side 1 day games in club cricket and I think it works well. at international level, a 40 over innings would hopefully nullify the "pushing 1's and 2's and picking up the occasional boundary" part of the innings between say the 15th and the 40th over. hope that makes sense.

i also think they should bring back the keep it simple stupid way it used to be. bowling restrictions for the first 10 overs and that's it, no stupid powerplays. the powerplays just confuse people.. it's a bit like rugby, not everyone wants to know the intricacies of all the rules, they just want to watch a game and have fun doing so. the same should be applied to ODI's as they were fun back in the 80's and 90's.[/b]
Click to expand...

I think that the 50 over game leaves room for the quality batsmen like Strauss, Kallis, Dravid to build an innings and play the class shots rather than just some crash bang wallop that you get with Twenty20 and Pro40.
 
1 one day international is one too many.

I keep saying this, but they're a waste of f***ing time. They should structure our summer so we have a short Test series against team A in May/June; a T20 triangular with team A and team B, then a long Test series with team B in July/ August.

1) Playing the one day series AFTER the Ashes makes it feel like an afterthought
2) Playing 7 games makes every game feel like it's the same one
3) Playing a format which doesn't have the explosiveness of T20 OR the intensity of First Class cricket is pointless.

For heaven's sake, there won't even be a 50 over competition at county level next year. T20 is what's making all the money, and Tests is pure cricket. One Day is squeezed between the two, it's farcical and it will soon be dead. Let's get rid of it before it gets any worse.

EDIT: Just read your post Tarbh. If I want to see Strauss, Kallis and Dravid play a proper innings, I'll watch them do it over 90 overs, which they can do in a 1st Class game. Otherwise, I'll watch them smack it about. Because there's no point in a 'proper' innings if it's rushed so it can squeeze in in 50 overs.
 
problem is though they won't be playing much county cricket. I'd much prefer to see class players than someone who just bludgeons the ball. It's more about strike rate and with the class players at 50 over level there's not many who are going to be going below 80.
 
They should have a bigger emphasis on test matches, they should kill off ODI slowly and have 20/20 as the new ODI as the entertainment version of the game.
 
Reckon 40 overs would be better instead of 50 overs, keeping the same amount of power players etc in it!
 

Latest posts

Top