ODI Cricket for WCs only

[Socerer 01]

a world where there is only t20 world cup with domestic t20s alone would make the world cup interesting to watch at least like @SteveNZ says since it will be novel

 

[Ali TT]

Finding it odd this nostalgic running to the defence of ODIs. Ten, fifteen years ago we were suffering 7 match series that were just overkill. I don't think there's enough space in the calendar for ODI and T20I, so yeah get rid of one or other but either way reducing the total.

 

[Socerer 01]

Finding it odd this nostalgic running to the defence of ODIs. Ten, fifteen years ago we were suffering 7 match series that were just overkill. I don't think there's enough space in the calendar for ODI and T20I, so yeah get rid of one or other but either way reducing the total.

because unlike the last world cup cycle we have had plenty of odis this cycle that haven’t been complete run fests

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

I prefer longer Test series but as a general rule this works

For us, 3 tests is a long series

 

[Ali TT]

because unlike the last world cup cycle we have had plenty of odis this cycle that haven’t been complete run fests

Maybe cause they tried the World Cricket League format they've not discarded. But anyway, the type of outcome isn't really the issue to me.

 

[GIMH]

I guess the world Cricket League was an attempt to be a bit like football, and other sports, in basing the format around qualification for a major event.

The problem of course is how few countries there are that can realistically compete, and nobody wants unseeded qualification that, for example, groups England, India and Australia together with only two going through (well maybe they do, but the WC would be worse for it)

Anyone who’s followed cricket for a couple of decades will have fond memories of various tri-series. The one in Oz in particular was a big deal. But the neutral games were always a problem for home boards so as much as I’d agree with the concept of mini-tournaments being the way to sustain, I don’t know that they’re the answer.

It’s a tough one tbh. Maybe with a change of WC format next time you can make the intervening ODIs mean a bit more by having them count towards something such as seedings, I dunno.

 

[SteveNZ]

Finding it odd this nostalgic running to the defence of ODIs. Ten, fifteen years ago we were suffering 7 match series that were just overkill. I don't think there's enough space in the calendar for ODI and T20I, so yeah get rid of one or other but either way reducing the total.

OK, so don't have seven-match series', then. And find the right balance of ODIs and T20Is.

Nostalgia isn't actually a bad thing. As I said previously, if you have no history or emotional buy-in to your product, it can capitulate pretty quickly under certain circumstances.

 

[Ali TT]

For me, I lost interest in non-tournament ODIs about twenty years ago when Fletcher started using them as a try out for the test side and we had teams of elite fielding fitness featuring the likes of Anthony McGrath, Ian Blackwell and Rob Key. Even though it's been fun watching the modern side smash huge scores they mean very little and a failure to win in 2019 would have completely devalued the achievements of the previous 4 years.

 

[CricAddict]

ODI Tri-series are interesting. The Asia Cup was quite good. We should bring back tri-series only for ODIs. That can help recreate interest in ODIs.

 

[Daemon]

I have idea about ODIs but use gum ball like in japan

 

[WICFan]

Perhaps they could work on the qualification format of The Champions Trophy that isn't just the top 8 International sides then that might bring some more importance to bilateral odi's.

 

[FBU]

Tests
5 - India, Australia, England, New Zealand and South Africa
3 - West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe
ODIs
3 series
T20s
3 series
ODIs and T20s played after one another

Franchises - should last 3 weeks.

 

[Yeoman]

Would it? ODIs are already out of fashion, and that hasn't seemed to add anything to the allure of T20Is. To me, the issue with T20Is lie two-fold - a lot of people who like them aren't heavily emotionally invested in cricket, and aren't loyal to the overall product. And people who are emotionally invested, just don't get a lot of joy out of them. They have no relevance. They're a meaningless cash cow.

This is why LIV golf v the PGA Tour has become such a vexed issue. Once you hand over the power in your sport to the oil barons, the billionaires, the cashed-up bigwigs looking for a plaything...you're ****ed. Once they get bored of it, it ceases to exist. Same with the fans, if you give them some flash new, Youtube Reel-style quick satisfying hit, once they've got bored of that, off they run to the next shiny thing. It has no longevity. It has no historical relevance. Majors in golf have historical relevance, it gives meaning to the sport. Performance in Tests and ODIs provides that. T20 does nothing for that, neither does LIV. Without it, your sport has no backbone and no lifespan. I think it's incredibly dangerous to try and build a product (international cricket) around a format that has no real hype or loyalty at that level if you're trying to hold up the fact that playing for your country is, and needs to continue to be the pinnacle. What international sport survives without history, without hype, without column inches, without emotional buy-in? T20I has none of that.

This is something that someone like Mark Nicholas should understand, but clearly either doesn't, or as I believe, would rather be a patsy for whatever organisation he's currently on the teat of.

The LIV comparison is an interesting one. LIV has mega money but next to no one is watching, either on the tv in America or on you tube worldwide (a few thousand across the world). The ‘problem’ with T20 as far as committed cricket fans are concerned is the exact opposite - it is too popular with casual fans of the sport which leads it to crowd out the other formats.

 

[ankitj]

Tests
5 - India, Australia, England, New Zealand and South Africa
3 - West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe
ODIs
3 series
T20s
3 series
ODIs and T20s played after one another

Franchises - should last 3 weeks.

I don't what you are trying to say in this post but wanted to point out you missed mentioning Pakistan.

 

[honestbharani]

Tests
5 - India, Australia, England, New Zealand and South Africa
3 - West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe
ODIs
3 series
T20s
3 series
ODIs and T20s played after one another

Franchises - should last 3 weeks.

Pakistan to play 4 test series?

 

[SteveNZ]

The LIV comparison is an interesting one. LIV has mega money but next to no one is watching, either on the tv in America or on you tube worldwide (a few thousand across the world). The ‘problem’ with T20 as far as committed cricket fans are concerned is the exact opposite - it is too popular with casual fans of the sport which leads it to crowd out the other formats.

Very true. My point was moreso that the main issue with LIV - one that most people overlooked - was the problem of handing the product over to mega-rich oil barons without any real interest in the game, and who had no interest in running it as a viable business model. It's all well and good when these people with deep pockets (anyone remember 'Sir' Allen Stanford?) come in exuding passion and a bright future for the sport, but you're ****ed when they get bored of it. Once you've handed the keys over to these groups with no interest in the sustainability of the sport, the grassroots (something LIV has done about zero for) etc, you've got nothing to fall back on when they go looking for a new shiny thing.

I see significant problems with resting the game's future more and more so on a franchise system which the ICC and other major cricketing administrative bodies have little sway. The Saudis are now getting involved in T20 cricket. The more you say T20 is the future, the more they rub their hands together and say 'the world will be mine'. It's a pretty easy recipe - cash, some big names, plus make sure you place it on TV in India's primetime viewership window, there's your W right there.

 

[Yeoman]

I am not really into watching golf howrver I find LIV fascinating from a sports business & power perspective. It’s a bit like the packer split in cricket. In the LIV case it seems the people most likely to be shafted by the Saudis either withdrawing or doing a deal with the PGA are the players who signed up with LIV. Most of them have however been handsomely rewarded for their trouble.

 

[BazBall21]

It would most likely be the beginning of the end. So no.

 

[SteveNZ]

It would most likely be the beginning of the end. So no.

Agreed. We've gone through this BS with Test cricket, then came to our senses.