English one day cricket

[Poker Boy]

As another England ODI flop comes to an end (and let's be honest even if we'd won the Ashes I still reckon the current CB series would have been a flop) - there is enough eveidence (SA 2005, SL 2001) to show that even when the preceeding Test series is a succsess we still flop in the ODIs - the question is: Why? Well to be honest I reckon its to do with domestic one-day cricket in England.
When we were really crap in Tests (I'm talking 86-89 when we didn't win a home Test match (apart from v SL the weakest team in the era) went through five captains in 1988 and suffered an Ashes defeat in 1989 which made this year's look good - 29 players used, down to our 17th choice seamer, etc) domestic FC cricket had no resembalance to Tests. It was mainly three day cricket on crap pitchis and with a ball that had too big a seam. Remember in 1989 Derek Pringle and Steve Watkin were the leading FC wicket-takers. The next winter they went to Zimbabwe (not then a Test country) and achieved nothing - proving the point. It wasn't till we introduced all four-day CC and two divisions that our Test cricket started improving (despite Ashes fiasco we are still No 2 in the world inb Test cricket). Fast forward to 2007 and the same applies to our one-day cricket.
It beggars belief that until last summer the english county player was guarenteed only one 50-over match against FC opposistion - in the C&G - then a knock-out cup - and the rest of domestic one-day cricket was a 45-over league. Last year the ECB did bring in more 50-over cricket by turning the C&G into a league - but of course they stil did things wrong. The 20-over power-play rule that is in ODIs wasn't brought in - we still have the "old" 15-over rule - and from July onwards we went back to 40-over cricket - please tell me if another country in the world plays 40-over domestic cricket (and no power-plays either). No wonder the likes of Loye and Joyce are unprepared for ODIs - they've never played under the current power-play rules before.
Time for a change. IMO all non 20-20 one-day cricket MUST be played under the rules of ODIs - at least that way when players come into ODIs from county cricket they have some idea what they should be doing. The pro 40 (the 40-over competition) should be scrapped and a knock-out cup (with the minor counties) should be brought back. Youi'd then have one league, one KO cup but all over 50 overs. Remember that pre 1996 we were good at ODIs in our own country - hardly surprising when they were 55 overs when the rest of the world played 50! Until we get our domestic one-day cricket in line with ODIs we will still tread water in one-day cricket - and ven having a specialist one-day coach (as G Boycott suggested) won't help.

[GIMH]

It's been said before, but still, fair points

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Poker Boy

As another England ODI flop comes to an end (and let's be honest even if we'd won the Ashes I still reckon the current CB series would have been a flop) - there is enough eveidence (SA 2005, SL 2001) to show that even when the preceeding Test series is a succsess we still flop in the ODIs - the question is: Why? Well to be honest I reckon its to do with domestic one-day cricket in England.
When we were really crap in Tests (I'm talking 86-89 when we didn't win a home Test match (apart from v SL the weakest team in the era) went through five captains in 1988 and suffered an Ashes defeat in 1989 which made this year's look good - 29 players used, down to our 17th choice seamer, etc) domestic FC cricket had no resembalance to Tests. It was mainly three day cricket on crap pitchis and with a ball that had too big a seam. Remember in 1989 Derek Pringle and Steve Watkin were the leading FC wicket-takers. The next winter they went to Zimbabwe (not then a Test country) and achieved nothing - proving the point. It wasn't till we introduced all four-day CC and two divisions that our Test cricket started improving (despite Ashes fiasco we are still No 2 in the world inb Test cricket).

for someone else spotting that '86-'89 was worse than anything in the 1990s.

Fast forward to 2007 and the same applies to our one-day cricket.
It beggars belief that until last summer the english county player was guarenteed only one 50-over match against FC opposistion - in the C&G - then a knock-out cup - and the rest of domestic one-day cricket was a 45-over league. Last year the ECB did bring in more 50-over cricket by turning the C&G into a league - but of course they stil did things wrong. The 20-over power-play rule that is in ODIs wasn't brought in - we still have the "old" 15-over rule - and from July onwards we went back to 40-over cricket - please tell me if another country in the world plays 40-over domestic cricket (and no power-plays either). No wonder the likes of Loye and Joyce are unprepared for ODIs - they've never played under the current power-play rules before.
Time for a change. IMO all non 20-20 one-day cricket MUST be played under the rules of ODIs - at least that way when players come into ODIs from county cricket they have some idea what they should be doing. The pro 40 (the 40-over competition) should be scrapped and a knock-out cup (with the minor counties) should be brought back. Youi'd then have one league, one KO cup but all over 50 overs. Remember that pre 1996 we were good at ODIs in our own country - hardly surprising when they were 55 overs when the rest of the world played 50! Until we get our domestic one-day cricket in line with ODIs we will still tread water in one-day cricket - and ven having a specialist one-day coach (as G Boycott suggested) won't help.

Not untrue, not untrue at all.

[Nishant]

Originally Posted by Poker Boy

As another England ODI flop comes to an end (and let's be honest even if we'd won the Ashes I still reckon the current CB series would have been a flop) - there is enough eveidence (SA 2005, SL 2001) to show that even when the preceeding Test series is a succsess we still flop in the ODIs - the question is: Why? Well to be honest I reckon its to do with domestic one-day cricket in England.
When we were really crap in Tests (I'm talking 86-89 when we didn't win a home Test match (apart from v SL the weakest team in the era) went through five captains in 1988 and suffered an Ashes defeat in 1989 which made this year's look good - 29 players used, down to our 17th choice seamer, etc) domestic FC cricket had no resembalance to Tests. It was mainly three day cricket on crap pitchis and with a ball that had too big a seam. Remember in 1989 Derek Pringle and Steve Watkin were the leading FC wicket-takers. The next winter they went to Zimbabwe (not then a Test country) and achieved nothing - proving the point. It wasn't till we introduced all four-day CC and two divisions that our Test cricket started improving (despite Ashes fiasco we are still No 2 in the world inb Test cricket). Fast forward to 2007 and the same applies to our one-day cricket.
It beggars belief that until last summer the english county player was guarenteed only one 50-over match against FC opposistion - in the C&G - then a knock-out cup - and the rest of domestic one-day cricket was a 45-over league. Last year the ECB did bring in more 50-over cricket by turning the C&G into a league - but of course they stil did things wrong. The 20-over power-play rule that is in ODIs wasn't brought in - we still have the "old" 15-over rule - and from July onwards we went back to 40-over cricket - please tell me if another country in the world plays 40-over domestic cricket (and no power-plays either). No wonder the likes of Loye and Joyce are unprepared for ODIs - they've never played under the current power-play rules before.
Time for a change. IMO all non 20-20 one-day cricket MUST be played under the rules of ODIs - at least that way when players come into ODIs from county cricket they have some idea what they should be doing. The pro 40 (the 40-over competition) should be scrapped and a knock-out cup (with the minor counties) should be brought back. Youi'd then have one league, one KO cup but all over 50 overs. Remember that pre 1996 we were good at ODIs in our own country - hardly surprising when they were 55 overs when the rest of the world played 50! Until we get our domestic one-day cricket in line with ODIs we will still tread water in one-day cricket - and ven having a specialist one-day coach (as G Boycott suggested) won't help.

these are all fair points...but it is quite unfortunate for all england fans that everyone on CW realises the mistakes made ny the ECB....but the people that are most meant to realise all these points dont seem to get it!

[Neil Pickup]

Also worth remembering that OD cricket in England during the Texaco Trophy years (not sure if this was the case in ODI too) - were a world away in terms of fielding restrictions with the circle rules not even existing.

[Richard]

Wasn't the 1999 World Cup the first time ODIs in England were using field-restrictions?

Certainly 1996 was the first time they were used in domestic comps... 4 years after they became standard international practice.

[Neil Pickup]

The old memory's a bit hazy - but it's something like that. It makes it blindingly obvious why we're dire at ODI cricket though. No one plays it to get good at it...

Off topic slightly, how do club games in the rest of the world recreate fielding restriction rules? The ECB Club Cup and the BUSA Inter University Competition both use 50 overs; two fielders outside the circle in the first fifteen, five fielders after that, and two close catchers in the first fifteen. I played a field-restrictions game for the first time last summer... Exeter University IV v Warwick University II/III. More to think about captaining, great fun!

[Richard]

I think Jeff might launch an Official Protest if they ever start trying to use field-restrictions in our comps. Mind, it won't change the fields me and Jahad usually bowl to with the new-ball.

[Neil Pickup]

Originally Posted by Richard

I think Jeff might launch an Official Protest if they ever start trying to use field-restrictions in our comps. Mind, it won't change the fields me and Jahad usually bowl to with the new-ball.

No, because those fields are always the same and only have one variation in the whole game. Which is "Neil, go run around the boundary."

[Richard]

TBF, I did once get fine-leg moved to third-man when there was a stupidly short boundary there...

[The Argonaut]

All good points above. I could never understand why 40 and 45 over matches were popular with administrators. Surely a longer game means that people will buy more food and drink which is the way the grounds make most of their money in Australia.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by The Argonaut

All good points above. I could never understand why 40 and 45 over matches were popular with administrators.

They've always been thought to be more crowd-friendly.

Which is a great shame, because that does matter.

[dass]

i think one of the main reasons England suck as an ODI team is that dont play as much one day matches as other teams do. i know this was the case before too but oneday format of the game has changed a lot over the last 10 years and to remain competitive today you have to play a lot of cricket.

[Richard]

An interesting point I heard raised a week or so ago is that it's been 8 years now since a ODI was shown live on free-to-air TV in Britain. Is that any way to go about building an audience?

The only one-day cricket available between 2000 and 2005 was The C&G Trophy - and that 4 games a season max.

I wonder - how many ODIs and MM\ING\FR Cup games are shown on a similar station in Aus? Or in SA or WI, for that matter.

Is it really any wonder that fewer and fewer Brits care about ODIs?

[dass]

No one on the England oneday team has ever crossed 5000 runs and no one has ever taken 200 wickets, this gives you an idea how few oneday matches england had played.