Cricket Betting Site Betway

View Poll Results: Will ODI cricket die?

Voters
61. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 37.70%
  • No

    38 62.30%
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 95

Thread: Will ODI's die a slow death?

  1. #31
    Hall of Fame Member chaminda_00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Murali CG
    Posts
    16,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig View Post
    What they did in Australia in the Ford Ranger Cup where batting side got to pick when they could their alloted power play and so could the bowling captain take his 5 when he wanted. And I liked it as well since there was plenty of pro's and con's to when to take it. Sure you could have wickets in hand (10-7 left) and save it for the 36th-40 over mark, but what happens you lost some wickets and your 'hitters' so to speak were out? Or do you take it early and try and get some momentum going, but it could not work as well, or what happens if you have a bad start in the first 10-15 overs and you lose two or three wickets quickly? There is no right or wrong IMO and why the ICC haven't brought it in yet, I'm not sure (then again the bonus point was done in Australia first and then it was adopted by the ICC).
    It going to be looked at being brought in this year at the AGM or whatever they call it. Needed to be trailed for a season before being brought in. But like most innovations they all get trailed as domestic level and look good. Then never seem to work out at International level, due poor changes in the innovation. Or you don't notice some major issues until it used on a regular basic on the International scene. I think these innovations should be trailled for atleast two seaons before being brought in, rather then just one season. You never really see its full effect until the 2nd season, when teams get used to them.
    The man, the mountain, the Mathews. The greatest all rounder since Keith Miller. (Y)

    Jaffna Jets CC (Battrick & FTP)

    RIP WCC and CW Cricket

    Member of the MSC, JMAS and CVAAS

  2. #32
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    League One
    Posts
    60,821
    Quote Originally Posted by chaminda_00 View Post
    There is still a place for ODI cricket, much rather a 50-over World Cup, then a the Twenty20 World Championship. But really hope we see the end of pointless OD only tours, seven match series and even tri series (especially really long ones like the CB series). If ODIs are kept to just a 2-3 games a tour then I think cricket will be better off.

    But the sad fact is that Test cricket brings no money to cricket. Apart from Ashes series and now Border/Gavaskar most Test series countries loss money holding them. With this in mind we probably more likely to see more 2-Test series, 7 ODIs and 5 Twenty20. Now that is what your call dire.

    Personally though I think if you reduced ODIs and Twenty20 Internationals, more people will go watch Test cricket. The problem is with Test cricket is not the format, it excess of International. Your average cricket fan just wants to see the national team play, but with so many ODIs, it is easier to watch them over a Test match. If there was a limit to ODIs and Twenty20 Internationals. I think you will find there will be more people watching Test Cricket.

    Really the ICC need to make a hard decision here and cut the number of ODIs, or Test cricket might be the one that dies a slow death. There isn't enough time for all three formats, plus cash based domestic competitions.
    I am pretty sure we make profits out of all the Tests we host tbh, they are usually sold out or at least 3/4 full.

    I don't think ODIs will die because there is still enough demand amongst the fans, I am not sure whether T20s will become more popular though and therefore more prominent, we'll have to wait and see I guess

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  3. #33
    State Vice-Captain slugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,059
    the game has to move with the times.. and the irony is ..the lenght of time the game took to complete became its down fall (in a matter of speaking) hense the introduction of 20/20 a 3 hour game..

    20/20 cricket could have been moulded to fit and look like a compacted 50 ovr game.. if they had made it bowlers vs batsmen as a batting team you only have 7 wickets..rather than the 10 .. as per usual..

    that could ve been one idea but its abit late now..

    if they broke up the 50 over game in quaters.. or made it a 40 over game in quaters.. you will have those cruisy middle overs seprated by blocks of big hitting overs..

  4. #34
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    League One
    Posts
    60,821
    40 over games are a bit crap tbh


  5. #35
    Soutie Langeveldt's Avatar
    Pinball Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Leeuwarden, Netherlands
    Posts
    29,567
    T20 isn't even cricket, but I fear it will be the downfall of both ODI and Test cricket in the long run.. After all, there is so much more money in T20, and the uneducated masses will obviously lap it up to breaking point..
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    Don't like using my iPod dock. Ruins battery life too much.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Thanks Dick Smith. Will remember to subscribe to your newsletter for more electronic fun facts.

    ****.

  6. #36
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,127
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    40 over games are a bit crap tbh
    STT.

    I always find it odd that there are 45 over games in England but they play 50 everywhere else, why?
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  7. #37
    International 12th Man Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,604
    T20 is a bit dire at the moment and not a lot of fun to watch (in my opinion anyway).

    But it is a very new format so I have not completely given it away yet. Tactics will improve over time and there will not doubt be a few rule changes to improve the game. Plus they will hopefully stop talking to the players during the game.

  8. #38
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Thane India
    Posts
    19,346
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig View Post
    What they did in Australia in the Ford Ranger Cup where batting side got to pick when they could their alloted power play and so could the bowling captain take his 5 when he wanted. And I liked it as well since there was plenty of pro's and con's to when to take it. Sure you could have wickets in hand (10-7 left) and save it for the 36th-40 over mark, but what happens you lost some wickets and your 'hitters' so to speak were out? Or do you take it early and try and get some momentum going, but it could not work as well, or what happens if you have a bad start in the first 10-15 overs and you lose two or three wickets quickly? There is no right or wrong IMO and why the ICC haven't brought it in yet, I'm not sure (then again the bonus point was done in Australia first and then it was adopted by the ICC).
    I have heard of that and I think its an interesting concept. One will have to see how it worked in practice though.

    Tell me do the overs still have to be taken as a block of five - I mean they are five consecutive overs.

    It could give a lot of interesting options like using the power play when your best hitter is batting, or maybe when someone who is not such a big hitter and needs the extra 'prop' of fewer outfielders to help hi m get a decent strike rate.

    It could also mean that if a side takes a power play when Afridi comes into bat, they get into trouble if Afridi, as is quite likely, gets out first ball

  9. #39
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,127
    Quote Originally Posted by SJS View Post
    I have heard of that and I think its an interesting concept. One will have to see how it worked in practice though.

    Tell me do the overs still have to be taken as a block of five - I mean they are five consecutive overs.

    It could give a lot of interesting options like using the power play when your best hitter is batting, or maybe when someone who is not such a big hitter and needs the extra 'prop' of fewer outfielders to help hi m get a decent strike rate.

    It could also mean that if a side takes a power play when Afridi comes into bat, they get into trouble if Afridi, as is quite likely, gets out first ball
    Yes.

  10. #40
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    40 over games are a bit crap tbh
    Just a little.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  11. #41
    Norwood's on Fire GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    League One
    Posts
    60,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig View Post
    STT.

    I always find it odd that there are 45 over games in England but they play 50 everywhere else, why?
    What is STT?

    We don't actually have 45 over games anymore, they replaced them with 40 overs. Most of the domestic OD cricket played is 50 over now actually, but really, all of it should be. Don't quite see the point in the 40 over league, it has absolutely no relevance to any cricket played anywhere else

  12. #42
    All the bulldust excuses to slate Twenty20 that have been disproved trotted out as always. To get an entertaining ODI so many variables have to be right. ODIs were created for money and the odd fluke happens and you actually get one that's entertaining. Twenty20 was created for money, does a better job of it than ODIs and they actually *are* entertaining. There are also cricketing reasons to prefer them over ODIs, such as good and bad performances having a suitably big impact and a real influence on the game.

    At the end of the day sport that is entertaining will survive on its own merit. ODIs are rarely entertaining and they're rather convoluted, their survival is based on financial reasons. The financial reasons for ODIs are diminishing so ODIs are in trouble. Things like the World Cup will probably keep ODIs going for the forseeable future.
    World Scrabble Champion 2014. National Scrabble Champion 2009, 2015.
    Author of Word Addict
    Countdown Series 57 Champion
    King of the Arcade
    ECB - you are a complete ****ing disgrace, #FTECB

  13. #43
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    47,191
    I think ODIs will gradually be replaced by 20/20 as the main abbreviated form of the game. My belief is mainly based on 20/20's broad appeal (we, as cricket fans who care enough about the sport to post on a forum dedicated to it, may wring our hands, but the fact is that the dollar of the casual fan is worth the same as ours) & that most quote-unquote "real" cricket fans prefer tests to ODIs. This leaves ODIs without a natural audience.
    Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "Ben Stokes, that most unlikely saint, worked the second of the two miracles he needs for his canonisation." - The Guardian's Andy Bell on the England all-rounder's Headingley ton

  14. #44
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    I think 20/20 supporters vastly underestimate the number of fans who find 20/20 mindless slogfests but also find test cricket too long and boring. In all honesty, the only people I've met outside of this forum who like 20/20 compared to the other forms of the game are people who don't like cricket in the first place, or at the very least don't watch it. I know plenty of people who prefer ODIs to test cricket though, even though I don't personally.

    Then you've got the genuine cricket fans who prefer tests but still like ODI cricket. I'll rarely miss an ODI in which Australia are involved, and watched the ODI World Cup religiously. I've barely seen a minute of the IPL.
    It's cold on the outside they say
    But the cold leaves you clear while the heat leaves a haze

  15. #45
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    47,191
    Quote Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad View Post
    I think 20/20 supporters vastly underestimate the number of fans who find 20/20 mindless slogfests but also find test cricket too long and boring. In all honesty, the only people I've met outside of this forum who like 20/20 compared to the other forms of the game are people who don't like cricket in the first place, or at the very least don't watch it. I know plenty of people who prefer ODIs to test cricket though, even though I don't personally.

    Then you've got the genuine cricket fans who prefer tests but still like ODI cricket. I'll rarely miss an ODI in which Australia are involved, and watched the ODI World Cup religiously. I've barely seen a minute of the IPL.
    It might be different in Oz, of course, but I've honestly never met anyone who'd call themselves a cricket fan (as opposed to a casual watcher) who prefers ODIs to tests. Admittedly us Brits have always been a bit sniffy about the shorter form, but I'm still surprised there would be so many who would down under.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Slow death of international cricket
    By Langeveldt in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 26-12-2018, 11:50 PM
  2. Penalty for slow over rates
    By silentstriker in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 18-06-2006, 11:24 PM
  3. Slow?
    By age_master in forum Site Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-11-2004, 05:48 AM
  4. Damian Martyn the Slow
    By Eclipse in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 18-08-2003, 05:28 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •