Will ODI's die a slow death?

[anoop4real]

I dont think ODI will die out.........

 

[weldone]

Personally I don't think that ODIs will die, not for the forthcoming future anyway. Test cricket is based on patience, T20 on more frantic cricket (and supposedly more entertainment) and a balance needs to stay in place (ODIs). I can't see that balance being removed from cricket any time soon. If it does, cricket will be the poorer because of it, and I have an image that players will either be T20 specialists or traditional test cricket specialists without anything in between (with a lack of adaptability).

In saying this, the ODI World Cup should be between the top eight (or ten if the other two are competitive enough) countries. Each plays each other, semis, final. The Twenty20 World Cup should include the full complement as although a team could get smashed still, at least the beating is all over within 3 hours. Personally I think the ODI World Cup format mentioned there would help give it more credibility and reduce the amount of one sided encounters. People would be more inclined to go to the games and they know they'll see a contest over up to 100 overs. People will also go to Twenty20 games regardless of who would be playing, for entertainment purposes as much as wanting to watch a close contest.

My thoughts expressed by you in words before I could...

 

[Richard]

I think it will, IIRC.

You think you recall your own thoughts correctly?

 

[GIMH]

PS CW Awards?

 

[Richard]

All in due course... there's an article as needs to be done too, as you might remember... which I also have to try and do today...

 

[Anil]

You can hate the format while acknowledging its necessity. Even now, most of the cash comes from ODIs, and its used to finance Test cricket. So I understand its existance, but that doesn't mean I like it. However, now that there is a superior format to ODIs which also has the potential to generate income, I would like the ODI format to die. I don't like T20s either, but having both is too much and if I had to choose one, I'd choose T20.

in what way is it superior?

 

[Anil]

Yeah, ODI cricket has a whole range of merits that 20/20 cricket doesn't have, and I don't feel that it "pretends" to be anything. I can't see ODI cricket dying out while there's a continued market for it, and I certainly think there is, given that just about every cricket fan I know loathes 20/20, myself included.

your generation might but what we are seeing is each generation being "blessed" with shorter and shorter attention spans...i can see both tests dying out and one dayers losing popularity...

 

[Black_Warrior]

^ sadly agree

 

[Richard]

in what way is it superior?

Not sure I've ever seen you use that smiley before TBH.

(Agree with your sentiments in that post BTW)

 

[swede]

yes thankfully that horrible game will die.

I have never understood why the administrators in the sixties decided to come up with the one-day game instead of adressing the problems of the real game such as pitches and declining over rates.

Look at a county or shield scorecard from 100 years ago and often the run rate is 3-4 with typically 22-24 overs bowled per hour. Real cricket with almost as many runs per hour as T20. No wonder they needed mounted police to push back the crowds for county games on bank holidays.

The test over-rate now stands at a pathetic 13.8 with no apparent will to do anything about it. Its a choice of real cricket played at a snails pace or slogs.that come with or without a bonus mid-innings defence-fest.

 

[Richard]

ITSTL, haven't seen you for a while. Only remember seeing you once before in fact, that being in this thread about that rubbish article.

You've met Haakon have you?

 

[aussie]

your generation might but what we are seeing is each generation being "blessed" with shorter and shorter attention spans...i can see both tests dying out and one dayers losing popularity...

Can't see test dying out, surely the tradition of over 125 years is strong enough to be carried on until Jesus is ready to return for his people?. But i can see ODI's losing popularity though.

 

[cowboysfan]

I think all three formats can co-exist and it will.why do odi's have to die?.

 

[Spinksy]

Yes, unfortunately the IPL or any other twenty20 tournament will take other as it is the next big thing. ODI's will still be around of course but won't be as popular and probably won't be televised much. I can see ODI's disappearing between 2010-2020.

 

[The Masterplan]

Surely with all the money being pumped into the shorter formats of the game at the moment I don't see ODI's dying out...

 

[silentstriker]

in what way is it superior?

Unlike ODIs, where you goto sleep in the middle, T20 has a lot more wickets and runs. ODIs lack the buildup of Tests and lack the firepower of T20. I don't see the point, and frankly, I never have.

I won't go so far as to say I like T20, but I can watch it. I'd obviously be happier if both of the formats went away, but I desperately want Test cricket to survive, and for that to happen, it needs to be subsidized by a shorter format with wider appeal. To me, whichever format does that is fine by me, but if I had to choose, it would be T20 for the following reasons:

1. It's over faster: limited overs cricket should end as quickly as possible to prevent people who like real cricket from committing Seppuku.
2. You can get a bunch of them over with in a shorter span of time, and hopefully focus on real cricket
3. It's over faster
4. You can have large competitions like WC in a shorter amount of time instead of taking up months
5. It's over faster
6. I like seeing one side always being aggressive. It is possible for two teams to knock it around for hours in an ODI and both sides come out of it happy, which is not on.
7. ODI doesn't know what it is, it pretends to be real cricket while being as far away as possible from it. At least T20 is what it is: a bit of hit and giggle
8. It's over faster

 

[cowboysfan]

Surely with all the money being pumped into the shorter formats of the game at the moment I don't see ODI's dying out...

you have got it backwards.Its the shorter forms of the games that is generating all the money(both T-20 and ODIs).Test cricket is the one which needs money to be "pumped in" and thats not a bad thing if all 3 formats have to survive.

 

[GIMH]

Unlike ODIs, where you goto sleep in the middle, T20 has a lot more wickets and runs. ODIs lack the buildup of Tests and lack the firepower of T20. I don't see the point, and frankly, I never have.

I won't go so far as to say I like T20, but I can watch it. I'd obviously be happier if both of the formats went away, but I desperately want Test cricket to survive, and for that to happen, it needs to be subsidized by a shorter format with wider appeal. To me, whichever format does that is fine by me, but if I had to choose, it would be T20 for the following reasons:

1. It's over faster: limited overs cricket should end as quickly as possible to prevent people who like real cricket from committing Seppuku.
2. You can get a bunch of them over with in a shorter span of time, and hopefully focus on real cricket
3. It's over faster
4. You can have large competitions like WC in a shorter amount of time instead of taking up months
5. It's over faster
6. I like seeing one side always being aggressive. It is possible for two teams to knock it around for hours in an ODI and both sides come out of it happy, which is not on.
7. ODI doesn't know what it is, it pretends to be real cricket while being as far away as possible from it. At least T20 is what it is: a bit of hit and giggle
8. It's over faster

Didn't know you weren't a fan of LOI SS

 

[LA ICE-E]

Unlike ODIs, where you goto sleep in the middle, T20 has a lot more wickets and runs. ODIs lack the buildup of Tests and lack the firepower of T20. I don't see the point, and frankly, I never have.

I won't go so far as to say I like T20, but I can watch it. I'd obviously be happier if both of the formats went away, but I desperately want Test cricket to survive, and for that to happen, it needs to be subsidized by a shorter format with wider appeal. To me, whichever format does that is fine by me, but if I had to choose, it would be T20 for the following reasons:

1. It's over faster: limited overs cricket should end as quickly as possible to prevent people who like real cricket from committing Seppuku.
2. You can get a bunch of them over with in a shorter span of time, and hopefully focus on real cricket
3. It's over faster
4. You can have large competitions like WC in a shorter amount of time instead of taking up months
5. It's over faster
6. I like seeing one side always being aggressive. It is possible for two teams to knock it around for hours in an ODI and both sides come out of it happy, which is not on.
7. ODI doesn't know what it is, it pretends to be real cricket while being as far away as possible from it. At least T20 is what it is: a bit of hit and giggle
8. It's over faster

SS, being that your are from here, why do you like tests more than t20 or odi?

 

[silentstriker]

Didn't know you weren't a fan of LOI SS

You just want to get me mad, don't you?

SS, being that your are from here, why do you like tests more than t20 or odi?

Well, it's really odd. My love of cricket obviously started in India as I was born there, but until my teenage years, I never really was interested in international games outside of ODI and WC. I guess slowly as I started getting more into it, I found the limited games boring and very repetitive. I fell in love with the build up and over the five days, and the skills required to win a Test match and how one session can cost you everything so it required focus, concentration and sustained effort. Whereas a solitary performance can win you LOI, you really tend to need a solid and consistent team effort to win a Test, with very few exceptions. McGrath & Donald probably had a lot to do with it too, actually - I really loved watching them play. I probably watched more Australian Tests than most Australian players (every single one, with very few exceptions). Back then, I was very one eyed, and didn't much like any Pakistan unfortunately never got into Wasim and co. But back in the early nineties, I thought Kapil Dev was the greatest fast bowler in history, so you can forgive my choices .

But I really got into tests when I started reading the history behind it. That got me into trying to get my hands on old tapes/dvds of matches and all sorts of things, and the rest is history.