Rank the formats

[Zinzan]

There was a similar thread a couple of years ago when T20's were relatively new. I'm interested in whether opinion has swung much....

 

[Jayzamann]

p. easy decision to make, imo.

 

[smash84]

haha.....yeah on CW it would probably be tests>ODIs>T20.

On other forums it will probably be the other way around

 

[Spikey]

Daemon that's not funny

 

[Spark]

What's with the four last irrelevant options?

 

[Daemon]

Daemon that's not funny

hipsterglasses.jpg

 

[morgieb]

Easy choice.

 

[Howe_zat]

There's a lot more cricketing skill in 50-over matches, but I find I enjoy T20Is more than ODIs. Partly because England are much better, but mostly because T20Is have more world tournaments and fewer repetitive bilateral series.

 

[centurymaker]

don't enjoy t20 at all.

 

[NasserFan207]

Prefer T20 to odis.

They've messed around with the powerplay crap too much, should've left that format alone.

 

[keeper]

Where's the option for 'whatever my team is winning at'?

 

[Howe_zat]

Where's the option for 'whatever my team is winning at'?

That's the second one.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I prefer T20 to ODIs because there's less of those awful, stodgy middle bits where both teams are quite happy for the score to advance at about 4-5 runs per over and the taking of wickets is barely a consideration.

The tweak of the powerplays is an admirable effort to alleviate this, but I still think the ICC should go the whole way and remove all over restrictions from the 40/50 over formats. To my way of thinking it'd lead to more genuine contests between bat and ball with proper bowlers sending the ball down and less of the "5th bowler" syndrome, where a captain has to cobble together ten overs from non-bowlers and the limit of his ambition is containment.

 

[centurymaker]

The tweak of the powerplays is an admirable effort to alleviate this, but I still think the ICC should go the whole way and remove all over restrictions from the 40/50 over formats. To my way of thinking it'd lead to more genuine contests between bat and ball with proper bowlers sending the ball down and less of the "5th bowler" syndrome, where a captain has to cobble together ten overs from non-bowlers and the limit of his ambition is containment.

totally agree. The number of overs a bowler can bowl should be at least increased to 12.
This will definitely increase the quality of cricket as you'll see more specialists picked in place of those 50/50 cricketers..
more proper batsman will play and more overs will be bowled by the wicket-taking bowlers..

 

[G.I.Joe]

totally agree. The number of overs a bowler can bowl should be at least increased to 12.
This will definitely increase the quality of cricket as you'll see more specialists picked in place of those 50/50 cricketers..
more proper batsman will play and more overs will be bowled by the wicket-taking bowlers..

It won't pan out that way, IMO. Captains will look at it as an opportunity to fit in one more batsman.

 

[Furball]

Crap, one-sided T20s waste much less of my time than crap, one sided ODIs. Add in the fact that I don't really follow much domestic cricket and T20Is are still enough of a novelty to be fun. Same can't be said of ODIs.

 

[morgieb]

While I agree that ODI's are over-used, T20's are just as bad. And a quality ODI >>> a quality T20.

I don't really like either format though.

 

[Uppercut]

It won't pan out that way, IMO. Captains will look at it as an opportunity to fit in one more batsman.

Possibly but it still increases the overall quality of the bowling. It's always seemed strange to me that there's a rule in place that serves no purpose other than to ensure that the bowlers no one wants to see bowl get to bowl.

I preferred T20s to ODIs a year or so ago but at the moment I probably prefer ODIs. The problem with both formats is that non-World Cup matches usually feel completely inconsequential.

 

[Daemon]

Crap, one-sided T20s waste much less of my time than crap, one sided ODIs.

Same reasoning that I used for my vote

 

[Redbacks]

I see the English are voting in order of their results against India

The middle overs of ODIs are often tedious, there should be thoughts about a rule change. If they are worried teams will pick more batsmen then they should ensure a team uses at least 5 bowlers and give away penalty runs if they don't (and make it to 50 overs).