Int ODI is one of the most competitve sports league in the world

[Xuhaib]

Over the years cricket has been criticized for its lack of depth in terms of competition. Currently odi cricket is at it peak in terms of competitiveness I doubt any of the soccer leagues around the world can match cricket in what has been happening over the past 2 years. I am enjoying what I am seeing and i hope this trend continues till the next World Cup

 

[Prince EWS]

Wouldn't the team selectors of the most competitive sports league in the world shy away from actively selecting less than full strength teams purely because factors other than the result meant a lot more to them?

You can call the ODI world at the moment, close, unpredictable, exciting etc - but "competitive" isn't the word I'd use given the general apathy that is shown towards winning every game, every series etc by the respective boards.

 

[Xuhaib]

PEWS,

Teams have been treating od's like this for the best part of last 10 years but the results have never been as close and unpredictable as we have seen over the last 12-18 months.. I think the introduction of T-20 has changed the way in which teams play the 2 shorter formats of the game.

 

[Prince EWS]

PEWS,

Teams have been treating od's like this for the best part of last 10 years but the results have never been as close and unpredictable as we have seen over the last 12-18 months.

Not denying that; just don't think it's in any way relevant to my post.

There's more to competitiveness than unpredictability and close finishes; that's not what the word means.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think two factors ramp up the apathy quotient. Firstly the length of the series; bipartite series of five or more games just don't gird the loins. Secondly the existence of a world cup renders all the other games largely an irrelevance; a team can win every game for four years, but if they eff up in a quarter final (hello South Africa!) they're done for.

In tests, because there's no world cup each series is special in and of itself (although two game series are awful, but that's an argument for another thread) but with ODIs there's a feeling that teams are building towards the next WC, so selectors experiment with line-ups and, given the length of the series (see first point), who can blame them?

 

[thierry henry]

imo cricket generally is one of the more well contested international sports in the world, dunno why cricket fans are generally so loathe to claim this. There are people out there claiming rugby union is a better sport at international level, no ****ing way imo.

 

[BoyBrumby]

imo cricket generally is one of the more well contested international sports in the world, dunno why cricket fans are generally so loathe to claim this. There are people out there claiming rugby union is a better sport at international level, no ****ing way imo.

Interesting point; cricket has had five different world cup winners but union only four. Even league has had three...

Cricket also has three other sides (SA, NZ & England) who could conceivably win a world cup but from union one could only realistically see the French or (at a pinch) the Welsh carrying it off.

 

[thierry henry]

Interesting point; cricket has had five different world cup winners but union only four. Even league has had three...

Cricket also has three other sides (SA, NZ & England) who could conceivably win a world cup but from union one could only realistically see the French or (at a pinch) the Welsh carrying it off.

Yeah and Union is very lucky to be able to claim 4 winners given the way the All Blacks absolutely dominate in general....their unbelievable run of chokes gives an illusion that the game is more competitive than it is. It is also imo far worse than ODI cricket in terms of being totally focused on its world cup, and then you've got test cricket on top of that....

(**** Ruby Onion btw, but yeah, I genuinely believe cricket is better as a competitive international sport)

 

[NUFAN]

I think currently it is an extremely even competition, but unless you exclude domestic comps and are just talking about International team competition then I wouldn't agree with the OP.

BTW, talking about countries winning world cups - how about Football? In the past 8 world cups, we've had 7 different winners.

 

[smash84]

this last Asia cup was pretty good to watch IMO

the bangers played really well and most of the games were close finishes.....

Also the Aus-WI ODI series has been throwing up decent games it seems (not sure though since I haven't been following more than just glancing at SCs)

 

[smash84]

I think the 2 new balls and the batting power play have definitely spiced up things quite a bit and I think the teams have gotten much better at chasing than they used to in earlier eras

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think currently it is an extremely even competition, but unless you exclude domestic comps and are just talking about International team competition then I wouldn't agree with the OP.

BTW, talking about countries winning world cups - how about Football? In the past 8 world cups, we've had 7 different winners.

Is that right?

82: Italy
86: Argies
90: Jerry
94: Brazil
98: France
02: Brazil
06: Italy
10: Spain

Six by my count.

Your point's well made tho, football is the world's game, no doubt. However, of the other major team sports, I'd say international cricket stacks up pretty well in terms of competitiveness.

 

[NUFAN]

Yeah your right Brumby - I should have checked properly. 6 from the past 7 years.

I'm trying to think of other competitive team sports, Rugby Sevens gets a few different tournament winners.

 

[DingDong]

obviously mlb is the most competitive league in the world there have probably been less than 5 sides in the last 10 years who have won more than 100 games in a 162 game season

 

[wellAlbidarned]

obviously mlb is the most competitive league in the world there have probably been less than 5 sides in the last 10 years who have won more than 100 games in a 162 game season

MLB is still a domestic competition so doesn't count, even if it is the highest level of Baseball.

 

[salman85]

Cricket's unpredictability is down to it being a more technical sport than Football or Rugby too.I use the world unpredictability here because it is difficult for people to master their skills at Cricket compared to Football and Rugby,which means that only a handful of players develop the quality to compete at the highest level in Cricket,and the chances of quality players facing off against each other are much greater compared to other sports.

This isn't to suggest that Football and Rugby aren't technical sports per se,but you know.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Cricket's unpredictability is down to it being a more technical sport than Football or Rugby too.I use the world unpredictability here because it is difficult for people to master their skills at Cricket compared to Football and Rugby,which means that only a handful of players develop the quality to compete at the highest level in Cricket,and the chances of quality players facing off against each other are much greater compared to other sports.

This isn't to suggest that Football and Rugby aren't technical sports per se,but you know.

Union is a very technical game; football far less so.

It's no coincidence that football and basketball are probably the two team sports with the broadest geographical appeal. They're the two simplest to play.

 

[Ikki]

DWTA. Football is very technical and tactical.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Technical meaning the complexity of the rules, not the complexity of tactics etc. I assume anyway.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Technical meaning the complexity of the rules, not the complexity of tactics etc. I assume anyway.

Yeah.

Only need a ball and two sets of jumpers for goalposts, etc. By far the easiest of the major football codes to pick up.