Is ODI Cricket Losing Its Relevance?

[TheJediBrah]

The loss of tours that would include an ODI and a test series hasn't helped as all the ODI series now seem to happen at random. Playing 3 ODIs before a home Ashes series felt like a good appetiser. However, as @Chin Music says we then had overkill as series extended to 7 matches, often at the end of tours, that just dragged on. Then standalone 7 match series etc.

I'm still an advocate that for tours that are less high profile, the women's approach of having multi-format scoring to decide the series winners should be used.

Peak ODIs outside World Cups were the tri-series IMO. If we're talking in England, the NatWest series' before the Ashes in 2001 and 2005 were great fun, better than a meaningless 3 game series. And it was always very popular in Australia every year for a couple decades (even if the neutral games didn't always get a good crowd).

The late 90s/early 00s might have gone overboard a bit with the Sharjah tournaments but in moderation that was what ODI cricket was all about for me growing up

 

[shortpitched713]

For me, ODI cricket was about the diversity of competition in the 90s, followed by everyone being scared shitless of the canary yellows in the 00s.

T20 doesn't have any of those vibes. It's saccharine barely cricket, sorry to say.

 

[Skyliner]

The annual ODI Tri Series in the Australian summer was fantastic. I guess it was scrapped because they thought it had gone stale.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The annual ODI Tri Series in the Australian summer was fantastic. I guess it was scrapped because they thought it had gone stale.

It was because the neutral games were non events. They only brought it back post 2007 ish when India were involved because they were guaranteed engagement

 

[Immenso]

ODIs were fun when teams were bad at it.

 

[thierry henry]

I think we just let it happen. Like, teams started picking understrength XIs sure, and then we started saying "ah well ODIs don't matter now". But like, to this day if there's an ODI on it's more interesting, more entertaining, and more meaningful than an equivalent T20I. It seems like the main reason we say ODI is less relevant than T20I is just because for some reason we keep telling ourselves it is.

If the question was "are ODIs and T20Is both becoming irrelevant" the answer would be yes, kinda, because of the general shift towards not playing full strength teams outside of tournaments.

 

[ankitj]

Still love 50 over cricket. Would rather that t20s die out and we go back to the awesome world of test and ODI cricket.

 

[ankitj]

Peak ODIs outside World Cups were the tri-series IMO. If we're talking in England, the NatWest series' before the Ashes in 2001 and 2005 were great fun, better than a meaningless 3 game series. And it was always very popular in Australia every year for a couple decades (even if the neutral games didn't always get a good crowd).

The late 90s/early 00s might have gone overboard a bit with the Sharjah tournaments but in moderation that was what ODI cricket was all about for me growing up

Before IPL even bilateral ODI series were great fun. Teams fielder full strength teams and they did care about who won the series just like tests. In a tour losing test series but winning ODI series genuinely felt like honours even.

 

[TheJediBrah]

In a tour losing test series but winning ODI series genuinely felt like honours even.

I don't think the majority would agree with this. The Test series was always much more important

 

[ankitj]

I don't think the majority would agree with this. The Test series was always much more important

Indian fans alone make the majority, mate. I know what I am talking about.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Indian fans alone make the majority, mate. I know what I am talking about.

Eh, the "majority" now prefers T20. There's no accounting for taste. I believe we on cricket chat are more discerning

 

[Ali TT]

I think we just let it happen. Like, teams started picking understrength XIs sure, and then we started saying "ah well ODIs don't matter now". But like, to this day if there's an ODI on it's more interesting, more entertaining, and more meaningful than an equivalent T20I. It seems like the main reason we say ODI is less relevant than T20I is just because for some reason we keep telling ourselves it is.

If the question was "are ODIs and T20Is both becoming irrelevant" the answer would be yes, kinda, because of the general shift towards not playing full strength teams outside of tournaments.

I genuinely don't think this is true. It's all just wallpaper in the international calendar - a long way behind tests, the World Cups, Champions Trophy and the major franchise T20/100-ball leagues.

 

[ankitj]

Eh, the "majority" now prefers T20. There's no accounting for taste. I believe we on cricket chat are more discerning

I was talking about pre IPL age. And not of CW members alone. Now, even among casuals ODIs have taken a back seat (sadly)

 

[TheJediBrah]

I was talking about pre IPL age. And not of CW members alone. Now, even among casuals ODIs have taken a back seat (sadly)

So was I. Outside of India, and maybe Sri Lanka (?), ODIs were never considered as important. If you lost the Test series, winning the ODIs didn't make up for it or make it "honours even"

 

[ankitj]

So was I. Outside of India, and maybe Sri Lanka (?), ODIs were never considered as important. If you most the Test series, winning the ODIs didn't make up for it or make it "honours even"

Maybe "honours even" is a stretch. Still the bilateral ODI cricket felt quite important. Teams didn't half ass them with a B-team.

 

[Molehill]

In the last 9 months England have played 3 series against WI (home and away) and India. I'm sure I watched all of these, but I couldn't have told you the results without looking them up.

Sadly, there is just nothing memorable about them anymore. TJB mentioned the Nat West Series before the Ashes in 2005, that's one of the very few where you thought this actually means something (although it was clearly all about setting pre-Ashes markers), but it was a great series.

 

[SeamUp]

ODI cricket is the best of both worlds. I love it.

 

[Chin Music]

In the last 9 months England have played 3 series against WI (home and away) and India. I'm sure I watched all of these, but I couldn't have told you the results without looking them up.

Sadly, there is just nothing memorable about them anymore. TJB mentioned the Nat West Series before the Ashes in 2005, that's one of the very few where you thought this actually means something (although it was clearly all about setting pre-Ashes markers), but it was a great series.

I even managed to blag a ticket for the final of the 2005 tied game. That was quite something, but I think we did away with tri-series not so long after that. 5 game ODI series, let alone the 7 game ones that I mentioned above were too much for me.

 

[Molehill]

I even managed to blag a ticket for the final of the 2005 tied game. That was quite something, but I think we did away with tri-series not so long after that. 5 game ODI series, let alone the 7 game ones that I mentioned above were too much for me.

I was at that Final too, memorable match. But I was also at Finals (like 2001) where England didn't qualify and they were not great occasions, which is probably why Tri-Series got dumped.

 

[centurymaker]

Only way to revive it would be to have a few annual three-nation/four-nation series again. It would regenerate interest because such series haven't happened in a long time.