Best ODI tourney since '03 WC?

[pasag]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

I still think people are unduly harsh on the 2007 World Cup.

The aim was to get the best 8 teams to play a round-robin, kinda like the awesome 1992 World Cup, and a more simple system (in theory) than the Super Six.

The upsets by Ireland and Bangladesh were fantastic (imo) but (in some people's eyes) killed the Super 8s by making a lot of the games easy wins over the minnows. The fact Bangladesh also beat South Africa seems to be glossed over too easily though.

Even the final was on target to be a really good, high-scoring game, until the weather struck.

I really think that external factors ruined the tournament- Bob Woolmer's death giving everything a creepy, surreal feel, the weather and light ruining the final, and of course ticket prices (as far as I could tell) bringing down the crowds and killing the atmosphere. I think if you looked at what actually happened purely in terms of the cricket played there was heaps of amazing stuff.

Main problem was it went on for 6 months.

[thierry henry]

Originally Posted by pasag

Main problem was it went on for 6 months.

See, I don't think so.

It went on slightly longer than normal but the cricket world cup has always been a fairly lengthy tournament (well, from the 1990s onwards it certainly has, dunno about before that).

In the 1992 World Cup 9 teams played 8 games each- that's more like a season than a tournament. But everyone loved that.

[silentstriker]

Well, choosing between ODI tourneys....

But in seriousness, if we had more pitches with low scores like some of these games, ODIs might actually hold a passable interest for me. Really happy with the low scoring games so far. I haven't been following the tourney, but I do pop into the cricinfo commentary time to time, and when the teams are chasing a small contest, I tend to stick around for a while.

[pasag]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

See, I don't think so.

It went on slightly longer than normal but the cricket world cup has always been a fairly lengthy tournament (well, from the 1990s onwards it certainly has, dunno about before that).

In the 1992 World Cup 9 teams played 8 games each- that's more like a season than a tournament. But everyone loved that.

Nah, it really felt like a long, long time. I agree with you that whilst it had its issues it's much maligned, but it really needs to be trimmed, time wise.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by pasag

Nah, it really felt like a long, long time. I agree with you that whilst it had its issues it's much maligned, but it really needs to be trimmed, time wise.

Yeah, the scheduling and the ambience of the 2007 WC sucked, and two big teams like India and Pakistan getting knocked over in the 1st round also played a big role in making the whole thing looking stale, fortunately the ICC seems to have learned from their mistake, and have made the schedule of the 2011 WC a lot more compact.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

See, I don't think so.

It went on slightly longer than normal but the cricket world cup has always been a fairly lengthy tournament (well, from the 1990s onwards it certainly has, dunno about before that).

In the 1992 World Cup 9 teams played 8 games each- that's more like a season than a tournament. But everyone loved that.

And it gave every team a fair chance to compete (well except SA)

[Faisal1985]

I think the Champions Trophy has unveiled the very nature of ODI's. The nature of ODIs as i understood is of a mixture of Tests and T20s. Sometimes you have to play ODI's like T20s and sometimes like Tests......this forces the teams to make profound strategies then just bang bang or tuk tuk.....I don't think the importance of ODIs was this clear ever before......for all those who think ODIs are done or they should be modified are out of their mind....ODIs are a perfect balance and must stay the way they are.....perhaps the only modification could be the Referral system.

You don't want each and every game to be a nail biter either like T20's because then its hard to see the reward of a good innings or a good bowling spell. For example, in the T20 there have been many occasions where there has been a phenomenal innings played or a great bowling spell bowled. I.e SA VS Pak in semis and Kallis's innings.....yet SA lost. And in the final......Razzaq's three quick wickets yet the game got too close and the impact of Razzaq's spell seemed very low or perhaps less significant then what it may have in an ODI......in order for these types of exceptional performances to be rewarded properly in games, i personally think ODIs are the best platform.....

[tooextracool]

Originally Posted by pasag

Nah, it really felt like a long, long time. I agree with you that whilst it had its issues it's much maligned, but it really needs to be trimmed, time wise.

It felt like a long time because of the number of lop sided contests and minnow teams and it wasn't helped by the fact that Bangladesh and Ireland made the super 8's. Im not a big fan of ODI cricket, but this tournament, IMO, is arguably the best ODI tournament we've seen since 1999. And thats only because we've had 7 out of the top 8 teams playing in it. It actually does good to the title of the tournament - 'Champions Trophy'

[Xuhaib]

Originally Posted by Faisal1985

I think the Champions Trophy has unveiled the very nature of ODI's. The nature of ODIs as i understood is of a mixture of Tests and T20s. Sometimes you have to play ODI's like T20s and sometimes like Tests......this forces the teams to make profound strategies then just bang bang or tuk tuk.....I don't think the importance of ODIs was this clear ever before......for all those who think ODIs are done or they should be modified are out of their mind....ODIs are a perfect balance and must stay the way they are.....perhaps the only modification could be the Referral system.

You don't want each and every game to be a nail biter either like T20's because then its hard to see the reward of a good innings or a good bowling spell. For example, in the T20 there have been many occasions where there has been a phenomenal innings played or a great bowling spell bowled. I.e SA VS Pak in semis and Kallis's innings.....yet SA lost. And in the final......Razzaq's three quick wickets yet the game got too close and the impact of Razzaq's spell seemed very low or perhaps less significant then what it may have in an ODI......in order for these types of exceptional performances to be rewarded properly in games, i personally think ODIs are the best platform.....

Nicely done Faisal.

[wpdavid]

The first 2020WC was pretty good iirc.

And yes, of course all of the ICC comps have been better than the recent WC's for all the reasons previously stated.

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Sanz

And it gave every team a fair chance to compete (well except SA)

SA'd have had more of a chance if they hadn't deliberately bowled thslowly to deprive England of the final few slog overs.

[Faisal1985]

Originally Posted by Xuhaib

Nicely done Faisal.

Thank you Sir.

[brackenNY]

Originally Posted by wpdavid

The first 2020WC was pretty good iirc.

Yeah but that wasn't an ODI tourney.

[DingDong]

wrong thread.

[silentstriker]

I think most people know that I hate limited overs format. I hate it with a passion. However, they are certainly the financial backbone of world cricket, and we have to live with such formats, I would be content with competitions such as these. Short, no meaningless games, good contest between bat and ball, and the best teams in the world playing almost every day. T20 has many of these things (especially the short part, which is #1 in my admittedly biased opinion), but if ODIs were simply short fast exciting tournaments once in a while, instead of seven game abominations, I would not mind as much. I still wouldn't like it, or particularly watch many of them, but it would be understandable.

Considering how much flak the ICC get, I think it's high time to praise them for hitting on pretty much the perfect formula and execution of an ODI format. Good for them, hopefully this becomes the standard from now on. WC may need to have more teams, but I hope they can keep a format that's similar.