Is 20/20 better than ODIs ? A Poll

[grecian]

grecian to come under fire from the vast majority of CW in 5...4...3...

Yeah, I'm bored, thought it would be funny.

I almost put Dhoni in as well

 

[Jono]

Just because your team is poor in that form doesn't make the form useless.

ODIs by a mile and then some.

 

[grecian]

Just because your team is poor in that form doesn't make the form useless.

ODIs by a mile and then some.

No fair, England were rubbish at tests for many years, and I still considered it the best form of the game.

 

[Steulen]

Can anyone tell me a good thing about ODIs, instead of saying bad/good things about Twenty20? Because the latter is what most of these threads turn into, while I'm yet to hear a convincing argument for ODIs being anything much more than run-of-the-mill sport that wears down the players.

The good thing about ODI's is that they are long enough for a nice day out watching a match which starts at the beginning and has ended by the time you go home drunk. It has a perfect length for that. Due to its length, the game can also change in complexion, you can get a good look at batsmen and bowlers alike and the outcome can be unclear right til the very end.

That's why I actually believe it's the best cricket format. Tests are way too long and only result in something worthwhile once in a blue moon. Heresy, I know .

20/20 is a good light snack, fun to watch and imo perfect for spreading the game to other countries than the usual suspects.

 

[Jono]

No fair, England were rubbish at tests for many years, and I still considered it the best form of the game.

Fair point, but I don't recall too many complaints when England were beating Australia in the Natwest Series. But when they start losing 5-1 to SA and IND and 5-0 to SL the game is useless and should be done away with. Yet at the same time we're heading into a WC which will be more open than its been for a long time. Possibly since 1996.

 

[Jono]

People like Fairbrother, Hick, Bevan, Harris, Agarkar, Symonds, Ealham, O'Donnel all have flourished in ODIs, whilst clearly not being test standard

Why can't both games have seperate champions? Its a silly criticism on the game considering thats been happening for ages now. ODI specialists aren't anything 'new'.

 

[grecian]

Why can't both games have seperate champions? Its a silly criticism on the game considering thats been happening for ages now. ODI specialists aren't anything 'new'.

It was just in response to people saying that average cricketers thrive in 20/20.

In answer to your first point I've never liked ODIs, but I'm generally happy to beat Australia at anything, cricket-wise.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Fair point, but I don't recall too many complaints when England were beating Australia in the Natwest Series. But when they start losing 5-1 to SA and IND and 5-0 to SL the game is useless and should be done away with. Yet at the same time we're heading into a WC which will be more open than its been for a long time. Possibly since 1996.

My post in September of 2004 (this took ages to find) - "I personally wouldn't be in the least bothered if Twenty20 replaced 50 overs..."

 

[grecian]

Well I can't do as well as that, but this was before the defeats against India and Sri Lanka..

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=727908&postcount=30

 

[Anil]

20/20 represents a fairly rapid decline of traditional cricket....sadly it fits the smaller attention-spans of the modern generation so it will become more popular i guess....

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

People like Fairbrother, Hick, Bevan, Harris, Agarkar, Symonds, Ealham, O'Donnel all have flourished in ODIs, whilst clearly not being test standard

Bevan and Hick were certainly capable of playing test cricket. Hick failed because of his temprament and Bevan had a terrible run and never got another opportunity after he improved against the short ball because of the strength of the side.

Anyway, I don't think you could possibly argue that all those players did well in ODIs because the format doesn't reward talent. Harris and O'Donnell might be fair enough, but not the others.

 

[Craig]

Bevan and Hick were certainly capable of playing test cricket. Hick failed because of his temprament and Bevan had a terrible run and never got another opportunity after he improved against the short ball because of the strength of the side.

Anyway, I don't think you could possibly argue that all those players did well in ODIs because the format doesn't reward talent. Harris and O'Donnell might be fair enough, but not the others.

I thought it might have been technique for both of them at Test cricket, as well as temprament, and the same for Mark Ramprakash (Tests in this case for him), where as domestic bowlers may not have the skill to exploit their weakness, but at Test level they got found out.

Anyway I took the 3rd option, but for me it is Tests > ODIs > Twenty20. I don't mind Twenty20, it's quick, fun and entertaining, but there doesn't need to be overkill, like a world cup or in the way of the NZC and cancelling a Test in favour of Twenty20. I think it is the ideal thing at the start of the ODI series to get interest flowing, or as a promotational tool, is the word I'm looking for. Also I don't like it when teams (ie Australia) use player nicknames on the back of their shirts, mainly because the nicknames are often pathetic.

 

[Craig]

And 20/20 then? Where players sit in a dugout and run out onto the pitch to save time while their themesong plays, and bowlers send down opening spells of two overs to them? I don't see how ODI cricket could possibly be any more "manufactured" than that.

To be fair though, I think theme songs were happening well before Twenty20 was even dreamed up.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Interesting how England fans almost exclusively prefer 20/20 to ODIs, while those from other countries do not.

I think it might have something to do with the fact that 20/20 is still to some extent "England's" cricket format, because relatively few other countries play it, and those that do don't play it to the same level or with the same amount of interestas English sides. Witness the novelty haircuts and nicknames in Australian and New Zealand 20/20 games, the captains wearing earpieces in the Australia/South Africa game so they could joke around with the commentators, and the fact that a Rugby League player will be playing for New South Wales this season. England seem to take the format very seriously, while for other countries it's a novelty, if they play it at all.

England has never had any major success in ODIs, particularly not in the last decade or so, and test cricket has similarly been dominated by other countries recently. It'll be interesting to see if it's still so popular in England compared to ODIs after this "world cup" thing they have planned. Or alternatively, if England happen to do very well in the World Cup next year.

 

[marc71178]

Or alternatively, if England happen to do very well in the World Cup next year.

Greigy alert!!!

 

[steds]

this photo is of agarkar when he wicket of Justin langer IN MY OPINION AJIT AGARKAR IS A BETTER AND PROVEN ALLROUNDER.

Not particularly hard to be a better allrounder than Langer, seeing as he doesn't bowl.

 

[superkingdave]

Interesting how England fans almost exclusively prefer 20/20 to ODIs, while those from other countries do not.

I think it might have something to do with the fact that 20/20 is still to some extent "England's" cricket format, because relatively few other countries play it, and those that do don't play it to the same level or with the same amount of interestas English sides. Witness the novelty haircuts and nicknames in Australian and New Zealand 20/20 games, the captains wearing earpieces in the Australia/South Africa game so they could joke around with the commentators, and the fact that a Rugby League player will be playing for New South Wales this season. England seem to take the format very seriously, while for other countries it's a novelty, if they play it at all.

England has never had any major success in ODIs, particularly not in the last decade or so, and test cricket has similarly been dominated by other countries recently. It'll be interesting to see if it's still so popular in England compared to ODIs after this "world cup" thing they have planned. Or alternatively, if England happen to do very well in the World Cup next year.

I doubt we will do well at all in the twenty20 tournament in SA, most of the people doing well aren't English.

BTW 2 players from each side always wear earpieces in televised games over here so its not like that was something novelty over in Aus. IIRC India is now the only country out of the main 8 not to play 20/20, so 'relatively few other countries play it' isn't really true.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Interesting how England fans almost exclusively prefer 20/20 to ODIs, while those from other countries do not.

I think it might have something to do with the fact that 20/20 is still to some extent "England's" cricket format, because relatively few other countries play it, and those that do don't play it to the same level or with the same amount of interestas English sides. Witness the novelty haircuts and nicknames in Australian and New Zealand 20/20 games, the captains wearing earpieces in the Australia/South Africa game so they could joke around with the commentators, and the fact that a Rugby League player will be playing for New South Wales this season. England seem to take the format very seriously, while for other countries it's a novelty, if they play it at all.

England has never had any major success in ODIs, particularly not in the last decade or so, and test cricket has similarly been dominated by other countries recently. It'll be interesting to see if it's still so popular in England compared to ODIs after this "world cup" thing they have planned. Or alternatively, if England happen to do very well in the World Cup next year.

TBF we were arguably the strongest ODI team in the world for 7-8 years between 1986-1993 & ODIs never remotely came close to tests in terms of popularity.

I also remember us beating Oz 3-0 in the ODIs in 1997 before the Ashes & no-one really giving a flying one save for the fact we might have found some players (the Hollioakes) who could stand toe-to-toe with the mighty Aussies.

I think the reason that some people prefer ODIs is that because of the time they've been played they are seen as some more legitimate than 20/20s; I personally consider them both equally illegitimate, but just simply find 20/20 the more exciting format. The supposed "strengths" of ODIs (time to build partnerships, more real cricket shots, etc) are, in reality, actually the strengths of FC cricket. For mine one dayers are increasingly becoming a diluted version of the real thing whereas 20/20s are a genuine shot-in-the-arm that cut away the awful starchy filler that pollutes ODIs (essentially overs 15-40).

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I doubt we will do well at all in the twenty20 tournament in SA, most of the people doing well aren't English.

BTW 2 players from each side always wear earpieces in televised games over here so its not like that was something novelty over in Aus. IIRC India is now the only country out of the main 8 not to play 20/20, so 'relatively few other countries play it' isn't really true.

Fair enough, the earpiece thing was something I'd only ever seen in charity games over here, which is why I associated it with a novelty concept. And really, it may be that six other countries play it, but aside from perhaps South Africa I don't think any of them take it seriously, at least not yet. As I said, it has all the hallmarks of a novelty event over here, with Shane Warne bowling bouncers against Western Australia, Andrew Johns representing New South Wales, and Ponting wearing an earpiece playing against South Africa.

 

[superkingdave]

Fair enough, the earpiece thing was something I'd only ever seen in charity games over here, which is why I associated it with a novelty concept. And really, it may be that six other countries play it, but aside from perhaps South Africa I don't think any of them take it seriously, at least not yet. As I said, it has all the hallmarks of a novelty event over here, with Shane Warne bowling bouncers against Western Australia, Andrew Johns representing New South Wales, and Ponting wearing an earpiece playing against South Africa.

Well it's only just starting in WI, but given the money involved i'd venture to suggest that will get taken seriously.

Regarding Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it's interesting that you say they don't take it seriously over there, because the reports i can find seem to suggest its far from a joke event.