• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Is 20/20 better than ODIs ? A Poll

Is 20/20 better than ODIs ? Poll


  • Total voters
    57

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
There have been several members on this forum who have expressed opinions that 20/20 is in their opinion better than ODI cricket . In fact some have even suggested 20/20 will replace ODI cricket !!

I personally love ODIs far far better than 20/20 and Tests far far far ....far better than ODIs .
And as far as I can see only in England (actually the United Kingdom :laugh: ie England , Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland ) 20/20 seems to have gained some firm hold support , whereas everywhere else it has hardly reached a noticeable foot hold .

In the long term I am also concerned whether Cricket which already has to play second fiddle to other sports in some of these countries (ie to Aussie Rules, Rugby league in Australia, Football and few other sports in the UK , Rugby Union in NZ and probably Football, Golf and Rugby Union in SA -the sports mentioned probably being more popular than Cricket in the respective countries) , will endanger itself by dividing and fragmenting its following for the shorter version of the game between these two and lose its market share to these other sports by promoting 2 shorter versions of the game.

Anyway here is a poll canvassing everyones opinions on which of the 2 shorter versions of the game they prefer .
 
Last edited:

andyc

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I went this one- ODIs better than 20/20, but like 20/20 to continue

They should do away with 20/20 internationals, though.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Not even close. 50 over ODIs by a mile.

edit: I voted for the fourth option, but I don't actually object to 20/20 being played, per se. I simply object to it being given international status and a world cup and so on.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Obviously I voted for 20/20 as ODIs are irrelevant to me and I think they are pointless cricket. I think we are at the dawn of 20/20 cricket and it will continue to grow as people become more accepting. It is a great and challenging form of the game that requires far more than slogging.

JASON said:
There have been several members on this forum who have expressed opinions that 20/20 is in their opinion better than ODI cricket . In fact some have even suggested 20/20 will replace ODI cricket !!
Well its also the only form of the game you get more than 1 man and hid dog watching in SA
 
Last edited:

Burpey

Cricketer Of The Year
ODIs better than 20/20, but like 20/20 to continue.

I enjoy any form of cricket to be honest, but I think ODIs are superior to Twenty20. Also, I think Twenty20 should be confined to the domestic scene with perhaps one Twenty20 International each tour as Australia have done recently.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
It possibly may only be the relative freshness of the format, but I far prefer 20/20s just now. ODIs are just so formulaic; the overs between 15-40 are a total snoozefest & contribute little in the way of entertainment, save some commentator or other saying "it's now XX overs since the last boundary, but they are keeping wickets in hand" like some mantra.

20/20 means batters & bowlers both have to be "on" from ball one & does away with the unnecessary filler overs that blight one-dayers.
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Goughy said:
Well its also the only form of the game you get more than 1 man and hid dog watching in SA
At least the one man and his dog have an ounce of cricketing knowledge to throw around..

ODI's by a mile, not even close and I wouldn't be concerned if suddenly Twenty20 ceased to exist..
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Langeveldt said:
At least the one man and his dog have an ounce of cricketing knowledge to throw around.

ODI's by a mile, not even close and I wouldn't be concerned if suddenly Twenty20 ceased to exist..
You really think the ODI crowd do? You are more generous than I am.

The way I see ot, if you want real cricket watch tests, if you want fast paced enjoyment, braai, bikinis and beer then 20/20 is your game.

ODIs have are neither particularly 'real' cricket or entertaining and therefore fails in both regards.

Also where would football be financially if only the most knowledgable went to the games and watched on TV. 20/20 is important in introducing more people and getting more watching on TV and in the grounds and increasing TV revenue.

As long as Test cricket is sacred then Im all for it.

I find ODIs very manufactured with all sorts of rules being introduced and the game being tinkered with because fundamentally the concept is flawed. 20/20 cricket does not hide what it is. ODIs try and masquerade (sp?) as something they are not.
 
Last edited:

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Goughy said:
I find ODIs very manufactured with all sorts of rules being introduced and the game being tinkered with because fundamentally the concept is flawed.
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.
 

James90

Cricketer Of The Year
Twenty20 is great in moderation. I see ODI's as a proper contest so voted for the third option.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
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.
It not manufactured at all. It is full pelt from the start and is genius in its simplicity.

Its about going for it from the start and showing what you have got.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
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.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Samuel_Vimes said:
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.
For me it isn't about ODIs being good. ODIs are good for the same reasons test cricket is good, I just don't enjoy it quite as much. I'd watch a test over a one dayer any time, but I think that ODI cricket has its place, and I do quite enjoy watching it.

20/20 cricket for me is like a concentrated version of all the things I don't like about ODIs. The lack of an even contest between bat and ball, the defensive fields and captaincy, the lack of a real test of concentration for the batsmen and so on. These are problems in ODI cricket, but they are far, far worse in 20/20 cricket, to the point where I don't enjoy watching the game to any significant degree.

I still try and watch 20/20 games because I love cricket, but in the last international 20/20 Australia played I just turned it off because it bored me senseless. I know some people who aren't really big cricket fans who enjoy the format, so it certainly serves its purpose, but the idea of it replacing ODIs is absolutely abhorrent, to the same degree as the idea of ODIs replacing tests.
 
Last edited:

Tomm NCCC

International 12th Man
20/20 Is a fantastic competition, and to those who dismiss it as simple slogging, thats fine, your entitled to your opinion. It attracts more fans, gets young people interested, and has almost reinvented the way people look at cricket in the UK. ODI's are great, most of the time, and would love to keep on seeing them being played, but from my point of view, 20/20 is the best thing to happen to cricket for a while.
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Twenty/20. Not that I'm advocating it, but 50 over games are the most boring things to watch ...just argh! I prefer yawnion to 50 over games. I prefer socey to 50 over games! They just send me to sleep.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I find one-dayers dull in the extreme, despite powerplays and all that nonsense, you still get a lot of average bowlers trying to contain, and average batters milking singles, and trying to keep wickets in hand for the end.

Its every bit as unrecognizable from Test cricketer as 20/20, but at least 20/20 is over nice and quickly, and can be thrilling.

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

Oddly a lot of young spinners seem to be doing well, which can only be good.
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
grecian said:
People like Fairbrother, Hick, Bevan, Harris, Agarkar, Symonds, Ealham, O'Donnel all have flourished in ODIs, whilst clearly not being test standard
grecian to come under fire from the vast majority of CW in 5...4...3...
 

Top