Prepared To Sacrifice?

[four_or_six]

I've been thinking about this, and I still don't think scrap them. But I reckon you could cut them down quite a lot, and achieve the de-cluttering that people are looking for. If you take current/future tours for example:


Eng-Aus - currently 2xT20, 7xODI - becomes 3xT20, 3xODI
SrL-NZ-Ind - 2xT20, 4xODI - looks weird, not sure what India are doing there?
Champions Trophy - I'm going to be controversial here, but I think keep in its current format (15matches, 2 centres)
Ind-Aus - currently 7xODI - could scrap this series, they happen every year I think? Or change to 1xT20, 3xODI
Ind-SrL - 5xODI - becomes 3xODI
Park-NZ - 5xODI - becomes 3xODI
Ban-Ind-SrL - 4xODI - keep
Ban-Zim - 5xODI - keep, or replace with 3xODI and a FC match
SA-Eng - 2xT20, 5xODI - becomes 3xT20, 3xODI
NZ-Ban - 3xODI - keep
Aus-Pak - 1xT20, 5xODI - becomes 3xT20, 3xODI
Aus - WI - 2xT20, 5xODI - becomes 3xT20, 3xODI
Pak-Eng - 5xODI - becomes 3xODI
NZ-Aus - 5xODI - becomes 3xODI
Ind-SA - 5xODI becomes 3xODI
WI-Zim - 3xODI - keep

And that seems to take us up to the world T20 next April. That's a cut of ~26 ODIs and and increase of 6T20s. It's not hugely radical, and I don't think the solution to this will be because of how much money will be lost... but I think it's a fairly sensible approach to freeing things up a bit whilst maintaining the cricket that's there.

NB - some of this comes from the FTP rather than the fixture list, which doesn't include any of the T20s to be played, and also isn't necessarily accurate. But it's all I can see to work with.

 

[Matt79]

In cutting the number of ODIs, you'd presumably increase the interest factor in terms of people wanting to watch every match, and hence not take as big a financial hit as would initially appear to be the case. You could also strip out the less popular times first, so retain the weekend matches, but bin the midweek matches, if you are to bin matches at all.

 

[Uppercut]

In cutting the number of ODIs, you'd presumably increase the interest factor in terms of people wanting to watch every match, and hence not take as big a financial hit as would initially appear to be the case. You could also strip out the less popular times first, so retain the weekend matches, but bin the midweek matches, if you are to bin matches at all.

Hmm. It's an interesting point, but an ODI series has a tendency to get incredibly bogged down and uninteresting if there's only one or two matches a week.

 

[Matt79]

Hmm. It's an interesting point, but an ODI series has a tendency to get incredibly bogged down and uninteresting if there's only one or two matches a week.

IF its a five or seven match series, or 15 match trilateral. If it's a three match series, the anticipation through the week would be huge.

Made an two-team LO series three weeks long. Play either a double header each weekend (Friday Day-Night and Sunday) - T20 the first weekend, a T20 the second Friday and an ODI the second Sunday, and two ODIs the next week. That's six games of cricket in three weeks, all on at audience friendly times. That's enough IMO. In Australia for instance, you could squeeze two such series easily in a summer - the tests run Nov-first week of Jan, then the first LO series Jan, the second in Feb.

Would give internationals more of a chance to turn out for their domestic units mid-week, especially for List A games, and the tourists could play one mid-week LO game against domestic teams each week as a way to tune up between matches and help the domestic scene make money - assuming it would be reciprocated later on.

 

[subshakerz]

So by the same logic, how can having more tests matches be good for test cricket ?

There's a different diagnosis for the problem of test cricket. The lack of interest in test cricket has a lot to do with marketing, scheduling, and conditions rather than the number of games itself.

For example, in the 2004 Pakistan-India series, there was tremendous buzz before the series. Yet, the ODIs were scheduled before the tests, and by the time the test series rolled around, nobody was as psyched. IMO, ODIs or 20/20s should never be scheduled before a test series, people will attend the former regardless.

Dull, dead wickets of late have killed interest in tests, especially in the subcontinent. You can't expect a crowd to come to the ground if you know it will be a draw on Day 1.

In Pakistan, the quality of the game has suffered resulting in poor turn-outs. There are fewer big name draws to get people to watch compared to the 90s. Say what you want about Shoaib and Afridi, they did draw in the crowds in tests. Sri Lanka may have this problem when Murali retires, who knows.

When it comes to India and Pakistan, there should be more and less. That is, they should follow the model of the two most successful trophies, the Border-Gavaskar trophy and the Ashes, and play every 2 years as opposed to annual contests. But these series can be expanded to four or five tests, given than Pakistan and Sri Lanka never play longer test series. Pakistan and India played in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, with each series becoming progressively duller.

 

[Xuhaib]

There's a different diagnosis for the problem of test cricket. The lack of interest in test cricket has a lot to do with marketing, scheduling, and conditions rather than the number of games itself.

For example, in the 2004 Pakistan-India series, there was tremendous buzz before the series. Yet, the ODIs were scheduled before the tests, and by the time the test series rolled around, nobody was as psyched. IMO, ODIs or 20/20s should never be scheduled before a test series, people will attend the former regardless.

Dull, dead wickets of late have killed interest in tests, especially in the subcontinent. You can't expect a crowd to come to the ground if you know it will be a draw on Day 1.

In Pakistan, the quality of the game has suffered resulting in poor turn-outs. There are fewer big name draws to get people to watch compared to the 90s. Say what you want about Shoaib and Afridi, they did draw in the crowds in tests. Sri Lanka may have this problem when Murali retires, who knows.

When it comes to India and Pakistan, there should be more and less. That is, they should follow the model of the two most successful trophies, the Border-Gavaskar trophy and the Ashes, and play every 2 years as opposed to annual contests. But these series can be expanded to four or five tests, given than Pakistan and Sri Lanka never play longer test series. Pakistan and India played in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, with each series becoming progressively duller.

yet the test crowds have been higher in 00's then in 90's.

 

[Jamee999]

Tbh, I can't remember the last time I watched a full ODI.