Test Match or One Day Cricket

[Craig]

The thing I can never work out is that Klusener who was in the form of his life then, didnt the ball through the leg side of hit somewhere else.

I'm sure that plays in his mind, as ihad South Africa had won, they probably would have still bneaten Pakistan in the final.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Yeah the '99 WC was a good 'un. Talk about backs to the wall.. What was it? 7 wins in a row to take the cup (I say that off hand)? Then when you think about some of the incredibly close calls they had...
South Africa look like they're finding new, innovative ways to choke. I look forward to the 2007 WC on that note

But that finish; THAT finish! They shouldn't have been in the final. I think I almost made a mess in my pants when Paul Reiffel not only managed to drop a catch at long off, but give away 6 runs.

The first match of this years WC was pretty good too, between West Indies and South Africa. I remember the commentators saying (with South Africa a few wickets down and plenty to get) "If anyone can do it it's this man" about Lance Klusener. Wanting SA to be as disadvantaged as possible in getting the cup, I was of course barracking for WI. So I had been sitting watching SA seemingly fade away and lose the match until Klusener came out and started thumping the game away from the Windies. Then he got out and WI got back on top. Off the last ball Makhaya Ntini got plenty on it (with 3 to win) away to deep point and got caught. Good, close finish to a game that really climaxed at the right time.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Steve Waughs century in the 5th Ashes Test at the SCG in January was a Test highlight.

A ODI highlight would have to be Michael Bevans last ball four in January 1996 at the SCG to win against the West Indies.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

There have been plenty great Test Match and ODI moments, too many to list.

I was just thinking about how ODI's have only been around for a little over 30 years. I reckon this is this one of the reasons people dislike ODI's. What would happen if ODI's started when Tests did, I bet peoples opinions would be different if that were the case.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

ODI's have helped to attract more people to follow cricket. The introduction of day/night games & coloured clothing have all revolved around ODI's. ODI's are extreemely poplular all around the cricketing world with alot of ODI matches sold out.

 

[abe]

ODI's certainly attracted me to cricket.

Spending the first 12 years of my life in a country where playing sport was a luxury (the philippines), it astounded me to find out about a game that took up to five whole days to finish. I had a hard time imagining playing it, let alone just sitting down and watching it.

The limited overs games eased me in to it though, and now I'm up in the wee hours of the morning clicking refresh on my browser and swearing at cricinfo for being too slow

As for ODIs vs Test, personally I prefer watching ODIs but find far more enjoyment in following tests.

 

[NikhilN]

I would pick One Day Cricket because even though I love cricket test matches get kind of boring after an hour or 2 because they play too many Def. shots

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

A couple of people have said that a person who is good in ODI cricket but not in Test cricket is not really that good a player. The argument for this is that Test cricket is the true test of a player. However, what about those who are good in Tests but not in ODI cricket? Does that make them worse than others? Case in point - Michael Vaughan.

IMO ODI cricket is a completely different approach and game to Tests and therefore, a Michael Bevan should not be judged as a player due to his Test failure, but rather due to his ODI success. I think Bevan has worked hard and made a career for himself in ODI cricket and full credit to him for that.

 

[Don Ricardo]

"I would pick One Day Cricket because even though I love cricket test matches get kind of boring after an hour or 2 because they play too many Def. shots"

no offence, but that is a pretty naive view
In odis the bowling and feilding is very defensive compared to tests
have you ever watched australia bat in tests?

 

[Gaijin-san]

Careful, mate, he's saying which one HE prefers, not which one you prefer.
I love watching Australia's field settings in tests, especially when they have everyone in the slip cordon lol

 

[Token]

I. Love. Cricket.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

I love watching Australia's field settings in tests, especially when they have everyone in the slip cordon lol

Yeah its an awesome sight, especially if you follow Australia

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Test Match cricket will never be wiped out.
Tests are not boring to me. Though like I've said before, if I was forced to choose, I would choose ODI's. Though just like Token said, I love cricket, not just one form, but both forms of the game.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Nothing beats the excitement of waking up during summer holidays and knowing the whole day is planned already. I regularly watch all 5 days of play on TV when I can, Test Cricket is great to follow. But I think that a good close ODI with a tight finish is all the excitement you need.
The best ODIs to watch are wins that come from being absolutely dead in the water.

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_...BS/SCORECARDS/AUS_NZ_VBS_ODI10_29JAN2002.html

This one had a good close finish:

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_...SCORECARDS/AUS_ZIM_CUODS_ODI12_04FEB2001.html

They're both pretty famous games. I seem to remember Australia tied a VB/CUB match a couple of years ago, but can't find the scorecard. That was a great game though from what I remember. At the end I remember feeling ripped that there was no winner. All that loss of nail and falling off chairs for bugger all.

 

[luckyeddie]

Yeah its an awesome sight, especially if you follow Australia

I remember that approach during the Centenary test when Randall was batting - as you say, an awesome sight. Almost the whole fielding side stretched out over 30 yards - and one by one they were taken away. It was like watching 'The disappearing card trick'.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

I seem to remember Australia tied a VB/CUB match a couple of years ago, but can't find the scorecard. That was a great game though from what I remember. At the end I remember feeling ripped that there was no winner. All that loss of nail and falling off chairs for bugger all.

I was looking around in Cricinfo and I found stats to all ODI tied matches.

Australia's most recent tie (in Australia) was in the Super Challenge ODI Cricket Series (2nd game) against South Africa (18th August 2000).

RSA: 8/226 (50)
AUS: 9/226 (50)

Here is a web link to the list of all ODI tied matches

http://statserver.cricket.org/db/STATS/ODIS/RESULTS/ODI_MARGINS_TIED.html

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

The best ODIs to watch are wins that come from being absolutely dead in the water.

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_...BS/SCORECARDS/AUS_NZ_VBS_ODI10_29JAN2002.html

This one had a good close finish:

http://www-aus.cricket.org/link_to_...SCORECARDS/AUS_ZIM_CUODS_ODI12_04FEB2001.html

They're both pretty famous games.

I remember those games well.

The first one was best remembered for once again Michael Bevans briliance with the bat.

In the second game, I remember seeing the shattered looks of the Zimbabwe team at the end of the game after getting so close to an upset.

 

[Richard]

A couple of people have said that a person who is good in ODI cricket but not in Test cricket is not really that good a player. The argument for this is that Test cricket is the true test of a player. However, what about those who are good in Tests but not in ODI cricket? Does that make them worse than others? Case in point - Michael Vaughan.

IMO ODI cricket is a completely different approach and game to Tests and therefore, a Michael Bevan should not be judged as a player due to his Test failure, but rather due to his ODI success. I think Bevan has worked hard and made a career for himself in ODI cricket and full credit to him for that.

For me one-day and FC cricket are different - neither is "better" or "more" skillful. They sometimes laud different skills (and some skills are lauded by both) but the better idea will always be a matter of preferance. Just like Union and League. I get so sick of the bickering between followers of the two codes; you get so much of it here and I suppose you get it in Aus and NZ too.
Yet again, the preferance for either code is simply a matter of attitudes and values; it cannot be fact.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Except with League. Which is better. :baddevil:

 

[Richard]

IYO.
Which, incidentally, has the larger following?
I genuinely don't know the answer; I prefer Union, but I don't know.
And I'm talking about this country, not Worldwide.