Swann - scrap ODIs

[puddleduck]

Boycott would cry if he read someone describe batting a maximum of 50 overs as a long time.

 

[jacobfelix]

Scrap Swann himself from ODI's

 

[VC the slogger]

If Graeme Swann doesn't like playing ODIs he should retire from ODIs like his test captain Andrew Strauss.He shouldn't say such silly things like scrap ODIs.

 

[Owzat]

Pfft, even an average TEST side fails to bat out 100 overs...

Doesn't matter if they don't bat out their 100 overs, the point is both sides get the same allocation of (maximum) overs, as do the bowlers (20 each tops) so it is as even as you'll get. England played in West Indies back in 93/94 I think it was and England crawled to the same total as Lara 375 in 26.3 more overs.

HowSTAT! Match Scorecard

Now while that was a mammoth score whether five or 10 down, just imagine the permutations if both sides did bat the full 100 overs, or even if they didn't how the pace of innings could easily impact the result. A lot more interesting than one side making a massive score and the other making less because conditions change, and indeed the main gain over Tests would be A POSITIVE RESULT if you allow 3-4 days for weather intervention.

And how much better will it be if the big guns can't rely on their Muralis or McGraths and Warnes, but have to bowl 60-80 overs of other bowlers. It will be a test not only of batting depth but of bowling depth too. Would England be as dominant if they had to find a fifth bowler? Might not come to it if they can push through the wickets with the front four, but TACTICS will come into it way more than Tests.

I've taken your point with a severely dangerous lot of pinches of salt.

 

[ferg512]

The problem is that there are far too many ODIs which makes them boring and meaningless. I don't really see the need for 5 match series let alone 7, 3 ODIs is more than enough.

 

[barmyarmy]

Doesn't matter if they don't bat out their 100 overs, the point is both sides get the same allocation of (maximum) overs, as do the bowlers (20 each tops) so it is as even as you'll get. England played in West Indies back in 93/94 I think it was and England crawled to the same total as Lara 375 in 26.3 more overs.

HowSTAT! Match Scorecard

Now while that was a mammoth score whether five or 10 down, just imagine the permutations if both sides did bat the full 100 overs, or even if they didn't how the pace of innings could easily impact the result. A lot more interesting than one side making a massive score and the other making less because conditions change, and indeed the main gain over Tests would be A POSITIVE RESULT if you allow 3-4 days for weather intervention.

And how much better will it be if the big guns can't rely on their Muralis or McGraths and Warnes, but have to bowl 60-80 overs of other bowlers. It will be a test not only of batting depth but of bowling depth too. Would England be as dominant if they had to find a fifth bowler? Might not come to it if they can push through the wickets with the front four, but TACTICS will come into it way more than Tests.

I've taken your point with a severely dangerous lot of pinches of salt.

I'd support this if each side was given two innings.

 

[swacker]

Swann is his own man, I don't actually agree with him but I do think that 3 ODI's is sufficient on any tour. The balance has to become more biased to Test Cricket somehow, a good one-day over game is a nice day out but it needs to be kept fresh which it is not.

 

[cricketmad09]

The ODI's are still very good to watch. It allows the batsman to really play proper cricket, concentrate and construct an innings. But you get a result within a day.

Sour grapes because England are no good.

 

[teamindia]

Graeme Swann has called for ODI cricket to be scrapped. Whilst his view is probably coloured by the 5-0 drubbing England just experienced in India he has a very good point. Test cricket and T20 is quite enough to be going on with. 50 over games are more often than not dull, predictable and over by the change in innings.
Of course it won't happen as long as the BCCI hold sway but I'd be interested to know if it's just English cricket fans who agree with Swann or whether he'd get support in other countries too.

Source.

What the hell has BCCI go to do with this? Cheap shot for more thread views

Swann is just being a cry baby here. There are interesting ODI matches, boring test matches and boring T20. It just depends on whether you see a glass is half full or half empty. I say cut down the stupid 5 day test matches to 3 or 4 days. Test matches have some of the most stupid stupid stupid rules in cricket. Who needs a tea break and lunch break when rain washes out the whole morning days play.....

----------

Oh and it's irrelevant whether England are any good in ODIs or not, we reached the final three times out of the first five and

Considering the fact that most nations sucked before 1990 and only a few elite nations (Eng, Aus and WI) were playing lot of cricket, I am not sure how much importance you can give to 1979. 1987 probably we can recognize their effort. They did not have any business being in the final of 1992 world cup.

Flower has already stated a desire to win it.

I state my desire to be the King of England

We sucked at Test cricket for a fair while, but didn't call for that to be scrapped.

There were no T20 then and not so much media presence. Now every fool wants to give expert comment on TV....

 

[barmyarmy]

What the hell has BCCI go to do with this? Cheap shot for more thread views

You're entitled to your opinion but I think you're being pretty naive. The BCCI wields more power than any other national board in the ICC due to the massive television deals. If you're telling me that the fact the iCC test championship was postponed and the DRS still isn't being universally used are nothing to do with the BCCI's agenda then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[Owzat]

Considering the fact that most nations sucked before 1990 and only a few elite nations (Eng, Aus and WI) were playing lot of cricket, I am not sure how much importance you can give to 1979. 1987 probably we can recognize their effort. They did not have any business being in the final of 1992 world cup.

They had plenty of business being in the 1992 final, one of the best sides there. If anyone shouldn't have been in the final it was 73 all out Pakistan who only got into the semis because rain stopped England finishing the job.

As for "most nations sucked before 1990", what utter utter utter utter utter tosh. That's the cricket equivalent of football starting in 1992

I state my desire to be the King of England

Court jester is looking a home banker................

There were no T20 then and not so much media presence. Now every fool wants to give expert comment on TV....

The media hasn't changed that much, only the nipls that think the ipl changed the world would think so. You clearly haven't followed the media slating England in the 80s and 90s for humbling defeats to West Indies, in India, out for 46 in West Indies etc.

Bloody great big pinches needed for the salt with your comments.

 

[barmyarmy]

I'd also like to apologise for resorting to clich?...

 

[pcfan123]

Don't be, it helps explain things to the not so bright such as myself.

Maybe just post pictures next time, or speak in metaphors only.

 

[barmyarmy]

If you're going to change horses at half time then make sure you've got your ducks early doors. That's just the way the coin crumbles.

 

[teamindia]

You're entitled to your opinion but I think you're being pretty naive. The BCCI wields more power than any other national board in the ICC due to the massive television deals. If you're telling me that the fact the iCC test championship was postponed and the DRS still isn't being universally used are nothing to do with the BCCI's agenda then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

I am not sure why DRS is being discussed here. While BCCI did have a huge say in that I doubt it would have been used in games featuring countries like ZIB who have no money.

Reg test championship BCCI had very little motive.BCCI does not depend on ICC funding unlike most other boards. If anything it would have been an ideal marketing opportunity give Sachin and Dravid may be retiring at the end of the championship.