D
Deleted member 11215
Guest
I hate ODIs, theres never good games as theres nothing in it for the bowler. Batsmen get themselves out more than the bowlers get them in ODIs.
The future for ODI's???
- Thread starter Kev
- Start date
Will_NA
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
The only good thing about ODIs is that there is a result in one day. 20/20s are just slog-fests. No real skill required. Plus, t gets really boring when a team keeps trying to score and loses their wickets ending up on 112/7 with 2 overs left. Where's the entertainment in seeing 9/10/11 slog singles?
D
Deleted member 11215
Guest
ODIs bore the crap out of me, they just arent good on the eye. In tests a team knows what they're chasing when batting last in a session but have the option to stay in and block out and draw the game, however in ODIs i find it painful watching teams try to push it on when they clearly cant. Moments like this make me shout at the tv and kinda get angry with the players, however in test cricket i feel much more relaxed and like there is more skill. People like Pietersen have shown that Tests dont need to be batted slowly either so they can be fast moving and exciting at times 
.
.Jaztheman
Chairman of Selectors
I prefer Tests aswell Will but ODI's don't bore me but I do laugh in the face of Twenty20's.
Simbazz
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2005
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Im a lover of Test cricket always have been, always will, but i enjoy the ODI's just the same, in a total differnt way.
50ov competition is becoming a bit boring, but restriction on overs, such as time restrictions need to be introduced to make it better and more free flowing, someone said power players were "americanised," get real, its the ICC trying to be differnt, doesnt work, cricket is, and always has been traditional, keep it that way!
20/20's are utterly useless but at the same fantastic to watch with a full crowd!
So my feelings, Test cricket all the way with series ending with a 20/20 and 3- 5 ODI, never more! And never have a ODI series before the test, its stupid! The best should be first followed by the signing off session bit of ODI!!
50ov competition is becoming a bit boring, but restriction on overs, such as time restrictions need to be introduced to make it better and more free flowing, someone said power players were "americanised," get real, its the ICC trying to be differnt, doesnt work, cricket is, and always has been traditional, keep it that way!
20/20's are utterly useless but at the same fantastic to watch with a full crowd!
So my feelings, Test cricket all the way with series ending with a 20/20 and 3- 5 ODI, never more! And never have a ODI series before the test, its stupid! The best should be first followed by the signing off session bit of ODI!!
Leicester Fox
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
If it wasn't for the world cup to me they would be meaningless. Wouldn't it be soo much better to have a test match world cup!
Simbazz
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2005
- Online Cricket Games Owned
D
Deleted member 11215
Guest
a test match WC would be awesome start like 4 tests every 7 days . 2 days rests inbetween it would be immense!
. 2 days rests inbetween it would be immense!
evertonfan
Chairman of Selectors
ODI's are pointless in terms of outcome but they are always good to watch. If anything you need more skill in ODI's than Tests because everything happens so quickly. You have to attack from the off rather than bed yourself in as you would in a Test.
Leicester Fox
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Or we could do it in a much more simple format. It's not exactly the toughest problem to think your way around...Yeah, it would only take a good 6 months:
evertonfan
Chairman of Selectors
Isn't one of the Aussie domestic knockout cups played in 4-day format? Surely we could just use that principal?
Simbazz
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2005
- Online Cricket Games Owned
You could but with rules and regulations concerning players and how long rest they have to have its getting harder and harder, PLUS they're moaning about being overworked now, i mean, they choose to play the sport for a living, i wouldnt moan for playing it too much, but then again, doing it every day for 15 years might get a bit tiring! Differn't topic, anyways, test world cup, never going to happen, ill bet my Gran, mom, dog, money, anything else you want to bet me on, ill add it in
Im not going to lose!!Almost_Austwick
International Captain
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2005
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I'll start this off by stating that my first love is test cricket, always has been and always will. After that I enjoy 20/20 because its quick, accessible and generally allows me to sell the game to some of my non cricket loving friends.
This leaves me with the 50 over game and I don't really know where I stand with it. If it's on I'll watch it but more often than not I just don't bother and I really haven't worked out why. Maybe it's down to overkill or is it down to other factors.
However more than likely its due to a combination of both.
Firstly, do really need a 7 games series which will normally be at the expense of a test match. I don't think so and personally I'd limit series to 3 games per tour. At least this would allow players and the public to have a break every now and then as well as hopefully rediscovering their love of the format.
Secondly, most contests seem to favour the batsmen. Scores of 300 plus are great but not all the time. Often the lower scoring games have a higher degree of drama and entertainment and I'm sure that most of us love watching a battle between batsman and bowler.
What can be done? I'm not really sure to be honest but we need to even out the contests. Maybe have 2 balls per innings as well tweaking the fielding restrictions (I know the ICC have addressed this in the last 7 days).
Bigger grounds would be a step forward as this would bring spinners into the game more - lets have the batting team having to weigh up the worth of a risky big hit rather than have them safe in the knowledge that that odds are in their favour. This would also allow for more space for ball placement and more opportunity's for 1's and 2's.
If they want to go gimmicky then how about breaking up the innings into 25 over segments. Would make things interesting and add spice to the tactics. The 'sub' was a fair idea but badly implemented. Teams should have been named before the toss, not after.
Two balls per innings but each one used from one end only - would keep the balls newer for longer and negate the 'green' issue. Would also mean that the captain would have to be on the ball and make use of any difference between the balls (one swinging more etc).
The main thing is to keep it interesting for the whole 50 overs that's what the general public want, which is way 20/20 works. I don't want to lose 50 over games if possible but at the minute I wouldn't overly miss them.
This leaves me with the 50 over game and I don't really know where I stand with it. If it's on I'll watch it but more often than not I just don't bother and I really haven't worked out why. Maybe it's down to overkill or is it down to other factors.
However more than likely its due to a combination of both.
Firstly, do really need a 7 games series which will normally be at the expense of a test match. I don't think so and personally I'd limit series to 3 games per tour. At least this would allow players and the public to have a break every now and then as well as hopefully rediscovering their love of the format.
Secondly, most contests seem to favour the batsmen. Scores of 300 plus are great but not all the time. Often the lower scoring games have a higher degree of drama and entertainment and I'm sure that most of us love watching a battle between batsman and bowler.
What can be done? I'm not really sure to be honest but we need to even out the contests. Maybe have 2 balls per innings as well tweaking the fielding restrictions (I know the ICC have addressed this in the last 7 days).
Bigger grounds would be a step forward as this would bring spinners into the game more - lets have the batting team having to weigh up the worth of a risky big hit rather than have them safe in the knowledge that that odds are in their favour. This would also allow for more space for ball placement and more opportunity's for 1's and 2's.
If they want to go gimmicky then how about breaking up the innings into 25 over segments. Would make things interesting and add spice to the tactics. The 'sub' was a fair idea but badly implemented. Teams should have been named before the toss, not after.
Two balls per innings but each one used from one end only - would keep the balls newer for longer and negate the 'green' issue. Would also mean that the captain would have to be on the ball and make use of any difference between the balls (one swinging more etc).
The main thing is to keep it interesting for the whole 50 overs that's what the general public want, which is way 20/20 works. I don't want to lose 50 over games if possible but at the minute I wouldn't overly miss them.
Last edited:
Animator!
School Cricketer
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Online Cricket Games Owned
In England, I want to see the traditional C&G trophy back. Knockout games with Minor Counties would give the game so much more meaning that just 9 games against other teams in your area. Also, I'd like to see Pro-40 turned into Pro-50. Because of the extra time allowed in the schedule by the other OD competition being a knock-out one, then the players would have plenty of free time.
Twenty20 does add quite a bit of entertainment, however the whole endurance factor of playing for a long time in cricket is completely lost. I can understand that conservative watchers of cricket - those that endulge in the ways its 'always been' - are annoyed of twenty20's, however I think they provide a lot of entertainment. Yes, they don't provide it in the same manner that ODI's or Tests do, but that's why its another form of the game. It's fast paced and often very close. I personally think it's a good idea for a knockout tournament once a few years or something with it. I'd like to see all three forms of the game survive. IMO, ODI's are losing their spice because too many games are being played and too many runs are being scored. Bowlers need more rules that assist them. Also, the idea of the powerplays being mandatory between 20-35 overs is a damn good one. Adding a "bowl out" rule in case of a tie would also be interesting. Also, I dont know about you guys, but I find the D/L Method really annoying. They should try to make ODIs always a triseries. That would help as well.
Last edited:
