ECB forces One-Day cricket rethink

 
Brett McKay Columnist

By , 1 Sep 2009 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert

Tagged:
 , , , ,

18 Have your say

Related coverage



South African batsman HM Amla makes runs as Australian bowler James Hopes follows his misfielded ball during the 4th One Day International cricket match between Australia and South Africa at the Adelaide Oval, Adelaide, Monday, Jan. 26, 2009. AAP Image/Dave Hunt

South African batsman HM Amla makes runs as Australian bowler James Hopes follows his misfielded ball during the 4th One Day International cricket match between Australia and South Africa at the Adelaide Oval, Adelaide, Monday, Jan. 26, 2009. AAP Image/Dave Hunt

The irony wasn’t lost on me. Less than a week after writing about some immediate points for resolution in the world of Test Cricket, the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) made an announcement that will undoubtedly have a major impact on the future of … one-day cricket.

Did I say Test cricket last week? Surely I meant one-dayers.

Last Thursday, the ECB announced that one-day cricket played over 50 overs per side would be dumped from their domestic schedule for the 2010 English summer.

Instead, one-day cricket between the counties will only be played over 40 overs per side, and played mainly on Sundays.

40-over cricket in England is not a new thing; the old Sunday League was rebadged as the “Pro40 League” around ten years ago. This move by the ECB is essentially just a continuation of a competition that has been played in some shape or form for 40 years or so.

The Counties voted overwhelmingly in favour of scrapping 50-over cricket, with the common agreement being that 40-over cricket on Sundays was a lot easier to sell to the public than the traditional limited overs format.

In making the announcement, the ECB claimed that the move to cut 20 overs from the playing day would have little or no effect on players still exposed to the 50-over format at International level, pointing to the fact that South Africa have been playing their one-day cricket over 45 overs domestically with little adverse effect on their national team.

As with South Africa’s competition, the Pro40 League still utilises the same field restrictions and batting/bowling powerplays that are in play in One-Day International cricket.

England’s international players might not be so convinced, however. Stand-in captain Paul Collingwood was quoted late last week saying, “You want county cricket to mirror international cricket. If you’re not playing the 50-over form domestically, it’s a bit of a hindrance,” before quickly falling back into line with “forty-over cricket is what the public want in England, so it’s been pushed in that direction.”

As an interesting side-note, South Africa is actually debating whether to dump their domestic 45-over format completely. Whether they would also go to 40 overs, or just rely on Twenty20 cricket for their one-day fix is not known.

Cricket Australia CEO James Sutherland has also mentioned 40-over formats in recent times, as an option when discussing what might be required to overhaul one-day cricket.

Once the shock and then logic of the ECB’s decision sank in over the weekend, it became apparent to me that this is a move that could either fail dismally, or change the limited overs game as we know it.

For what it’s worth, I think we’re about to see a revolution of one-day cricket globally, and there probably hasn’t been as big an impact since a forward-thinking Kerry Packer introduced World Series Cricket, back when I were a lad.

Despite the fact the 2011 and 2015 Cricket World Cups have been locked in, it’s only going to take a few more countries to follow the ECB’s move domestically for the game’s movers and shakers to have a good hard look at trimming 10 overs per side off the ODI game as well.

And it makes a bit of sense. Aside from the fact from that there’s still way too much of it (and the reaction to last week’s column showed that scheduling is a topic worthy of its own discussion), ODI cricket is in massive danger of being taken over by Twenty20 as the game of choice for not just fans, but also sponsors and broadcasters.

The introduction of fielding restrictions and powerplays has gone some way to reinvigorating the 50-over game, but each innings still faces the inevitable steady stream of action during the middle overs. Cutting ten of these glacially-slow-moving overs from each innings can only be a positive for the game itself.

Broadcasters would certainly love the fact they could start a day/night game mid to late afternoon, rather than just after lunch.

Even taking it further, 80 overs in the day is a fairly standard model for grade cricket too, and so playing one-day games in the same timeframe is bound to appeal to those of us not playing in front of packed stadiums each weekend.

The ECB have jumped on the front foot too, with suggestions they will propose the International Cricket Council conduct a review into the future of ODI cricket, with the 40-over format undoubtedly to be high on the list of suggested options.

As with my three Test cricket topics for resolution last week, this move to 40 overs seems to me like a no-brainer. It’s just hard to see any major objection being raised, and when that’s the case, it should just be introduced at the earliest possible opportunity.

If it can’t be before the 2011 World Cup, then make it the day after and then all nations will be in the same boat by the time the 2015 tournament rolls around. It’s just too good and too obvious an idea to ignore.

And so now, with that sorted, perhaps the powers that be can start looking at international scheduling, finally.

Follow Brett McKay on Twitter: @BMcSport
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

Get a daily cricket email

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it.

We value privacy. More.