With the rules also – they should only allow batting powerplays to be used before the last 10 overs, because lets face it, the last 10 are smash and bash anyway. it seems counter productive to liven up the middle overs only to have the batting side use it in the last 5.

The system was the standard 2 out in the first 15 overs, but then from 16-30, only 3 were allowed out (which is the PP system now). It meant that teams that got off to a good start could keep accelerating, and if they lost early wickets they could consolidate, but still take advantage of the field being up and build an innings.

For the bowling teams, it meant they could keep attacking fields for longer, and could really strangle a team with the field if they got early wickets.

It also meant that by the 31st over, once 5 were allowed out, batting teams pretty much kept going; there was very little of the “working the ones” we now see between the bowling and batting PPs are taken.

Unfortunately, it was only ever used in Australia, but it ws a great system, produced great one-day cricket, and in turn, the local one-dayers got good crowds (think Sundays at North Sydney, or Adelaide, Hobart, real family situations).

A move to 40 overs would bring back a similar spectacle, if the field restrictions or PPs are developed accordingly. 2 out for the first 15, only one more for the next 15, and then the last ten overs. You’d see proper innings and partnership-building, rather than the desperation that T20 brings.

And that’s also why I maintain you need something in the gap between Tests and T20. It’s not about being a stick in the mud as you preconceived me above, rather it’s about wanting to see a decent contest between bat and ball in several different and required formats…

The 50 over game consists of pushing 1′s and 2′s for 40 overs and then a hitout in the last 10. Nobody really wants to see the first 40 overs……they actually go to see the last 10 don’t they?

Give the people want they want and just play T20.

The crowd at Adelaide today should be interesting.

They need Gayle to save the day.

There are a number of factors that I see as the downfall of the great one-dayer.

Here is a brief list.
# teams were full of genuine stars – the West Indies of the 80s was arguably the best side ever. You got the same guys in the one dayers as the tests so you got to know their stars. Nowadays, you get two different sides in tests and one dayers. It makes creating box office stars tougher. If you are not good enough to play tests, why would you be good enough in a one dayer?
# Back in the day you had a weak Australia who were the underdog. This attracted fans hoping our battlers would pull off an upset and turn over all conquering West Indies, England or Pakistan. We have dominated the game for 20 years now and noone has really challenged us. The Australian public is bored of winning. And we get lousy tourists here now. West Indies are a glorified club side, Pakistan is a rabble it is a poor standard in international cricket now by comparison to the greatest era which had the best depth.
# over supply. Too many one dayers with no point. All these matches they are playing are basically exhibition fixtures. They count for nothing. 20/20 counts for even less. If I was running the game I would make ever series count. Over a 4 year period make every top level international side play each other once in a series. That series counts overall to qualification of the World Cup. Only the top 6 sides play in the World Cup. At the moment the World Cup is a rubbish tournament. The old World Series Cup format was tougher.

The solution is to reduce the supply and only play quality fixtures with the best players, playing for big stakes.

It’s been said above that ODIs will still be around until at least 2015, so the one-day game it certainly not dead yet. We may well see format changes though, maybe even before then.

GtWs, you might be surprised to read this previous column of mine: http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/09/01/ecb-forces-one-day-cricket-rethink/ – where I flagged that I could see the lead of England and South Africa being followed, and the one-day game is shortened to 40 overs a side. Feel free to have a read, if you get around your current preconception of my thoughts.

There still has to be something between Twenty20 and Test cricket though. Already this summer we’ve had Mohammad Yousuf blaming his team’s inability to bat out a day on the amount of 50 and 20 over cricket played. Tests would barely last last three days without ODIs..

I can watch a lot, like the most of Australia i like to twatch a tonk through midwicket or cover drive than a pad/bat forward defensive shot.

But i agree with your sentiment.

It will end up with 20/20 financially supporting Tests (there were almost more players and officials than spectators at the India v SA test this weekend) with ODIs long gone.

How about we make a trophy from something that epitomized ODI’s and present it to the winners of the next T20 world cup to recognize the superior game?……(something along these lines was done before when Oztralia first beat England in a test).

Here’s my suggestions for mounting on a trophy, but I’m tipping The Roarers out there can think of a few as well:

1. The ball that T Chapell bowled underarm.
2. The 52nd can Boonie drank on the flight to England.
3. The bat and ball chest chain worn by DK Lillee (or a headband).
4. Big Merv’s mo (or a suitable stuffed ferret).
5. G Boycott’s stiff upper lip.

Competition prizes:
1st: Dinner with B McKay
2nd: 2 dinners with B McKay
3rd: Dinner with G Lawson

the administrators have not learned their lesson – next year we have 7 ODIs against england!!

having said that, i think odi’s still add value to cricket, but the quantity of the games played does not justify the popularity of the product.

the ideal set-up for the summer should be:

1. Big Bash with all Australian players
2. 3 test matches or a 5 test marquee series.
3. 3 ODI’s
4. 3 T20 internationals.

and

B. you can head down after work and still see both teams have a bat/bowl/field and you simply enter a match at the half way mark with a bit of first innings context – a bit like mid way thru day 3 in a test match!!!!

I also went to the ODI yesterday; it was slow, dull and boring; we left after 10 overs of the WI innings; I’ve never walked out on a game before, but I had better things to do…like ironing my shirts for work this week. I was in a state of shock as we walked out of the MCG but I couldn’t see any point to being there…as go_the_wannabe’s said (and perhaps all that needs to be said) RIP ODI’s.

p.s I love test cricket and have the patience for it, but ODI’s…nup.

Says it all really doesn’t it?

It will be an exceptionally slow death though – Australia & NZ hosting the World Cup of ODIs in 2015 means we have at least another 5 years of ODIs to come.

And I can hardly see the World Cup being the last time the game is ever played! That would be incredibly strange – why even play the World Cup?

You point out the two fixtures in three days, but I dont think they picked the cheaper option they picked the more exciting option.

Sunday was a cracking day in Melb, the last thing you’d do is spend it watching TV.

Redb

Incredibly, people who wouldn’t have been seen dead at an ODI twenty years ago are now keen to endorse it and to worry about it’s demise.

If the ACB and various state bodies do not move swiftly to cash in on the growing trend for Twenty20 – the decision will be taken away from them by others with a keen eye for the bottom line.

Purists should rightly concern themselves about the long term viablility of the 4 and 5 day formats of the game, and be less concerned about whether ODIs can stand up to Twenty20.

One dayers get the dud end of the draw as they are after the test matches and the tests get all the good dates. Perhaps the one dayers should be against different teams rather than the sides we have just seen play 3 tests.. A bit of mystery would really help, if this one day series was against say NZ then their would be a bit more interest I feel.

The Windies could come and play some one dayers the season the NZ test team tours and so on.

And a NIGHT game on a school night?!?!?! Why not run it as a day game…..ah…..simple, it’s run more as a TV event now and taking on that prime time Sunday night slot.

(actually, I turned off the cricket at 8.30 and watched the compelling ABC doco on Black Saturday).

Last night’s ODI was the second international cricket fixture at the MCG within three days. This alone is a fairly major factor, in that plenty of people would picked one over the other, and in doing so have taken the (presuambly) cheaper option. This shouldn’t be that big a surprise.

Add to this though it being on a Sunday night, and with the game broadcast live into Melbourne all day too, and it’s pretty easy to jump to the conclusion that ODI is a dying duck.

That all said, CA scheduled it this way, so kind of only have themselves to blame…

People are happy with a 3-4 hour commitment rather than a 10 hour enduro that is spread out for action anyway. Test cricket still offers something different, but fans expect the shorter game to be full of action – Twenty20 fits the bill.

You could not get a clearer vote.

Redb