Can three formats of cricket continue?
By k77sujith, 11 Sep 2012 k77sujith is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Cricket, one day international cricket, T20, Test cricket
With the fourth edition of the Twenty20 World Cup competition just around the corner, it might be a good time to ponder over whether the beautiful game of cricket can continue to exist with its distinctive three formats.
No matter how much we whine about it, the advent of Twenty20 cricket in the last decade or so has truly enhanced the global reach of the sport.
This slam-bang version has managed to instil excitement that has resulted in an upward surge in spectatorship, something akin to the buzz created by 50-over cricket when it was introduced in the 1970s.
With wickets tumbling unvaryingly, boundaries and sixes aplenty and electric fielding, it’s no surprise the younger generation finds themselves hooked on this format.
The Indian Premier League (started in 2008) is one of the premier T20 competitions at the moment, attracting a lot of glamour and truck-loads of money.
Moreover, with the constant presence of top cricketers, Indian film stars, cheer leaders and thumping music, the IPL extravaganza continues to rule the roost and is a huge money-minting proposition for advertisers and broadcasters alike.
In a similar vein, the popularity of the Big Bash Twenty20 league in Australia has been growing and – who knows – there might come a time when somebody suggests that the traditional Boxing Day Test match held in Melbourne every December be replaced with a game of T20!
Even though this is unlikely to happen, the mere mention to replace a historical event in the nation’s sporting calendar is just a reflection of the obsession people have with Twenty20 cricket.
The demise of 50-over cricket was apparent earlier this year in the Commonwealth Bank ODI series between host nation Australia, Sri Lanka and India. Even though the competition featured three top teams, one of the major talking points of the entire tournament was surprisingly, not about the quality of cricket but the empty stands.
The fact that the series was spread over two months didn’t help sustain viewership interest which helped lead to these small crowds.
While an ODI series between top teams would have whet any cricket player’s appetite in the past, the just-concluded ODI series between England and South Africa proved otherwise. With the number one ranking at stake, it came as a surprise that South Africa rested some of their star players such as Jaques Kallis.
Yes, South Africa is still a strong unit minus Kallis, but that selection move does convey a message of where the game or rather, the priority of teams is heading.
Moving on to the conventional format, I’d like to still believe that despite its duration of five days and lesser crowds, Test cricket is still the real deal, as it throws up a whole new challenge to a cricketer in terms of tactics, skill, temperament and endurance.
But to have the three forms of cricket co-existing with each other might be an unrealistic option.
Unfortunately ODI cricket, which finds itself caught somewhere in between the adrenalin rush of T20 and the long-windedness of Test match cricket, is on the backfoot and very soon might have to return to the pavilion for good.
The Ashes journey begins
The Australian cricket team have left Australia to begin their tour of England, with a mission to reclaim the Ashes.
Australian captain Michael Clarke and his teammates were optimistic about their chances before jetting off.
Click here to hear the thoughts of our Australian cricket team as they left for England.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- England are a greatly overrated Test team (183)
- DIZZY: Australian bowlers look the goods for the Ashes (76)
- Warner’s case to bat at six (74)
- The Aussie cricket team aren’t THAT bad (58)
- Clarke take note: England has some weak points for Ashes (48)
- David Warner unleashes stream of abuse on Twitter (46)
- DIZZY: It’s time for the Aussie batsmen to fulfill potential (43)
- Why Channel Nine will retain the international cricket TV rights (11)
- New Zealand shows fight, and then capitulates, again. (12)
- How can we win the Ashes? (47)
- I should have called Craddock: Warner (33)
- Aussies Abroad: Journeymen expats tear up early County season (33)
- Adam Gilchrist bows out Gangnam Style (3)
- Landmark day for women’s sport as cricket cuts a cheque (15)
- Why Channel Nine will retain the international cricket TV rights (11)
- New Zealand shows fight, and then capitulates, again. (12)
- How can we win the Ashes? (47)
- Aussies Abroad: Journeymen expats tear up early County season (33)
- Adam Gilchrist bows out Gangnam Style (3)
- The Aussie cricket team aren’t THAT bad (59)
- Australians off to win back the urn (1)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Cricket, one day international cricket, T20, Test cricket


September 11th 2012 @ 10:58am
josh said | September 11th 2012 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Three formats can co-exist if there is a limit on the number of games played. Case in point why did Australia go to England to play 7 ODIs? The random and pointless ODI matches are what’s killing the game.
The ICC minimum should be in a bilateral series, minimum 3 Tests (for countries ranked in the top 5), minimum 3 maximum 5 ODI, 3 T20 games.
ODI/T20 only tours should be limited, maybe to a home series and two away series a year (excluding World Cup years). Place a limit of 20 ODI games a year in non world cup years. This year Australia has played 25 and Sri Lanka 29.
Sadly though there is a disparity between members of the ICC, that some countries make more from ODI/T20 events than test tours. So I really doubt anything will really be done about it.
September 11th 2012 @ 7:12pm
Timmuh said | September 11th 2012 @ 7:12pm | Report comment
I’d go a step further and allow any limited overs only tours between full member nations other than the World CUp and World T20 Championships (which would not be every year).
And any Test nation which had not played every Test nation home and away (neutral where security issues demand) in the previous five years would not get an invite to either the 50 or 20 over events. But the likes of Australia, India, England and South Africa would never agree to such a thing.
September 11th 2012 @ 7:58pm
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 7:58pm | Report comment
I guess in the current scenario, a 50-overs series between lowly-fancied teams such as Ireland or Bangladesh or Kenya might find more takers!
September 11th 2012 @ 9:47pm
Timmuh said | September 11th 2012 @ 9:47pm | Report comment
And those, I would heartily approve of. If Ireland, Scotland, Afghanistan and the like got more limited overs cricket against Test nations it could only be a good thing for the game. If that was matched with some four day tour matches against states, counties, A-teams when ready, with a view to more nations gaining Test status even better.
September 12th 2012 @ 6:22am
k77sujith said | September 12th 2012 @ 6:22am | Report comment
Agree with you Tim. On hindsight, the ICC must do a lot more in helping these minnows get involved in the calendar a lot more, it can only add to the excitement. Else, it’s the usual suspects such as India, Aus, England and the other big names ruling the roost. Thanks Tim.
September 11th 2012 @ 11:23am
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Hi Josh, you make some good suggestions. Yes, the Eng vs Aus ODIs were so unnecessary.
I honestly think there’s also too much cricket being played throughout the year which kills interest. Having a cap on the number of matches played in a year might also help judge teams when it comes to rankings and stuff. But, that’s unlikely to happen especially with India for instance, who would prefer to mint money at the expense of too much cricket. Thanks.
September 11th 2012 @ 11:44am
Ian Whitchurch said | September 11th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
“The Indian Premier League (started in 2008) is one of the premier T20 competitions at the moment, attracting a lot of glamour and truck-loads of money.”
Kinda. IPL advertising revenue is apparently down by 30%.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iplturning-track-broadcast-revenue-down-bythird/475426/
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/568291.html
September 11th 2012 @ 12:30pm
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
Thanks for that Ian. But even with this drop, the IPL might still continue to be a big draw taking into account the format, stars and attractions. What do you think?
September 11th 2012 @ 1:16pm
Ian Whitchurch said | September 11th 2012 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
Im not sure. It is fair to say it’s stopped growing, and its also fair to say that there is a de facto IPL window in the international calendar.
Club vs country will continue to bedevil the smaller, weaker associations, notably NZ and the West Indies, as they cant afford what the IPL can, and the BCCI will tend to put the interests of the IPL over those of NZ or WI.
A more interesting question is will the Big Bash League attract meaningful crowds in Australia. If the BBL can achieve the crowds of, say, a Port Adelaide then thats great for Cricket Australia. If they can achieve the crowds of, say, Penrith, then it’s still a massive improvement on the pathetic crowds state cricket gets in Australia.
September 11th 2012 @ 1:36pm
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Like Chris has mentioned, too much cricket is killing the sport. This is resulting in poor viewership and thereby, advertising.
September 11th 2012 @ 1:36pm
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Like Chris has mentioned, too much cricket is killing the sport. This is resulting in poor viewership and thereby, advertising.
September 11th 2012 @ 2:32pm
Ian Whitchurch said | September 11th 2012 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
K77,
Considering the tiny amount of cricket played as compared to any of the footballs, Im not sure I can buy that.
I think its more the fundamental mistake of a sport concentrating on representative teams, which by definition there can only be a small number of.
The collapse of the popularity of club cricket as versus club football of any code is the key for me.
September 11th 2012 @ 2:46pm
k77sujith said | September 11th 2012 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
If the focus goes back to old-fashioned domestic cricket, then, the situation would demand the T20 format which might rope in a bigger crowd than what you see for the 50-over format. It’s all a very dicey situation. I think the ICC needs to get its priorities right in regards to where they want the game to be in say, ten years’ time.
September 11th 2012 @ 12:33pm
ChrisW said | September 11th 2012 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
To much International cricket is played, focus on the domestic game like other sports do.
September 11th 2012 @ 2:32pm
Ian Whitchurch said | September 11th 2012 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Thats the intent of the IPL, Big Bash league and so on.
September 13th 2012 @ 4:56pm
lolly said | September 13th 2012 @ 4:56pm | Report comment
Which is what I like about those tournaments. I know some people hate T20 but at least you get to see domestic players and get a feel for who is doing what at domestic level in other countries. Most longer format domestic competitions just aren’t broadcast anywhere.
September 13th 2012 @ 5:17pm
k77sujith said | September 13th 2012 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Yes lolly, it’s all good for commercial reasons but T20 isn’t the right arena where a player can be judged. While its all good for the glamour aspect of cricket, T20 specialists can’t cope with the rigors of Test cricket., the real test. Just my thoughts. Thanks.
September 12th 2012 @ 9:15pm
sheek said | September 12th 2012 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
Cricket authorities keep telling us they care most about test cricket, but continue to pour more money & resources into T20.
Join the dots, T20 will eventually kill off test cricket. That’s the nuts & bolts of it.
Whatever else CA says, it is letting Sheffield Shield, the feeder of test cricket, wither on the vine. As the quality of the shield drops, so will the standard of the test team. You don’t have to be Einstein to figure where this is all heading…..
September 13th 2012 @ 10:18am
k77sujith said | September 13th 2012 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Hi Sheek…well said. However, I feel T20 is having a more damaging effect on ODI cricket, at least at this point. It’s such a pity that the sport is suffering with the advent of T20, which again doesn’t draw packed stadiums. Who knows….20-30 years from now…there might not even be ODIs and Tests! Thanks.
September 18th 2012 @ 11:50am
Don Corleone said | September 18th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Sheek,
I don’t think it’s quite that sinister.
I think the money and resources now being plowed into T20 will generate revenue to keep test cricket and the Shield going in the future.
Whether we like it or not, test and first-class cricket are unsustainable.
September 18th 2012 @ 11:56am
k77sujith said | September 18th 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Thanks Don but what about the viewership?
September 18th 2012 @ 2:07pm
Don Corleone said | September 18th 2012 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
Hey k77sujith, not sure what you’re asking about viewership.
September 18th 2012 @ 3:47pm
k77sujith said | September 18th 2012 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
Apologies for being abrupt. I meant…thanks to T20 which boasts of maximum viewership now compared to the other 2 formats, the game is suffering. But do you actually think Test cricket would die before ODIs? I think ODIs would become extinct soon..sadly. Thanks Don.
September 18th 2012 @ 7:12pm
Don Corleone said | September 18th 2012 @ 7:12pm | Report comment
I agree with you that ODIs are probably most at risk of extinction, but it was interesting to see at the end of last season Channel 9 had very similar ratings over the 3 formats…including the ODI tri-series. Of course the Tests and T20Is had the bigger crowd attendance.
I’m looking forward to the outcome of the negotiations for the next cricket TV deal. The Big Bash will play a significant part in securing a bigger deal with games on free-to-air.
I see survival of the 3 formats is a matter of context. Back when ODIs were big in the 80s & 90s, it was big because it was the only limited overs cricket we had. We didn’t know any different. I think ODIs have an uphill battle being scheduled on weekdays. After being at work and school, many these days can’t engage with half a cricket match. Therefore short ODI series on weekends and public holidays make more sense.
September 19th 2012 @ 4:29am
k77sujith said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:29am | Report comment
The fact that channel 9 had good ratings over the three formats is good news. I’ve always thought any sporting event within a country should be broadcasted on free to air so let’s hope for the best. Hope in the next ten years, we won’t witness a T10 with lives getting busier and people having time constraints due to work!! Thanks.