Don't let one-day internationals die

With all the talk recently of ODI’s being past their use by date, Australia’s series opening win against England was just the sort of display the 50-over version needed to rekindle interest in the allegedly dying format.

It had everything, a hit wicket (how often do we see those?), a run-out off a no-ball which the batsman then questioned if it was a stumping, some great catches and finally, Ryan Sidebottom needing a six off the last ball to win. You couldn’t write a better script!

It was the thrill of the ODI’s that first bought me to the sport at a very young age. As my appreciation grew for the intricacies of the game and my palate matured, I learned to love Test Match cricket. It is an acquired taste but a wonderful game, a true battle.

Then, one day while shooting some pool with friends, I saw there was a game on TV, it looked like a replay of an 80’s match only in much better quality.

I watched the birth of Twenty20 cricket and immediately dismissed it as a joke, as did the players at the time sporting retro uniforms, afro’s and horseshoe moustaches. But a mere four years later, it has gone on to have its own World Cup, the richest cricket league in the world dedicated to the format and is threatening to remove 50-over cricket from the calendar.

It is obvious why the Twenty20 version is so appealing.

Shorter games, bigger shots, more excitement. It’s better for TV (although a 10 over format would be even more suitable) and is attracting new fans to the sport.

However, as a youngish cricket traditionalist, I loathe this version of the game. Tactics have literally been thrown out the window, “slog everything” for the batting side and “Yorkers” for the bowlers. Selection is no longer based on genuine talent; it’s on who can hit sixes and who can keep a modest economy rate.

ODI’s are still thoroughly entertaining as witnessed last night and have been enhanced by the adjustments made to this format over the years. Power-plays are a fantastic innovation as it adds an extra dimension to proceedings, giving teams a joker up their sleeve. Free hits are a great idea and I quite liked the substitute idea used a few years back which was never fully implemented.

More importantly, in this format, bowlers need plans, captains need fields and batsmen need partnerships, as in test cricket but unlike Twenty20.

Yesterdays match was truly enthralling, watching Michael Clarke and the decisions he made, the fields he set and the plans he tried to execute. Australia had a modest target to defend but their bowlers performed well and played to their fields and the captain was on the ball all night.

England however were always in the game, literally until the last ball. Collingwood was holding them together and Wright’s hitting during the batting power-play was excellent but it was the key wickets that turned the game Australia’s way.

Now the key to keeping this exciting format alive is the fixturing. There is certainly still a market for 50 over ODI’s, the game must however be fitted to today’s cricket audience which means no 7 game series and not directly after a 5 test series.

Teams needs to look at rotating players more through the shorter versions of the game. Australia, England, India and South Africa certainly have depth in talent and while New Zealand and the Windies will struggle to rotate, they simply need to play fewer games so they don’t have to.

Cricket, in whatever form, shouldn’t lose the key aspects which were all born in Test cricket as it is what makes the game unique. Twenty20 has its place in the modern world and, while I’m against the format and don’t watch a lot of it, I’m all for players finally earning what they deserve in comparison with other sports.

But don’t do away with the ODI’s – it’s the best of test cricket all in one day.