Modern cricket is a madcap game.
No other sport has such a bewildering number of formats. In short-form cricket alone there are 50-over, 20-over and ten-over games, and with the start of the Hundred in England this year, now 16.67-over games too.
Yet it was not long ago that none of these existed. It’s within living memory that all major cricket consisted of two-innings matches with no concept of a limited-overs version of the sport.
How did this change?
Let’s travel backwards through time, looking at the milestones of limited-overs cricket, until we ultimately reach back to the very beginning.
The story of the first ever one-day international (ODI) is reasonably well known. The first three days of the MCG Ashes Test match of 1970-71 were rained off and the Australian Cricket Board, under the leadership of Sir Donald Bradman, declared the Test a draw and organised a limited-overs match on the fly instead.
Bill Lawry captained Australia in that first ever ODI. (AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy)
In excess of 40,000 flocked to the ground to see Australia win the 40 (eight-ball) over match, with the game coming to be known as the first ever ODI. Successful women’s and men’s World Cups were held in 1973 and 1975, and especially after World Series Cricket focused on the format in 1977-79, ODIs were here to stay.
Bradman, though, had not invented the format – far from it. At the time of that first ODI in 1970-71, limited-overs cricket was already established at the domestic level in Australia, with the first interstate tournament (the current Marsh Cup) having been held in 1969-70.
But the Australian tournament was hardly revolutionary: one-day games had actually been around since the early 1960s in England. By that time, English cricket’s post-war boom had ended. And as would be the case four decades later – when T20 was developed in England – low crowds, dwindling fan interest and plummeting revenues forced innovation in the English game, leading to the birth of the first ever one-day tournament, the Gillette Cup, in 1963.
To modern eyes, that initial tournament seems a little absurd, with each side getting a colossal 65-overs to bat: good luck getting 130 overs in a day with modern over rates! But at the time it was ground-breaking and refreshing – the dreary, attritional red-ball cricket of the era made way for attacking shots, and pointless draws were no longer a possibility. Crowds returned, cricket was fun again and, naturally, the purists didn’t like it.
Significant as it was, the Gillette Cup of 1963 was not quite the start of the revolution. For that we have to go back one more year.
Mike Turner was the secretary of Leicestershire County Cricket Club and knowing that plans were afoot for a potential one-day tournament the following year, he decided to organise a trial run in 1962. Three other local counties agreed to join in and on two successive Wednesdays at the start of the season, Nottinghamshire, Northamptonshire, Derbyshire and Leicestershire played a mini-knockout of one-day cricket.
And so, on 2 May 1962, the two first ever major (List A) games of one-day cricket were played, followed by the final a week later. The games were hampered by poor weather and the scoring rates were not exactly brisk. In one game, Northamptonshire crawled to 9-168 off their 65 overs – a run rate of just 2.58 – yet this was sufficient to win, as Nottinghamshire could only manage 137 all out in reply.
But while the matches didn’t make an enormous splash, there was enough to confirm that cricket was onto something. The local press referred to the event as champagne cricket and there was a general feeling that the (relatively) fast pace of the matches was exciting.
For the record, Northamptonshire won the tournament to become the inaugural (and only) winner of the Midlands Knock-Out Competition.
As for the sport itself, well, it would never be the same: coloured clothing, ramp shots, zing bails, the IPL, the BBL, switch hits, super overs, eye-watering sums of money – all these and more were to follow.
I wonder if any of the crowd of 1000 on that wet, freezing Wednesday in Leicester 58 years ago had an inkling they were witnessing the start of a revolution?
Gnasher
Guest
As you say, club cricketers had been playing one day cricket forever. While the English County game was still long form only, local leagues, particularly in Lancashire, were importing hard up foreign stars to play in limited overs after work games in the long English summer evenings and get the bar takings soaring. You could see test players like Garry Sobers breaking windows in villages across the North in the 60s . Once the counties got in on the act, they all wanted their imports...Asif Iqbal, Barry Richards, Viv Richards, Bishan Bedi.
Paul Dennett
Roar Rookie
Thanks! Yes, you’re right. In fact at the international level England persisted with the red ball for ages in ODIs: even for the 1997 Ashes tour they used red balls for the 3 ODIs they played against Australia. I have fallen into the habit of using ‘white ball cricket’ to mean limited overs cricket, even though for much of its history that was not literally correct. I should have made this clear in the article. Cheers Paul
Tigerbill44
Roar Guru
Nice read. I think county matches used red balls. The white ball was possibly a packer innovation for D N games. However I may be wrong.
Paul Dennett
Roar Rookie
Thanks Paul! I think one way or another one day cricket would eventually have emerged. Two-innings cricket over multiple days really was a 19th century invention and it’s pleasantly amazing it has remained as popular as it has been for so long. But without faster versions I don’t think cricket could have remained a major sport. The rise of the professionals quite probably did influence the timing, as you say.
Paul Dennett
Roar Rookie
There were even a few crowds of 80,000+ at the MCG in the 1980s. I miss the days when ODIs seemed to really matter. Now only World Cup ODI games really do. I don’t blame T20 - I think ODIs were losing popularity anyway. I like the BBL - I find it fun, plus it’s introducing a new audience to the sport. I think the BBL will help safeguard Tests in this country and that makes me happy.
Paul
Roar Guru
I'm sure you're right Dave, it wasn't only the factors I mentioned. Foe sure there were still more than a few amateurs, but their influence on the game, especially in terms of getting a result, was waning IMO. Throw in a few naturally cautious amateurs like Trevor Bailey and it probably didn't take much more to bring cricket from an enjoyable game to a boring one, in the space of perhaps a decade. In fairness,once Benaud disappeared, we seemed to follow suite with guys like Simpson and Lawry at the helm of the Test side, though thankfully in Shield cricket, we still had enough adventurous captains that made this a great competition.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Interesting hypothesis Paul. I wonder whether it wasn’t just other social factors that made county cricket less financially viable from the 1950s. There was still a fair number of amateurs around in the 50s I believe, especially among the captains. Peter May, England captain through one of their most successful (and stodginess) periods was an amateur, as was their most notorious stonewaller Trevor Bailey.
Paul
Roar Guru
An interesting look at the development of white ball cricket. Thanks Paul. I wonder though whether this game would have developed at all if a few things didn't happen in County Cricket? The first was the rise of the professional player, who completely took over from amateurs in the 50's & 60's, 3 day county games where professionals were happy to play for draws rather than losing which led in turn to a defensive mindset that simply bored fans away from the game?
Christopher
Guest
Peak white ball was in the 80s and 90s, packed out crowds at all venues except for the MCG (due to its size) where 60-70k was a good turn out. The decline in ODIs in the early to mid 2000’s wasn’t filled by the rise of T20s at the international level, possibly they didn’t see it as interesting or getting the value for money. What has taken over our summers is a Mickey Mouse competition where families can attend for $40 and wear buckets on their head. While good for revenue it has all but killed my interest in the game.