Four ways to reinvigorate the ODI format

I have been a staunch defender of cricket’s one-day international (ODI) format for many years.

As the mid-way point between Test cricket’s five-day ebbs and flows and the frenetic nature of T20s, the 50-over format still has a lot to offer for the average cricket fan.

Of late, however, the format has unfortunately begun to stagnate. Once the chief money maker in cricket, its prominence has slowly diminished.

The protracted tri-nations ODI competitions and the five-to-seven-match bilateral series of yesteryear have largely disappeared.

Nowadays, international tours are mostly played in sets of three – three Tests, three ODIs and three T20Is. This is not a bad thing by any means, as it offers cricket fans plenty of variety.

But when you factor in the emergence of evermore global T20 franchise leagues and the resurgence of bowler-friendly pitches and outright results in Test cricket, the ODI format desperately needs a bit of sprucing up.

With that in mind, here are four ways how the ODI format can be revitalised.

1. Make the white ball actually swing

Post the 2015 ODI World Cup, the Kookaburra white ball has lost a lot of its early-overs swing. Opinions differ as to the exact cause, but there is little doubt regarding the white ball’s dwindling wicket-taking potency.

This is despite the use of two new balls, which theoretically should prolong the ball’s period of swing during the ODI power-play overs.

An ESPNcricinfo article from 2018 attributes the vagaries of swing to the ball’s method of construction. In Kookaburra balls, only the middle two rows of seam are stitched across both halves of the ball compared to SG and Dukes, which has all rows passing through both halves.

This produces a flatter seam in Kookaburra balls, causing it to lose its swing and shape earlier. This is especially problematic due to Kookaburra’s white-ball market dominance and exclusive usage for ICC events.

(Photo by Matt King – CA/Cricket Australia via Getty Images)

For ODI cricket to endure and flourish, a genuine balance between bat and ball needs to be maintained. It is crucial that swing bowlers don’t go the way of the dodo and still have their place in the game.

Perhaps, the outlook is not as gloomy as feared, as the 2019 ODI World Cup showed. Rather than the predicted 50-over slog-a-thons on flat pitches, we witnessed the ball swinging and the occurrence of thrilling, low-scoring games, best epitomised by the dramatic final.

It made for some truly engaging contests despite the elongated competition format. According to Black Caps’ left-arm swing bowler Trent Boult, it was all down to the glossier finish of the lacquer, similar to the pink ball.

This is something that needs to be studied extensively and could hold one of the keys to the future survival of ODIs.

2. Bring back reverse swing

Starting in 2011, the ICC’s adoption of the two-new-balls rule has effectively killed reverse swing in ODIs. It is a lost art of bowling, which desperately needs to be brought back. And the idea has many high-profile backers such as Sachin Tendulkar, Harbhajan Singh and Waqar Younis.

Ironically, the rule became a necessity in the first place due to the shortcomings of the Kookaburra white ball. Over the course of 50 overs, it would routinely get discoloured and thus had to be replaced in the later stages of the innings at the umpire’s discretion.

In 2007, the ICC tried to standardise the process by making the ball change mandatory after the 34th over. But this also had its drawbacks – if the ball was too hard and new, batsmen would make merry in the death overs; if the ball was too worn out, it would reverse and bowlers would get a bag full of wickets.

Therefore, the two-new-balls rule was finally brought in to stop this inconsistency.

Surprisingly, the ICC never trialled or experimented with other brands, despite Dukes’ and SG’s claims about the superior durability of their white balls, which could make it through an entire ODI innings without discolouration or losing shape.

These assertions need to be investigated and if found to be true, adoption of alternative white balls should be seriously considered for one-day cricket.

3. Make more sporting pitches

Despite a less than ideal competition structure, the ODI World Cup in 2019 had plenty of exciting games and a stirring denouement.

This was mainly down to the swing on offer and due to the sporting nature of pitches. It provided some assistance to bowlers and barring a few exceptions, prevented games from becoming a simple exercise in slogging.

Speaking to cricket.com.au, Justin Langer summarises the problem with flat pitches quite eloquently.

“I see flat pitches as a huge problem for the health of cricket. I’ve said this for ten, 15 or 20 years, for the health of Test cricket, first-class cricket and even one-day cricket, you want to play on wickets where there’s a contest between bat and ball. When there’s wickets falling and the best batsmen score runs, that’s great Test cricket or great one-day cricket for me,” he said.

I cannot agree more with Langer. Watching a cavalcade of big hits, 360-degree slogging and balls sailing over the ropes for 20 overs is one thing; it quickly becomes tedious and monotonous when repeated over 50 overs.

The ideal pitch should reward good batting but also aid pacers and/or spinners. As with many things, variety is indeed the spice of life and ODIs need to maintain a clear distinction from both the Test and T20 formats to be a viable product.

(Photo by Harry Trump-ICC/ICC via Getty Images)

4. Don’t scrap the ODI Super League

Scrapping the ODI Super League after just one cycle has been a completely regressive move by the ICC Chief Executives Committee (CEC).

The Super League concept added value, context and meaning to bilateral games and crucially provided lower ranked full members and top performing associate nations with regular fixtures against cricket’s big boys.

Additionally, it made the World Cup qualification process fairer with full members having to qualify based on performances rather than status or rankings, while offering a clear pathway to associates at the same time.

This decision proves to be a mere continuation of ICC’s modus operandi: taking one step forward to then move two steps backwards.

Coming on the back of the fantastic news of World Cup expansion, this was a particularly bitter pill to swallow. Not only does it herald the comeback of meaningless ODI bilateral series, it also means a return to relying on the diabolical MRF ODI Rankings system.

That system is wholly dependent on which opponents the full members care to play and is open to wilful manipulation to improve one’s rankings before the qualification cut-off date for the World Cup or Champions Trophy.

The ICC needs to be held to account and ultimately, they need to answer the following questions: how is such a system fair by any metric?

How are the lower ranked teams expected to improve without proper exposure to 140-kilometre-per-hour pace or quality spin bowling?