Think of the most memorable games of cricket in recent times.
I won’t stop you from being biased. Are you thinking of the day 5 second innings win in a game which you were always on the losing side of until that one magical session when the opposition let their guard down?
Or is it a three-day rout of the opposition when your team absolutely blew them away and used the home advantage to perfection? What about the time when a No.7 walked in and hit 20 off the last over, or when the entire top order collapsed within a spell and lost the game?
In modern day cricket (read Tests and T20s), miracles really do happen. And just as miraculously, ODIs seem to have started losing relevance… or have we just started enjoying other formats more? Wait, both those point to the same thing!
Between the mature 150-year-old Test and the adolescent 15-year-old T20, the middle-aged 50-year-old ODI (more like Oldey I) seems to be going through a crisis and its not something born overnight.
What, however, was born overnight was the idea of writing this as all of us saw South Africa pull out of their Australia tour, Morgan retiring from limited overs after a very successful career as captain, Ben Stokes retiring from ODIs because of extreme schedules and just an overall simmering conversation about whether ODIs are still relevant.
The fact that I’m writing this quite a long time after any of those events is a completely different thing.
Everyone agrees that the ODI World Cup is the biggest event in world cricket (some may disagree owing to how the number of teams at the mega event has been decreasing) but despite that, I can give a number of arguments as to why ODIs are not the most exciting format to watch.
More people would rather watch T20s, a T10 game or even the Hundred (the latter two which are only franchise competitions) over an average one day international.
‘Oh, but those are shorter formats, they are meant to be entertaining for the masses.’
Tests aren’t a shorter format yet still provide more ‘oohhh’ and ‘ahhh’ moments.
It is unpredictability which has revived Tests (as they were thought to be dying some time back) and has made T20s and other shorter formats grow at an exponential rate (not to forget the money also aiding them, something I will talk about later).
(Photo Getty Images)
While this obviously is no generalisation, you can break an ODI into three phases, which is basically the three power plays.
The first 1-10 overs are when both teams assess the wicket with the bowling team trying for early breakthroughs, overs 11-40 are the “building phase” where usually the biggest partnership of the innings happens and a few wickets fall, and the death overs of 41-50 are considered to be when there’s at least one set batsman who can up the ante and score quick runs while also increasing the chances of losing his wicket.
That’s very much a layman’s description of the format and, generally, most games progress that way.
Compare that to Tests; you may be able to give an approximate idea of how the game is supposed to progress but the twists and turns always find a way in and provide excitement to the format.
Considered to be the true test of a player’s skill, it checks every box by arguably providing the fairest of opportunities to both batters and bowlers and chances to both teams to bounce back when they are down.
On the other hand, T20s (and by extension other smaller formats) have managed to gain and maintain such a high viewership by mainly focusing on aggressive batting and while the scales tend to tilt towards the batters, everyone loves to watch it.
Another major underlying reason, which could very well be the reason why ODIs eventually are just reduced to World Cups, is money. As much as you might hate it, you have to accept that money has started affecting cricket and the influence is only growing.
There are so many franchise cricket leagues, not just for T20s but even T10 and other shorter formats, if you can call them that. It is a proven strategy that these formats bring in the big bucks and as a result, even international bilateral series have seen an increase in the number of T20s being played while ODIs have stayed the same or worse, even reduced.
Chris Woakes celebrates the wicket of Glenn Maxwell at the T20 World Cup. (Photo by Francois Nel/Getty Images)
Agreeing that money is the reason for the boom of shorter formats but if that was all, Test matches should have died sooner, right? That is definitely not happening now, even though it was thought to be the case a few years ago, and the biggest credit for the “revival” of Test cricket goes to ICC’s World Test Championship.
WTC is not fully perfect yet but it has provided much more relevance to every single Test match played in a bilateral series by making all results count towards the ultimate goal of finishing higher in the table and eventually winning the final.
The quality of competition between bat and ball is undoubtedly of the highest quality in a Test match and there are somehow fewer dull moments in it than a ODI game. Why then, has the ODI Super League not done the same thing? It surely is a bit of cop out to still be blaming COVID for it but it’s not entirely wrong since we still haven’t seen it in its full potential.
Why I called it a cop out is because COVID is definitely in no way responsible for SA cancelling their ODI series with Australia, and that brings us back to T20 leagues (and poor SA administration but that’s a thing of its own).
Is that all though why ODIs have been losing popularity, or is there some flaw in the format itself which was bound to cause this? Yes.. and no. Any changes made to the format will definitely affect the current bat-bowl balance which is not going to improve things.
Mainly one thing is being talked about which is going back to having one new ball instead of two, which will bring spinners into play and also aid reverse swing for pacers. We can only guess at how much that would change because the growth and dominance of other formats doesn’t seem to be slowing down anytime soon.
Not to forget, extreme workload is a very real problem being caused due to the same reasons; other formats get more games and players get fatigued. The upcoming years are absolutely packed with domestic T20 leagues in almost every month and international cricket seems to be a filler event.
While it is also true that every player doesn’t play in every tournament, a lot of them do play in multiple ones because they pays the bills.
On a lighter note to end this, I would like to draw attention to how we these problems were never as big when Virat Kohli was manufacturing runs in ODIs; making sure the boring phase of building the innings from overs 11-40 was full of moments of pure class you would not want to miss.
Does this mean Virat coming back to form would somehow revive and make ODIs relevant again?
I’m hoping for it.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Well yes. It seems to be the downward spiral re FC some nations are in. The more white ball becomes the primary international focus, the more domestic white ball squeezes out domestic FC (in addition to domestic white ball - T20 - being a focus in itself). On the current trajectory, I suspect we're going to end up with a few Full Members by the 2030s that have such a low quality of FC cricketers, that they won't be competitive in Tests. I just hope Australia doesn't follow them down that rabbit hole - though the last decade of CA Shield management indicates we're at least toying with that outcome.
Micko
Roar Rookie
NZC begged CA to agree cancel a Test against Australia at the eleventh hour in 2016 (in Auckland: by far NZ's biggest city), so not sure what we owe NZ really, and why you blame CA??
badmanners
Roar Rookie
Hey Jeff what's the point of FC cricket if your country has put tests below T20? If the tests are a financially losing proposition then first class cricket must be an open drain for the non big three nations. :angry:
Trevor
Guest
The 2015 group game vs New Zealand. Michael Bevan vs West Indies on NYD in 1996. WC Semi Final of 1999. Andrew Symonds vs Pakistan in 2003. Andy Bichel vs England in 2003. Can't remember a single T20 game and personally don't know anyone who watches them. I think it's popular in India and the West Indies, but not really in Australia. Tests are great, ODIs somewhat enjoyable in a good meaningful game, but even the best T20s are nothing more than forgettable background noise.
Reddy
Roar Rookie
Agreed, t20's and odi's make more money in NZ simply because more people turn up to watch those in NZ. Only a boxing day test gets reasonable numbers in NZ. Because people are on holiday then and there is not much else to do then. Other times of the year t20 and odi's rule. The world test championship particularly for NZ is a godsend because it has stopped the death of test cricket in countries like NZ. The world test championship got the NZ public interested in test cricket again and competitive. It wouldn't have been hard for Australia to play at Seddon Park instead of Eden Park, it's just down the road in Hamilton, smaller ground with even ground dimensions. Eden Park is not suitable for test cricket anymore hence why no visiting team plays there in test cricket, it's been like this for a number of years. NZ don't even play much odi's there anymore. Hence why there is talk in redeveloping western springs into a cricket stadium for internationals. Auckland usually only get t20's now. Other cities in New Zealand hold the test matches and most of the odi's every cycle.
Micko
Roar Rookie
It has nothing to do with ground dimensions, but NZC's ability to make money. I don't understand why they wouldn't sell out Eden Park for a Test vs Australia in NZ's only million+ city??? Not sure why this is seen as Australia's fault, and why we keep getting the blame for it (like Ray seems to want to do).
The Bush
Roar Guru
Australia played ODIs in November/December 2020, so less than two years ago, not "in over 3 years". I agree that taking it off free to air in Australia decreases interest though. New Zealand has the least right to complain about a lack of test matches. They've actively rejected longer tours by Australia in favour of more limited overs games. Hard to take complaints from them seriously.
The Bush
Roar Guru
When Australia offers to play more tests against other nations, those offers are rejected. New Zealand and Sri Lanka have both rejected playing three test series against us in favour of playing two test series and playing more ODIs/T20s. What exactly is Australia meant to do? I agree that the ICC is failing cricket, the money they're making should be used to support more test cricket and FC competitions in the smaller nations. I'm not sure what else the purpose of the organisation is.
The Bush
Roar Guru
How sad then, because I'm not sure what the point of cricket will then be. Test cricket is cricket, not T20 cricket. The whole purpose of these T20 leagues was supposed to be to make boards financially viable and able to support proper cricket programs, including strong test teams. If they now just exist to make more and more money, then the sport is doomed.
Joshua Makepeace
Roar Rookie
That makes two of us, and I'm sure there are more. Interesting how that was an ODI game.
Reddy
Roar Rookie
Eden park has uneven boundaries hence the lack of test cricket there. No home tests lately are ever played there.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Last summer was the only year we didn’t play a home ODI. Was a series against India the summer before.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Is it T20 this year? I thought the last tournament was T20 so it was ODI this year. Covid must have thrown things awry.
Simon
Guest
It's hard to know where ODI cricket is at because 1. We haven't played a home ODI in over 3 years and from 4 games all outside school holidays and 2. They took it off free to air. When CA did that they signed it away from the limelight regardless of what the rest of the world did. I want an article on how Australia never once toured NZ for a test series during their golden era, which to me is the biggest scheduling crime of all time. NZ win the World Test Championship and yet between 2016 - 2024 there is no big four match home series against their biggest rivals? Nothing? It could have been NZs biggest ever series and done wonders for the game and has been completely and bizarrely ignored. We've played a bunch of other teams (including in sri Lanka/ the UAE) on multiple occasions away and somehow NZ got passed
Simon
Guest
It's T20
Jeff
Roar Rookie
The Asia Cup clash next Sunday between Pakistan and India will be one that at generates a lot of interest. Hopefully the game itself lives up to the anticipation.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Australia, England & India make money off Tests, and actually make the money for the rest of the Test playing nations. Don't forget Ray that on Australia's last tour of NZ, NZC begged CA to cancel the scheduled third test (to be held at Eden Park) to shove in an ODI series. So not sure what you're complaining about???
Jeff
Roar Rookie
The WTC points system is a level playing field though it’s true that not all Test sides get to play equally against better quality sides. However I think the domestic FC structure within many Full Member nations is a much bigger issue re producing Test players that can compete against the best, rather than the number of Test matches they actually play. NZ has a strong FC system but plays comparatively few Tests, yet has been a strong Test side for quite some years.
RayinSydney
Roar Rookie
Why would the other nations book 5 tests series against each other ?, as you say the cost is huge, but I’d bet any one of them would do against the big nations as they’d draw a crowd, and grow the game and cover the cost, I mean why would Penrith play the Warriors?, who want to see that when they could pack the place out playing the storm.. The WTC is not a level playing field in regards to teams playing each other, and that’s what grows the game.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
It’s the other nations choosing not to play more Tests. Sure, Aus, Eng and Ind don’t schedule 5 Test series against the other nations, but neither do the other nations schedule 5 Test series against each other. The Big 3 aren’t controlling the WTC schedule by prohibiting other nations from playing more. It’s mostly cost. With DRS, security and set hosting standards for visiting teams, most nations other than the Big 3 lose money on Test series.