40 Overs ODI Best Solution?

[sifter132]

I love the T20/20/20/20 idea. Why? It's fairer and is interesting for longer. But don't make it 2 SEPARATE innings, make it a continuance of your first innings.

How is it fairer? Both teams would have to bat under lights in a day nighter and both teams would have to cope with a wearing pitch as the day continues if it's a day match.

How is it interesting for longer? By playing 2 innings. So often in ODIs team A will whack 300-350 and the team B lose 2 or 3 quick ones. The last 40-45 overs are awful because Team B has 'buckley's' chance of winning. But in a 2 innings game, say Team A whacks 1/150 from their 20 overs and team B loses 2 or 3 quick wickets. But Team B has a much better chance at fighting back than in a single innings game, because they have the chance to bowl again and to settle their batsmen down during the break if they struggle in the first dig.

Traditionalists would shoot me down, but you could also do some cool things like letting one of your batsmen who was dismissed in the first innings come back in the second innings and bidding powerplay overs in an auction, instead of having a toss.

 

[King Pietersen]

The whole point of a T20 game is to attract the casual supporters who want a quick evening out for a couple of hours to watch an exciting game of cricket. They may as well turn up to a Pro40 game in England if they're going to attend this awful T20 Test match idea. The games would be longer than a Pro40 game in terms of time, and I don't think they'd be all that exciting. Give me a 50 over ODi or even a 40 over ODi over this rubbish.

 

[drmony]

I think you are right

The whole point of a T20 game is to attract the casual supporters who want a quick evening out for a couple of hours to watch an exciting game of cricket. They may as well turn up to a Pro40 game in England if they're going to attend this awful T20 Test match idea. The games would be longer than a Pro40 game in terms of time, and I don't think they'd be all that exciting. Give me a 50 over ODi or even a 40 over ODi over this rubbish.

I think you are right , T20/20/20/20 format would be much more time consuming and it also would give the same feel like t20 which i dont want to get in a perfect ODI

I am eagerly waiting for a day when icc make 40 overs odi

 

[Cricketman]

No, I love the 50 over ODI. I love the way the innings is built.

 

[dajesmac]

Hey guys. Guys.

How about this idea?

We leave it the way it is.

 

[drmony]

dont you think

No, I love the 50 over ODI. I love the way the innings is built.

Dont you think,, an odi should be complete in less hours?

drmony added 0 Minutes and 34 Seconds later...

Hey guys. Guys.

How about this idea?

We leave it the way it is.

Dont you think,, an odi should be complete in less hours?

 

[gj2005]

Good suggestion

i am impressed ,,this is really a good suggestion...right now middle 10 overs are boring

 

[shubhrayu]

Why do you people want to shorten ODI's??Let it remain 50...

 

[khalek]

I wouldn't mind it, ODI cricket used to 60 overs long once and it was reduced to 50 overs. Now with T20 coming up, having 10 overs less wouldn't be a bad thing and it will help ODI cricket survive.

 

[Cricketman]

Hey guys. Guys.

How about this idea?

We leave it the way it is.

GENIUS@!!!

Just leave the game alone.

 

[khalek]

Remove powerplays, it's chaotic!!!!!!

 

[SaiSrini]

I love the T20/20/20/20 idea. Why? It's fairer and is interesting for longer. But don't make it 2 SEPARATE innings, make it a continuance of your first innings.

How is it fairer? Both teams would have to bat under lights in a day nighter and both teams would have to cope with a wearing pitch as the day continues if it's a day match.

How is it interesting for longer? By playing 2 innings. So often in ODIs team A will whack 300-350 and the team B lose 2 or 3 quick ones. The last 40-45 overs are awful because Team B has 'buckley's' chance of winning. But in a 2 innings game, say Team A whacks 1/150 from their 20 overs and team B loses 2 or 3 quick wickets. But Team B has a much better chance at fighting back than in a single innings game, because they have the chance to bowl again and to settle their batsmen down during the break if they struggle in the first dig.

Traditionalists would shoot me down, but you could also do some cool things like letting one of your batsmen who was dismissed in the first innings come back in the second innings and bidding powerplay overs in an auction, instead of having a toss.

Well written. I agree with you. One thing is, if you want to continue from where you left of, then would that mean the batting team starts over with the opening batsmen or do they start over from where they left off (ie. if team A were 3/175 in 20 overs, then do the batsmen who were at the crease at the end of 20 overs come back and start or do the opening batters come out?).

saisrini80 added 1 Minutes and 22 Seconds later...

Remove powerplays, it's chaotic!!!!!!

That would make it even more boring for people who want to watch boundaries/sixes (and there's an awful lot of people including yours truly, who wants to watch the big hits and the boundaries but not at the cost of the bowler and the opposition looking hapless).

 

[IanG]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they use to play 40 Over a side ODIs on the sub continent? They were different lengths in different parts of the world.
eg England for a long time played 55 Over ODIs and of course 60 Over ODIs it's only been the last 15 years or so that they've made them uniform. Along with the Circles.

 

[age of the fall]

Hey guys. Guys.

How about this idea?

We leave it the way it is.

Best post here tbh

 

[Jakester1288]

The best solution is to leave 50 over cricket as 50 over cricket - shortening it wont do anything good for the game.