40 Overs, the future for ODI's?

[Will_NA]

I can't answer without turning this into anither 50-over vs 20/20 thread so I'll just say 'Keep it the way it is'

 

[shravi]

I can't answer without turning this into anither 50-over vs 20/20 thread so I'll just say 'Keep it the way it is'

There was never any versus. It's just 10 people continuously saying how test cricket will always be the crème de la crème . It's true, but just so you guys know, we heard you the first time .

 

[Will_NA]

It's true, but just so you guys know, we heard you the first time .

Huh?

 

[Pakistani Army]

They should stick with the 50 overs format as they have done for so long. Personally, i wouldn't mind in watching a 40/45 over game.

 

[shravi]

Huh?

Not you as in you. I meant Kev and the likes.

 

[m_vaughan]

Well like Kev mentioned, as much as I love ODIs the way it is right now (I love test matches the most), if I had to settle for a compromise I would prefer having 40 overs per side rather than T20.

Dont get me wrong, I dont hate T20. Its just that I feel its not "cricketing" enough.

 

[shravi]

But the debate isn't whether 40 over cricket should replace 20 over cricket. The debate is whether it should replace 50 over cricket.

 

[6 x Afridi]

i like 50/50 how it is
i dont want it shortented. thats why we have twenty20
and we obviously dont want it longer. thats why we have tests

 

[m_vaughan]

Lol. Well said.

I wonder if they'd ever considering having 24 hour matches.

 

[Jit]

Well like Kev mentioned, as much as I love ODIs the way it is right now (I love test matches the most), if I had to settle for a compromise I would prefer having 40 overs per side rather than T20.

Dont get me wrong, I dont hate T20. Its just that I feel its not "cricketing" enough.

totally agree 20-20 doesnt feel like cricket its slogging thats all and i like tests better than any other format

 

[Chimp132]

didnt odi matches in england used to be 40 overs ? then they changed back to 50 when natwest took the sponsership for odi matches in england ? i heard something along them lines by the commentators quite a few years ago = \

i prefur 40 over cricket, the pro40 county matches are really good to watch, so international 40 over odis would be excelent

 

[Cricketman]

I think the ICC needs to stop chopping the game up and players should adapt to the fast changing times that cricket is going through.

 

[Benno]

I think 20/20 is good for cricket, albeit a bit dangerous with balls flying into the crowd but the crowd expect that, its 20/20 cricket after all!

Another couple of possible formats could be 25 overs each, or mini test match with both sides getting two innings of 25 overs each. That could make things interesting.
So in conclusion, no, 40 overs would still be too long for most people. 20/20 is better because people these days don't have the time to sit around for ages. we want results in the here and now.
I think IPL has proven that 20/20 has been a success. I've even been told of a possible APL "Australian Premier League" comprising Australian, New Zealand players and drafted club and state players. If it all goes through smoothly with the ACB and ICC it should start for summer 2009.

 

[Kev]

didnt odi matches in england used to be 40 overs ? then they changed back to 50 when natwest took the sponsership for odi matches in england ? i heard something along them lines by the commentators quite a few years ago = \

i prefur 40 over cricket, the pro40 county matches are really good to watch, so international 40 over odis would be excelent

Don't recall ODI's being 40 overs. I do remember 55 overs, I also remember the number of overs being different in ODI's according to which country the match was played. There has been 60 and 65 over cricket too. Perhaps you are referring to domestic cricket, there used to be a 40 over competition a few years back (I forget the title sponsor).

 

[DPRA]

Nope. I really don't like it.

The only main type of OD cricket I love is the Twenty20. That will be the only OD competition soon. And thank god.