Four Innigs ODI. Each Innings of 25 Overs.

[Params7]

Nah 50-50 FTW.

 

[formula1man]

I think maybe what Sachin meant, was to play 25 overs pause the innings, let the other team start their innings, then after 25 overs continue with the 1st teams innings from where you left off. so each innings is still 50 overs and 10 wickets but split into 2 so both teams get fair playing conditions

 

[McLOVIN]

^^ baseball style pretty much!

 

[aussie1st]

While there is some merit to the idea of giving both teams fair use of the conditions. The problem is the breaks kill a match as we saw in the IPL. For the TV viewer having three 10 minute + break would be real annoying. There is also the problem of momentum being lost, a team that is flying away in their 25 overs then would be stopped and have to get themselves back in while the opposite of bowlers building some pressure only to have their innings stopped and then having to rebuild that pressure.

 

[Supershtuffthat]

With innings change over times, two innings of 20 overs is more appropriate in my opinion, or else you'll be there all day and night.

 

[mdoggie]

That Idea will just makt cricket far too T20 orientated. The beauty of ODI cricket is that you needed to balance you aggression and defensive attributes. You can't go all out early on because 2-3 wickets lost can lose you the game, you can't saty in and score 60 in 20 because once again you ruin your cahnces. But this would just be 25 overs of bam bam.

 

[age of the fall]

Stupid idea. Only getting recognition because Sachin suggested it tbh.

 

[irottev]

Bad idea in my opinion. All that is is two T20 games in a row. Pointless. May as well play 2 T20s instead where you get 2 results.

There's nothing wrong with ODI cricket if you ask me. If anything it could be brought down to 40 overs. But no less than that.

I think maybe what Sachin meant, was to play 25 overs pause the innings, let the other team start their innings, then after 25 overs continue with the 1st teams innings from where you left off. so each innings is still 50 overs and 10 wickets but split into 2 so both teams get fair playing conditions

If that's what he meant then that's not such a bad idea. An issue with it is it's extra breaks = extra time needed. It's long enough as it is.

 

[surendar]

Like Rohit, I am contradicting Sachin for the first time. It will be a bad idea in my opinion too. I just can't believe that Tendulkar who was unhappy with interval break in IPL has come up with such an idea. I can see his worries during that CT finals in SL, but such occurances does not happen often.

50 overs should be fine by the way it is now. After Morkel's classic/heroic knocks in batting powerplay in Australia, I always felt that 50 overs game's entertainment has increased further. I don't like T20. I just hate it, ' hit out or get out! ' isn't for cricket brains.

 

[ChrisDowns22]

I like the one day as it is now! But it sounds like a good idea to test out eventually, but I do like the Pro40 aswell so it might be better if anything was to change it would have to come down to he Pro40 level because that's a big hit aswell!

 

[Hooper]

Would people stop bitching about 50 over cricket? Leave it ffs, theres nothing wrong with it.

 

[SaiSrini]

I agree with Sachin (not because I am a huge fan of his, but I actually like his idea). I have also talked in favor of this idea in some of the other threads here in PC. Sachin's argument appeals to me. Most of the games are decided by the toss these days due to the conditions prevalent in some countries. Splitting up the game in 4 innings of 25 overs with each team alternating negates that 'condition advantage' to a good extent. For example if batting is excellent for the first 40 overs or so of the ODI match, Team B (the second batting team) gets to taste 15 overs of those excellent conditions. That could balance the scales to a more than decent extent. Could actually make games more interesting.

Lets face it. ODI's are losing in popularity due to T20's. The biggest debate is about the middle overs which are frankly quite boring. All this talk of it being a test of your skills is a waste of time. Test cricket tests your skills. ODI cricket is about entertainment (thats what it was started for) and now T20 provides that entertainment whereas ODI is stuck at an uneasy position between two extremes (Test and T20).

I will support both Shane Warne and Sachin Tendulkar (the champions) on this issue. EITHER SCRAP ODI's or IMPLEMENT WHAT SACHIN HAS SUGGESTED (which is not new because it has been suggested and talked about before). With either of these ideas implemented, the importance of test cricket will tremdendously rise. The ultimate strength of cricket will be realized and people will respect it more.

saisrini80 added 3 Minutes and 4 Seconds later...

Like Rohit, I am contradicting Sachin for the first time. It will be a bad idea in my opinion too. I just can't believe that Tendulkar who was unhappy with interval break in IPL has come up with such an idea. I can see his worries during that CT finals in SL, but such occurances does not happen often.

50 overs should be fine by the way it is now. After Morkel's classic/heroic knocks in batting powerplay in Australia, I always felt that 50 overs game's entertainment has increased further. I don't like T20. I just hate it, ' hit out or get out! ' isn't for cricket brains.

Sachin does not just talk about 2002 Champions trophy final. That was just an example. He also talked about the toss advantage that many teams get because of the conditions. Thats a huge factor (especially in the subcontinent). It is said that the team that wins the toss at the Premadasa stadium invariably ends up with the winner's cheque. How many times that has happened in India? Or Pakistan?

I read a recent article that talks about this and I completely agree

ODI's on its death bed - knocking the heaven's doors
http://cricketnext.in.com/blogs/gauravkalra/260/53788/oneday-cricket-knocking-on-heavens-door.html

 

[WORLD CHAMPIONS]

Definately not a good idea, 25 over per sides X 4 means, again slogging. Where as full 50overs means, lots of concentration and concistency. Another vital thing is, after eaach 25 overs there will be a kind of break, and that will ruin the whole thing. 50 overs cricket is the format we definately need to stay. This idea is basically cutting a ODI game into two T20s.

 

[shubhrayu]

I believe we must move with time...but regarding ODI's it's a tough decision....

 

[formula1man]

I think the duller ODIs are to
1. Batters Mindset.
2. Pitches. playing on a day 1 test wicket is not good for ODIs.

I think 40 overs is also good. but the whole idea of ODI cricket is so you can watch a full day of cricket like a test match but get a result at the end of the day.
T20 is for a quick prime time cricket fix.

But i do agree that if you can just manage to get 10 more overs of boundries it will be good. maybe teams taking the batting powerplay earlier could help. You aalready smash in the last 10 overs so why take it then when you have tailenders who are new to the crease. it doesn't make sense