Four Innigs ODI. Each Innings of 25 Overs.
- Thread starter AbhishekS
- Start date
Just shows that even Tendulkar is not too keen upon the survival of the Test matches.
25 over 2 innings format will ultimately lead to 3 day Test matches.:
Wait Wait. Now dont try to scan into Tendulkar's opinion and come up with deciphers of what he thinks about test/ODI cricket. It was his opinion and it needs to be respected. You dont agree with it, FINE! But dont try to go into other assumptions. Tendulkar values tests as the ultimate stuff. ODI's are mainly for entertainment and now people have got a new form of entertainment that beats ODI's hands down in that entertainment value. So ODI's need serious revamp to compete with T20's in providing entertainment
Just because you think 20/20's are better entertainment then ODI's doesn't mean everybody else thinks this.
And Tendulkar didn't come up with this, it's been sprouted around in the past. Heck NZ had something similar 10 years ago and it flopped big time.
And Tendulkar didn't come up with this, it's been sprouted around in the past. Heck NZ had something similar 10 years ago and it flopped big time.
I am speaking from the reactions and the kind of following that Twenty20 has seen so far. It has literally set a firecracker rolling that does not show any sign of stopping. The World Twenty20, the IPL, etc and people are now talking about the survival of cricket and about the grave danger of the ultimate formats surviving. If ODI's are better entertainment (for the majority of the people, not just for you), why are people talking about its survival and the bleak future of it? If you still cant see it, you might have some problem.
Yes, Sachin didnt come up with this. But he is not inspired by someone else's idea. It came up to him originally during the 2002 CT but the idea was already floating around.
The idea, as I have mentioned in one of my earlier posts was in existence in the form of the Super Max in NZ.
Frankly,it is not ideal for cricket.Cricket may lose its charm due to that.
ODIs are still important and I think many would still vouch for that.
Frankly,it is not ideal for cricket.Cricket may lose its charm due to that.
ODIs are still important and I think many would still vouch for that.
Cricketman
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Location
- USA
I still don't think the 'Majority' prefer T20 cricket to ODIs/Test. It's just something different, a novelty, which will eventually wear off.
gopkrish88
School Cricketer
the stupidest idea of little master ....:doh
Chetan0304
Chairman of Selectors
As if Cricket is all well atm. :sarcasm
Even if this idea is not implemented, they will come up with other, one thing is for sure the traditional 50 over game will be changed (shorten etcc..) FACE IT!
Hey man, there is nothing wrong in trying. Even Ian Chappell was of the same opinion as this would completely eliminate any unfair advantage that a captain gets upon winning a toss, also it would make the game a lot more tactical if you ask me as captains will be forced to rethink their strategy at the end of each innings. However, seeing one day hundreds would become a rarity, no 150 possible unless one plays innings of a lifetime and our longed lived desire of seeing a double hundred in one dayers would be thrown out of window. I think instead of thinking new ways to improve or sustain one day cricket, ICC should first do something about the rules that are making the game unfair, less exciting and tilting it; in favor of batsman every day. For God's sake, make those boundaries wider, as per ICC it should be 72m away from the pitch, how the hack matches are being hosted and played in countries like SA or NZ then where having such grounds is still a far cry. And why in the name of God they came up with a shitty idea of changing the ball after 35 overs that has ruined the game, and made it impossible for bowlers to reverse swing it, curse ICC. Forget about improving the game, they are making it worse every moment that goes by. :::
:::
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
No, you're right, the idea was to split the innings, not add 20 extra wickets to the game. People just aren't very good at reading.
You do have Test cricket to try out strategies after the innings is up.
More people will start scoring at a brisker rate and hundreds will be scored often.
Another thing - How will the 25 over 2 innings benefit the game ?
^It's supposed to make ODI cricket fairer. I think it would too - why should one team have to bat under lights and not the other?
But it misses the main issue for me - there's too much cricket. Yet they are trying to make all 3 formats interesting where we only used to have 2. They can't have everything - more T20 tournaments and then try to reinvigorate ODI cricket as well. Your market isn't that big and your players will get fatigued trying to give their all in 3 formats of cricket. I say merge T20 and ODIs into one form and leave T20s as one off season opening/closing exhibition games.
To merge the 2 forms, I'd play 40 over matches with 2 innings, resuming your score from over 20. Let one of the dismissed batsmen from the first innings come back in to encourage hitting in the first 20 overs. And use Ian Chappell's idea, a MINIMUM of 5 overs for 5 bowlers, but the other 15 can come from any bowler. So one bowler could bowl 20 overs if he wanted while the other 4 bowl 5 overs each. Give some power back to the fielding captain.
But it misses the main issue for me - there's too much cricket. Yet they are trying to make all 3 formats interesting where we only used to have 2. They can't have everything - more T20 tournaments and then try to reinvigorate ODI cricket as well. Your market isn't that big and your players will get fatigued trying to give their all in 3 formats of cricket. I say merge T20 and ODIs into one form and leave T20s as one off season opening/closing exhibition games.
To merge the 2 forms, I'd play 40 over matches with 2 innings, resuming your score from over 20. Let one of the dismissed batsmen from the first innings come back in to encourage hitting in the first 20 overs. And use Ian Chappell's idea, a MINIMUM of 5 overs for 5 bowlers, but the other 15 can come from any bowler. So one bowler could bowl 20 overs if he wanted while the other 4 bowl 5 overs each. Give some power back to the fielding captain.
What? Please stop all this nonsense, after 40 years of 50-60 overs of ODI cricket we are getting into this crap just to cut down on the luck factor. We do have T20 for some exciting cricket and if you don't like ODI cricket dont watch it and for players who don't like this form of the game, please retire and get into some other profession.
The game cannot change for you and still most cricket fans love ODI cricket.
The game cannot change for you and still most cricket fans love ODI cricket.
