One Day Cricket

[Kram81]

Re: One Day Cricket

Still the same amount of wickets in the shed though? That would surely make a fair difference?

As for the records being screwed up (which bothered me initially) they've already been compromised with boundary ropes, massive bats and minnows playing.. a yank looking at Glenn McGrath's record would think that his 7 for 15 against Namibia was his best ODI performance ffs.

We'll have to agree to disagree, I'd like to also point out that I've thought this is at least worth looking at for a couple of years and not just considered on a whim

 

[Boris]

Re: One Day Cricket

Still the same amount of wickets in the shed though? That would surely make a fair difference?

As for the records being screwed up (which bothered me initially) they've already been compromised with boundary ropes, massive bats and minnows playing.. a yank looking at Glenn McGrath's record would think that his 7 for 15 against Namibia was his best ODI performance ffs.

We'll have to agree to disagree, I'd like to also point out that I've thought this is at least worth looking at for a couple of years and not just considered on a whim

It's a good point the wickets in hand thing, but I didn't include them because I think a lot of teams quite often don't get past their 7th batsman, especially batting first, so I didn't think 10 overs was going to make much of a difference, maybe an over or two different in the ratio.

Two arguments there, you're right.

 

[Kreja]

Re: One Day Cricket

I like One Day Cricket as it is, and I enjoy them very, very much. I think after 40ish years ODI cricket has really developed and honed just enough tactics and knowledge to make it very good without it becoming a bore in that you know exactly what is going to happen.

For mine I don't like the powerplays. No bowling or batting powerplay should be used. There was no 'boring middle overs' to begin with, so why try and fix it by adding something irrelevant and stupid? Just another thing to encourage big hitting but not proper hitting.

I think the problem is twenty20. More people would rather attend them than go to an 8 hour ODI. If there was no t20 the crowds would be much bigger.

 

[gandalf]

Re: One Day Cricket

I think the problem is twenty20. More people would rather attend them than go to an 8 hour ODI. If there was no t20 the crowds would be much bigger.

You wouldn't have this situation if there weren't inherent problems with ODIs. The key problem for me is the tailoring of conditions to make it a batsman's paradise. This tailoring works well for T20 but for 50 overs it makes the game monotonous and formulaic - 15 over start, 25 over "poke it around" and 15 over slogfest. The glaring problem being the 25 overs in the middle - stemming, IMO, from the favourable batting conditions that leads to fielding captains spreading the field as soon as they possibly can - because they know the simply cannot attack. I say bring the bowlers back into the game so fielding teams can be more attacking - this will force the batsmen to be more attacking - go more for boundaries since the field is up. I don't see it as a problem if teams score less runs - if the batsmen are being more risky it will create excitement one way or another whether its through more wickets or more extravagant batting

 

[Boris]

Re: One Day Cricket

You wouldn't have this situation if there weren't inherent problems with ODIs. The key problem for me is the tailoring of conditions to make it a batsman's paradise. This tailoring works well for T20 but for 50 overs it makes the game monotonous and formulaic - 15 over start, 25 over "poke it around" and 15 over slogfest. The glaring problem being the 25 overs in the middle - stemming, IMO, from the favourable batting conditions that leads to fielding captains spreading the field as soon as they possibly can - because they know the simply cannot attack. I say bring the bowlers back into the game so fielding teams can be more attacking - this will force the batsmen to be more attacking - go more for boundaries since the field is up. I don't see it as a problem if teams score less runs - if the batsmen are being more risky it will create excitement one way or another whether its through more wickets or more extravagant batting

So take the batting powerplay out of the game, put the boundary ropes back where they should be (not 20m in like a the MCG today allowing 5 sixes that shouldn't have been), get some spicy pitches like there has been more of lately and review the fielders allowed outside the ring rules.

I don't mind the 25 midde overs. It's a part of the game. I wouldn't go taking out the 2nd session of the first day's play in a Test match because I find it the most boring session of a Test. It's cricket, that's life. ODIs are wonderful the way they are, and only small things can be made to make them better - and they are all taking backwards steps.