The new format for Domestic One Dayer's, how do you rate it?

[big game performer]

I know it is going to take a bit of getting used to, but personally I hate it. It breaks up the game too much, and as 1 of the bowlers said last night, it is another time you have to warm up. I do not see the point of having an innings disrupted halfway through it, only to resume it again a short time later. In my opinion this is just a waste of time, and I hope it only lasts for this season.

 

[Boris]

I can't follow it. Everything has been made too complicated.

Where are the days of 50 overs, first 10 overs of field restrictions, 10 overs max per bowler and pure cricket? All the gimmicks just make a complicated game even more complex.

What's worse is that when they notice something isn't working, they change the idea into something more ludicrous to fix it, instead of just scrapping it. I have the feeling this experiment won't go away, if CA doesn't like it at the end of this season they'll find something else to do to it.

 

[Ljp86]

Agreed, it's pretty awful. I'm hoping it will only be a one season thing but I reckon CA will keep this for at least the short-term future.

 

[joshie91]

Stupid idea one year before a World Cup. Another piece of bright thinking by CA.
Personally, the sooner it goes the better. Very ordinary

 

[crookers]

Stupid idea one year before a World Cup. Another piece of bright thinking by CA.
Personally, the sooner it goes the better. Very ordinary

I agree Joshie. I confess to being a test cricket devotee and always will be but at least saw merit in one day games if for nothing else than attracting people to the game as it has proved. And so transpired 20/20 and we had another intervention all be it "successfull". To introduce this new format so soon after these recent changes makes you wonder who makes these decisions and their knowledge of cricket. I think 50 overs had become a little predictable which saw the advent of 20/20 but I cannot see one advantage in 20/20/45/45/ or whatever it is. From a cricketing perspective it makes the task more difficult from both batsmen and bowlers persective having to make two starts and will inevitably lead to bowling injuries. IMO if you have to keep on changing rules of a game then that game is seriously flawed(NRL). So when it is all boiled down what did Packers' intervention deliver to our game-money yes,corruption yes,crowds of mugs yes,player division yes, player uncertainty in the game yes, division of National teams and loss of players from test cricket yes,a relentless meaningless flood of money making waste of time tornaments yes etc etc.Yet the great game goes on for those who appreciate and love its history, its uniquness,its incomparable ability to surprise and most of all expose the skill and dedication levels of all who dare to have a go. Kerry Packers intervention has done little after all this time and money to change and improve our game as it is untouchable by money or ego and will always be thus.

 

[ballanF]

I like it - Just as long as it doesn't go into the Australian ODIs. It makes it more interesting. As we know they were having trouble keeping the viewing up for the ODIs last summer, and I imagine domestic cricket was any thing to gloat about either.

 

[Ljp86]

Still shit. The New Zealand 50-over league had three games decided in the last and second last overs over the weekend, shows how much of a joke this new rubbish format is.

 

[Adamj1300au]

Stupid idea one year before a World Cup. Another piece of bright thinking by CA.
Personally, the sooner it goes the better. Very ordinary

well said! some of the decisions that CA has made over the last few years they are fast becoming a joke who have lost the plot. if they where so keen on trialing another fromat of cricket in the domestic comatition 45/45 spit innings, wouldn't you at least wait until the world cup is over. or is that putting to much thought in to it?