What's new

ODI Cricket has become a borefest

hoshiarpurexpress

First Class Captain
Joined
Jul 29, 2020
Runs
6,161
2 new balls.. Spinners taken out of equation. Hard ball and flat decks.
Basically a sustained assault on bowlers and they don't have any support.
Some balance needs to be restored, else it is getting pretty boring to watch.
 
2 new balls.. Spinners taken out of equation. Hard ball and flat decks.
Basically a sustained assault on bowlers and they don't have any support.
Some balance needs to be restored, else it is getting pretty boring to watch.

ICC doesn’t care.

They know that as soon as you start to favour the bowlers, we’ll see scores like 220 being scored in first innings more regularly.

This would mean games would finish earlier than expected and I’m assuming they’d lose out on money from advertisers.
 
I've always said i enjoy a game a lot more where both teams scored 180/ 200 odd runs vs a game where team score 400, the art and skill of bowling is slowly being removed from the game.
 
I've always said i enjoy a game a lot more where both teams scored 180/ 200 odd runs vs a game where team score 400, the art and skill of bowling is slowly being removed from the game.

Yeah. I prefer watching women's ODIs now. More balance and closer games. Some interest till 30-40 overs of second innings where both teams have some chance to win.
This is pretty boring and done deal in one innings itself.
 
Well we just had a World T20 with a fair battle between bat and ball and the entire time people cried about the toss. People saying the UAE should never host another tournament. Whatever the ICC do there's staunch opposition always.
 
I’ve been saying this for ages, they need to bring a balanc back in odis (my personal favourite format). Otherwise just have a bowling machine on the other end. Seeing a fast bowler beating the batsman edged, clean bowling them and seeing spinners bamboozle batsman is just as blockbuster as batsman hitting boundaries. But seeing fast bowlers being reduced to bowl defensive to avoid getting hit etc is just killing the game. How are you going to inspire the next Shoaib Akhtar Brett Lee with the current conditions. It’s a joke
 
Bilateral ODIs have no context.

Even if there is good contest between bat and ball, the ODIs simply aren't interesting anymore.

Other than World Cups, we should have more tri-nation and multi-nation tournaments.
 
ODI cricket needs to have its own identity.

We have test cricket for the purists, we have T20 cricket for the smash, bang, wallop. At the moment, it seems ODIs are just becoming a longer version of a T20 which is really nonsense - the point of a T20 is that it is done and dusted in 3 hours, there is no value in having a T20 which lasts 7 hours.

So there needs to be more of a balance. Whatever rule changes need to be made to give more balance to bowlers. The best ODIs are the ones where 270 is a defendable score so you see runs but you also see good bowling rewarded. I don't know how they are going to do this though because every possible solution e.g. not having two new balls and going back to one ball, will be met with 'oh no that isn't possible' even though it was done for decades.
 
ODI cricket needs to have its own identity.

We have test cricket for the purists, we have T20 cricket for the smash, bang, wallop. At the moment, it seems ODIs are just becoming a longer version of a T20 which is really nonsense - the point of a T20 is that it is done and dusted in 3 hours, there is no value in having a T20 which lasts 7 hours.

So there needs to be more of a balance. Whatever rule changes need to be made to give more balance to bowlers. The best ODIs are the ones where 270 is a defendable score so you see runs but you also see good bowling rewarded. I don't know how they are going to do this though because every possible solution e.g. not having two new balls and going back to one ball, will be met with 'oh no that isn't possible' even though it was done for decades.

I pretty much agree with you.

This is why I think the 2011 pitches were more or less perfect. We need to start replicating that. Pitches where 240-270 is considered a solid score, where any team can win. These should be most of the pitches. Occasionally some pitches can be 330+ or some pitches can be 180-200. But most pitches fall under the 240-270 marker ensuring good competition between bat and ball.
 
Yeah, Pakistan won an ODI against Aus, and ODIs have become boring. You never thought about this until now?
 
I pretty much agree with you.

This is why I think the 2011 pitches were more or less perfect. We need to start replicating that. Pitches where 240-270 is considered a solid score, where any team can win. These should be most of the pitches. Occasionally some pitches can be 330+ or some pitches can be 180-200. But most pitches fall under the 240-270 marker ensuring good competition between bat and ball.

2011 was a good time for ODI cricket and funnily enough it was after they introduced the two balls rule in 2011 that they became boring
 
Yeah, Pakistan won an ODI against Aus, and ODIs have become boring. You never thought about this until now?

Not sure what the value of this post is. Are you saying ODIs are boring and need change or that they don't need change?
 
they only exist for boards to farm some ad revenue. as long as players dont get injured i dont see the problem with 10 odis a year, there easy enough to ignore so ideally id like to see them being used as a platform for testing out youngsters and seeing if they are more suited to long form or t20 cricket.
 
Agree. It is not watchable for bilaterals.

Should only be limited to World Cups, and triangular tournaments. All boards, after they're done with hosting tests, and T20Is, must invite another country to play the ODIs in a tournament fashion.

For example, Afghanistan should have been invited to play this ODI tournament. A total of 4 matches. All worth watching.
 
Yeah, Pakistan won an ODI against Aus, and ODIs have become boring. You never thought about this until now?

Lol

Yeah Pakistan has supposedly caught up so it’s become boring all of a sudden
 
BCCI is to blame

They have deprived the fans of the sub-continent with the iconic India v Pakistan series which is the reason 90% of India/Pakistan fans watch cricket in the first place
 
I think ODI is still exciting. I would take ODI over T20.

But, I agree that it has become too batting-friendly. I prefer old school ODI more.
 
Most wickets are flat, boundaries not that big and you have 2 white balls.

Batter-friendly matches and no wonder bowlers are getting smashed.
 
Most wickets are flat, boundaries not that big and you have 2 white balls.

Batter-friendly matches and no wonder bowlers are getting smashed.

It’s such a flawed idea to think boundary after boundary is the only source of entertainment of cricket. Seeing a tear away fast bowler getting the better of the batsman is just as good or seeing a wiley spinner bamboozle the batters. Icc should seriously think about what they are doing to the game.
 
I seem to be one of the few people out there who still really enjoys ODIs. Lol
 
ICC has almost killed ODI cricket.

All this pathetic organization wants to achieve is a plethora of T20 leagues around the world where batters close their eyes and blindly smash every ball.

Bowlers are 3rd class citizens :kapil
 
Wasim Akram, during a show on A-Sports, discussed the future of ODI cricket:

"One ball, 40 overs, so that the youngster returns to One Day. Fewer use of time. Good for sponsors. A slightly faster game. You can have kind of the same rules. 8 overs per bowler. And you know, double of T20, obviously. And I think that's the way the future of one-day cricket because in this era, people have hardly time and attention span, most importantly. It's just way too long."
 
  • Like
Reactions: OMB
BCCI is to blame

They have deprived the fans of the sub-continent with the iconic India v Pakistan series which is the reason 90% of India/Pakistan fans watch cricket in the first place
Slow down, let’s see the root cause

In this instance money is to blame lol.
BCCI is just the one holding the big bag
 
ODI got boring because ICC changed things too much. They introduced stupidities like two new balls, free-hit, umpire's call etc.

Do not fix something that is not broken (as they say). ODI needs to go back to what it was before.
 
I think 40 overs is a good idea, will save about 1h 30 mins of game time. And teams will still score what they do in 50 if not more. Already in t20 teams can reach close to 200.
 
Brian Lara averages 40 in ODI cricket

So does Mohammad Rizwan
 
Brian Lara averages 40 in ODI cricket

So does Mohammad Rizwan

Netherlands's Ryan Ten Doeschate averages 67 in ODI cricket. Highest in history.

This is why cricket stats don't always give us an accurate picture. Cricket stats need contexts to be meaningful.
 
ODI had proven this WC to still be the best format and it makes sense because the ODI WC Trophy is still the most coveted prize, don’t care about the test nerds and their one off WTC match nor the burger kids and their t20 WC trophy. Both have their place though, ofc.

ODI is peak cricket. A true test of skill. If tests and t20 cease to exist, cricket will still survive on ODIs alone.
 
Wasim Akram, during a show on A-Sports, discussed the future of ODI cricket:

"One ball, 40 overs, so that the youngster returns to One Day. Fewer use of time. Good for sponsors. A slightly faster game. You can have kind of the same rules. 8 overs per bowler. And you know, double of T20, obviously. And I think that's the way the future of one-day cricket because in this era, people have hardly time and attention span, most importantly. It's just way too long."
Making ODIs 40 overs could add more excitement to the game, appealing to today's fast paced preferences.
 
Not at all.

ODIs are extremely tactical.
They have finally emerged as the ultimate format in cricket.

Not short enough that any lalli chhalii like Iftikhar Ahmed can succeed at it and not long enough as tests.

It’s just as long and as short it seems to be. Just perfects

Only poor cricket teams are finding this format tough to swallow
 
Making ODIs 40 overs could add more excitement to the game, appealing to today's fast paced preferences.
ODIs are dying. Take the spirit of T20s and Tests and create a new format. Two innings of 20 overs. The second inning will continue where the first is.left off. That means if someone is out in the first inning, they are out for the match. Teams should be able to pack all 11 batsmen in the team during batting and all 11 bowlers during bowling. That should balance the domination of bat. Similar to NFL where there are offensive and defensive teams. It will also discourage teams from picking bits and pieces useless cricketers.
 
Teams should take a leaf out of Afghanistan's book and improve. They looked mighty impressive. Same way in the ODI qualifier rounds Netherlands in a do-or-die match scored 30 runs in a super over against West Indies. So they desperately wanted to make a mark in this format. So are teams like Ireland, and Scotland. England after humiliation do their soul searching to come back in the format. if One dayers are not really considered important a team like West Indies would still be playing world cup. It is treated seriously by associate sides that is why Ireland/West Indies were knocked out in the qualifier.
 
Baseball has the concept of strikes and fouls. Cricket is tilted way too much in the batsman's favor, which needs to be corrected. If that's not possible, Tendulkar's idea of turning ODIs into two inning T20Is has my vote.
 
ODI cricket would be even more interesting if the ICC arrange mega events in this format every two years similar to T20 Internationals.
 
The best format in cricket. Every type of player has a role to play, not just tuulay baaz ( like in T20 ) . Even Labuschagne's " test inning" was of a great value today and I enjoyed every bit of it.
 
Todays match was so good
ODI Cricket needs to stay

Looking at the Australian players reactions and interviews, they considered this even bigger than the WTC win

Players and fans treat ODI World Cup as the GRANDEST prize so ODI Cricket has to be there always
 
The market is talking, ODIs are done. Tests are also pretty much done save for the Big 3.
 
The market is talking, ODIs are done. Tests are also pretty much done save for the Big 3.

As Wasim Akram said, ODIs should now be of 40 overs. This is the only way to save ODIs. And I don't want to see T20 format only. I will always prefer Tests and ODIs any day over T20Is.
 
As Wasim Akram said, ODIs should now be of 40 overs. This is the only way to save ODIs. And I don't want to see T20 format only. I will always prefer Tests and ODIs any day over T20Is.
As said above it's the market. Odis are done unless its a wc. And only eng aus ind should play tests. Not viable for others.. just market driven that's all.
 
They should reduce the number of overs for sure. Maybe change it to 30 or 35 overs and use only one ball. That shoould make it more interesting. They can also give perhaps a larger over limit for one or two bowlers (rather than having a standard over limit for all bowlers) so teams can use their best bowlers more than others.
 
As Wasim Akram said, ODIs should now be of 40 overs. This is the only way to save ODIs. And I don't want to see T20 format only. I will always prefer Tests and ODIs any day over T20Is.
I hear you but likely 40 overs would also be too long to entice audiences, especially from a TV perspective. The flavour we are looking for in limited overs is really best served by going 20 overs tamasha style.

I prefer tests too like you and ideally if Big 3 could continue to subsidize WTC, I'm ok with that. Tests give us so many scenarios that I would fight to preserve keeping all test playing nations strong.

Ideal for me is WTC in which ancillary T20 Bilaterals are played, then obviously domestic league play, and finally a T20 world cup. I'm ok if ODI's die off in my own opinion.
 
I hear you but likely 40 overs would also be too long to entice audiences, especially from a TV perspective. The flavour we are looking for in limited overs is really best served by going 20 overs tamasha style.

I prefer tests too like you and ideally if Big 3 could continue to subsidize WTC, I'm ok with that. Tests give us so many scenarios that I would fight to preserve keeping all test playing nations strong.

Ideal for me is WTC in which ancillary T20 Bilaterals are played, then obviously domestic league play, and finally a T20 world cup. I'm ok if ODI's die off in my own opinion.
ODIs will most likely die off but the problem is the game is going to suffer immensely. We have seen the skill levels of bowlers and batsmen going down in this World Cup due to so many of them not playing longer versions of the game. And this will continue to exacerbate if the longer formats are shunned.

The cricketing bodies won’t care though as long as the money train keeps rolling. But I fear the divide between the big three and others will widen because only they will focus on the longer format and won’t have too much of a drop in the skill levels whereas countries like us will suffer because our sole focus seems to be T20.
 
Aaron Finch proposes reducing ODIs to 40 overs per side, stating his views during an interview with a sports channel:

"I think it goes to 40 overs, I would love to see that. In England, they used to have the pro-40 and that was a huge competition. I think the game has gone too long, in my opinion. The speed that the teams bowl their 50 overs is so slow, it's down around 11 or 12 overs/hour and that is not acceptable. People will argue that maybe it is a glorified T20 game but it is about the crowds."

"I am not quite sold on that for every series. I think when you have got the big dogs all playing against each other, I still think the 50-over game's electric, and the ebbs and flows are wonderful but when they are so one-sided, when you have got the West Indies... who are trying to fight their way back into the World Cup, they are so off the track, I think 40 overs might suit that type of series, it might bring them closer together."
 
ODI had proven this WC to still be the best format and it makes sense because the ODI WC Trophy is still the most coveted prize, don’t care about the test nerds and their one off WTC match nor the burger kids and their t20 WC trophy. Both have their place though, ofc.

ODI is peak cricket. A true test of skill. If tests and t20 cease to exist, cricket will still survive on ODIs alone.

Yep. ODIs are the most entertaining format.

As the recent World Cup showed, you can still see some real threat offered by teams like NED , SL and AFG to the big teams.

You can see a full range of the skills in cricket.
 
Former Australian Test skipper Ian Chappell believes 50-over cricket has been left to rot by administrators, and holds fears for the future of the game.

The comments come after Cricket Australia announced on Monday the Chappell-Hadlee Trophy would for the first time be contested in the three T20Is between Australia and New Zealand beginning on Wednesday.

The trophy was traditionally contested across an ODI series between the trans-Tasman rivals, but on three occasions has been presented following one-off matches – two of those being at World Cups.

A statement from Cricket Australia, released on Monday, said the trophy would no longer be contested at one-off matches. A points system will also be used for future back-to-back ODI and T20 series, to avoid the potential of the trophy swapping hands twice within weeks.

Cricket Australia chief executive Nick Hockley said the change would ensure the trophy would hold "greater relevance in years to come", and the change had come with the support of both families.

But speaking to Wide World of Sports, Ian suggested the change was a broader reflection of the precarious situation the 50-over game is in.

He blamed the demise of the 50-over game on "short sighted" administrators trying to "beat the game over the head with a big stick", rather than attempting to entice crowds back through innovation.

"They certainly have T20 cricket at the top of the pole, and there's more and more T20 cricket being played and less and less 50-over cricket," Chappell told Wide World of Sports on Monday.

"Anyone who thinks T20 is a better game than the 50-over game is off their rocker.

"The administrators have let 50-over cricket go, and I think they've let it go to the point where they may not be able to resurrect it."

Chappell added that the problem extended well beyond Australian shores. He said the emerging popularity of T10 cricket, which has gained a cult following through the European Cricket League, also presented a threat to T20s.

"As a cricketer, I want to walk off the field at the end of the day's play thinking I've earned my beer," he said.

"I don't think if I played a 20-over game and I faced four balls, that I would walk off the field thinking I've earnt my beer.

"There are T20 leagues popping up everywhere, and now you've got a few T10 leagues … what are you going to do if the crowd get bored with T20?

"Are you going to cut it back to T10 and then T5? How are you going to play a T5 game, walk off the field, and think you've earned your beer?"

Chappell said the popularity of the 50-over World Cup will keep the format alive in the short term.

But he's not convinced the format can ever regain the popularity it once held – the days of 90,000 packing the MCG long gone.

"I'd like to think that you'll get good crowds at the 50-over game because it's a very good game of cricket – the next best thing to a Test match," he said.

"But it's not in the mind of the administrators at the moment, and whether you can turn the clock back, I'm not so sure.

"I don't see the World Cup going up in smoke – it's too important and it's still pretty well attended.

"But if you're going to have the World Cup, you've got to have the players playing some matches.

"But will it have the importance that it used to have? I'm very doubtful."

Australia are the current holders of the Chappell-Hadlee trophy. It was last contested in three one-day matches in Cairns in September 2022.

The first T20 gets underway on Wednesday evening in Wellington.

 
ODIs are now meaningless because they are nothing but a longer version of T20's with the same rules and gameplay.

To really save ODIs, ICC should split the innings to 25 overs each as recommended long ago by Richie Benaud. This would make the format more unique and interesting. Both team would play their first 25 overs in the day and the remaining at night.

ICC should think out of the box or else scrape this format forever.
 
ODIs are now meaningless because they are nothing but a longer version of T20's with the same rules and gameplay.

To really save ODIs, ICC should split the innings to 25 overs each as recommended long ago by Richie Benaud. This would make the format more unique and interesting. Both team would play their first 25 overs in the day and the remaining at night.

ICC should think out of the box or else scrape this format forever.
Proposing a shift to 40 overs per side in ODI cricket could infuse fresh excitement and enhance the game's equilibrium.
 
Short of ICC implementing a strict FTP requirement involving ODI’s (which India would never agree to)…there is nothing you can do.

The game has evolved. T20 has taken over.

It’s not best for cricket but the funds involved are simply undeniable.

ODI’s will now be played sparingly in between the CT and WC. That’s all there is to it.
 
ODIs are now meaningless because they are nothing but a longer version of T20's with the same rules and gameplay.

To really save ODIs, ICC should split the innings to 25 overs each as recommended long ago by Richie Benaud. This would make the format more unique and interesting. Both team would play their first 25 overs in the day and the remaining at night.

ICC should think out of the box or else scrape this format forever.

These are not ODI’s. This is a brand new format.

This idea kills traditional ODI’s even harder than it does now.
 
These are not ODI’s. This is a brand new format.

This idea kills traditional ODI’s even harder than it does now.
It's 50 overs and the only tweak is that after 25 overs the other sides takes it's turn. All bowlers bowls 10 overs each and all batters get the same overs.

Another option in the traditional 50 overs ODI is to let two bowlers bowls 13 overs each. This will balance the game more and was already experimented for a short while in the Australian domestic competition ODIs in the mid-90s.
 
These are not ODI’s. This is a brand new format.

This idea kills traditional ODI’s even harder than it does now.
England did played a 25 overs split ODI against Western Australia on the 1994/95 tour.
 
It's 50 overs and the only tweak is that after 25 overs the other sides takes it's turn. All bowlers bowls 10 overs each and all batters get the same overs.

Another option in the traditional 50 overs ODI is to let two bowlers bowls 13 overs each. This will balance the game more and was already experimented for a short while in the Australian domestic competition ODIs in the mid-90s.

I prefer your second idea.

Overall I’d like to see ODI’s to become significantly more bowler friendly to distinguish it from t20’s.

The ball changes, field restrictions and boundaries should all be adjusted with the bowling side in mind.

Maybe it’ll be less thrill-a-minute but at least it’ll have his own identity, nuances and skillset.
 
Moeen Ali during an interview with a local sports media outlet:

“The format [ODI] has almost completely died out, apart from World Cups and Champions Trophy, it is the worst format to play and I think there's many reasons for that."

“I think the rules are terrible. Like, to have that extra fielder in after [the powerplay], I think it's a horrendous rule for taking wickets, building any sort of pressure."

“Guys are averaging 60, 70 in ODI cricket now because of that. Like, when you're bowling at somebody and you put a little bit of pressure, he just reverse-sweeps and it’s not even a single, it’s a four. It’s just there’s always that option available for the batters [to score].”

“On top of all this, you have two new balls, you lose the reverse swing, you lose the art of trying to hit a softer ball. Everything's always in the middle and crisp and it's flying off your bat and stuff. I think for those reasons, the cricket's just died. 50-over cricket has died.”
 
Moeen Ali during an interview with a local sports media outlet:

“The format [ODI] has almost completely died out, apart from World Cups and Champions Trophy, it is the worst format to play and I think there's many reasons for that."

“I think the rules are terrible. Like, to have that extra fielder in after [the powerplay], I think it's a horrendous rule for taking wickets, building any sort of pressure."

“Guys are averaging 60, 70 in ODI cricket now because of that. Like, when you're bowling at somebody and you put a little bit of pressure, he just reverse-sweeps and it’s not even a single, it’s a four. It’s just there’s always that option available for the batters [to score].”

“On top of all this, you have two new balls, you lose the reverse swing, you lose the art of trying to hit a softer ball. Everything's always in the middle and crisp and it's flying off your bat and stuff. I think for those reasons, the cricket's just died. 50-over cricket has died.”
A sporting pitch like dubai is good one for odis ..It all depends on public demand and same for both the teams .. Bowlers are competing with their counterparts and they should just do that rather than comparing today's cricket with 9o's ..
 
ODI is anyday a better format than hit and giggle T20s. At least one is tested in this format.

I guess T20s should not even be called cricket as excitement is manufactured in this format.
 
Moeen Ali during an interview with a local sports media outlet:

“The format [ODI] has almost completely died out, apart from World Cups and Champions Trophy, it is the worst format to play and I think there's many reasons for that."

“I think the rules are terrible. Like, to have that extra fielder in after [the powerplay], I think it's a horrendous rule for taking wickets, building any sort of pressure."

“Guys are averaging 60, 70 in ODI cricket now because of that. Like, when you're bowling at somebody and you put a little bit of pressure, he just reverse-sweeps and it’s not even a single, it’s a four. It’s just there’s always that option available for the batters [to score].”

“On top of all this, you have two new balls, you lose the reverse swing, you lose the art of trying to hit a softer ball. Everything's always in the middle and crisp and it's flying off your bat and stuff. I think for those reasons, the cricket's just died. 50-over cricket has died.”
ICC has tried really hard to kill by this stupid 2 balls rule.

Who advised them to introduce this stupid rule? Most probably SENA countries who were afraid of reverse swing and spin of Asian countries.
 
ICC has tried really hard to kill by this stupid 2 balls rule.

Who advised them to introduce this stupid rule? Most probably SENA countries who were afraid of reverse swing and spin of Asian countries.
The cricket powers that be felt that bigger scores made the game more attractive. Two new balls made it easier to score.
 
There are still glimpses of exciting ODIs with a good bat and ball balance, the Dubai games have been examples of this. But they need to go back to having one ball and making the boundaries bigger again to get bowlers back into the game more.
 
Frankly ODIs are dead as a format.

It has nothing to do with new rules, it is just that a non competitive ODI is the worst spectacle cricket fans can see.

In a mismatched T20I atleast it is finished in 4 hrs and in a mismatched Test there is some level of comic relief in hope of seeing records being broken with bat or ball.

An ODI like NZ vs SA semifinal or the NZ vs Pak game where the chasing teams just miscalculated and got horribly stuck is simply a train wreck to watch. You want to see good matchup contests like Klaasen vs spinners or Agha in death but are denied the opportunity due to idiocy of a Babar/Bavuma. And there are no softer runs or wkts to be had than in an ODI where the opposition is sleepwalking. Take Miller's century for example, by delaying the trigger pull till the last 3 overs all he did was pad his own numbers
 
well yeah, india keep winning. thats why there is nothing in it for Pakistani viewers. When Australia was winning everything it wasnt as boring as it was often India that they were defeating in finals or semi finals.
 
I believe the super substitute was a better idea, and should have been explored further. Each team sports a team of 14 players, and it selects 11 specialists per inning. This will bring in more bowlers and more batsmen, and not to mention more players will receive exposure.
 
I think ICC needs to change rules in ODIs. Bring back 1 ball rule so that bowlers can have some advantage.Also ICC should try to reduce these crap leagues. Every street is holding a t20 or t10 league nowadays. That is reducing the quality.

ODI and Tests should be given more preference and for ODIs, i would definitely bring 1 ball rule back because it will make it a bit more competetive.
 
Make the powerplay 15 overs long, instead of 10.

Currently, that middle overs phase is just too long(11-40) and makes no sense.

The problem with ODIs is that it's not really a pure format like T20's or Tests where either the batting side is always attacking (T20's ) or the bowling side is (Tests).

That middle overs phase where bowling sides are trying to squeeze the rate and batting sides are looking to rotate results in a holding pattern. It's fine but it should not be 30 overs of it.
 
Even with tweakings gulf between teams have to reduce. Only then it will get interesting. Since 2010 look at the performance of teams in CT and ODI world cup against regular nations (excluding associates). Only 4 teams have W/L ratio over 1. Every other team has a very poor W/L ratio in ICC events meaning they lose more than they win.

Screenshot-2025-03-07-231940.jpg
 
Even with tweakings gulf between teams have to reduce. Only then it will get interesting. Since 2010 look at the performance of teams in CT and ODI world cup against regular nations (excluding associates). Only 4 teams have W/L ratio over 1. Every other team has a very poor W/L ratio in ICC events meaning they lose more than they win.

Screenshot-2025-03-07-231940.jpg
Insane W/L record by India. It just feels so wrong that we had only 2 trophies to show for it during this period. Could easily have had 4 which would have justified these insane numbers!
 
Insane W/L record by India. It just feels so wrong that we had only 2 trophies to show for it during this period. Could easily have had 4 which would have justified these insane numbers!
It is very similar to Australia in 2000s who had W/L ratio of 6.
 
This is the strongest IND squad...probably stronger than 2011.

1. Gill
2. Jaiswal
3. Kohli
4. Iyer
5. Axar
6. KL Rahul
7. Pandya
8. Jadeja
9. Bumrah
10. Shami
11. Varun C
 
Wasim Akram, during a show on A-Sports, discussed the future of ODI cricket:

"One ball, 40 overs, so that the youngster returns to One Day. Fewer use of time. Good for sponsors. A slightly faster game. You can have kind of the same rules. 8 overs per bowler. And you know, double of T20, obviously. And I think that's the way the future of one-day cricket because in this era, people have hardly time and attention span, most importantly. It's just way too long."
Same thing can be converted into two innings of 20 overs each, one set in the afternoon, one set in the evening/night, heck even make it 2 day match (played only in evening/night). And make it a continuation of 1st innings (say if a team is 120/3 in their first innings, they should continue on the same score in their 2nd innings) Another thing is same ball to be used for both innings (maybe to spice up things introduce a new ball in 11th over of 2nd innings).

This way it will even out toss / pitch also... This will make this format more popular than T20 & Tests... (and more challenging too)
 
It is very similar to Australia in 2000s who had W/L ratio of 6.

Australia was a very dominant side, if they made it to semis we knew they will win the trophy which certainly was the case, they were winning anything and everything back then, while India been bottling it for too long in semis and finals.They have been a very formidable side in past 15-20 years but just doesn't know how to consistently wrap it up all the way.

As for ODIs, two new balls ridiculouslness need to be rid of, make better pitches so games are more competitive. Also scrap meaningless Champions Trophy and just do 50 over WC so people look forward to it with high interest and high value. Too much cricket is being played of multi teams events so naturally competitions lose their charm. Cricket has lost its charm because of money corruption, greed and dirty politics by thugs ruling it so it's a slow dying game. Teams like SA, SL, Pak, WI, Bangla will only get further worse so it is bound to distant further among true passionate cricket fans
 
Australia was a very dominant side, if they made it to semis we knew they will win the trophy which certainly was the case, they were winning anything and everything back then, while India been bottling it for too long in semis and finals.They have been a very formidable side in past 15-20 years but just doesn't know how to consistently wrap it up all the way.

As for ODIs, two new balls ridiculouslness need to be rid of, make better pitches so games are more competitive. Also scrap meaningless Champions Trophy and just do 50 over WC so people look forward to it with high interest and high value. Too much cricket is being played of multi teams events so naturally competitions lose their charm. Cricket has lost its charm because of money corruption, greed and dirty politics by thugs ruling it so it's a slow dying game. Teams like SA, SL, Pak, WI, Bangla will only get further worse so it is bound to distant further among true passionate cricket fans
Australian fielding was always exceptional which helped them clinching key moments. Yes that is the only area where there was difference. Otherwise India was just as dominant. Should have won atleast 2 more trophies. In CT India is more dominant than Australia was in 2000. Australia mainly did well in WC where there was no competition. SA was a choker team. India had woeful bowling. Other teams like NZ were uber weak infront of them.


2010-2025 CT

India played 14 won 12 Lost 2 W/L 6.000

2000-2010 CT

Australia played 17 won 12 Lost 4 W/L 3.000
 
Back
Top