Even as prominent figures in cricket question the relevance of ODI cricket, raising concerns about its future in the face of T20’s dominance and corporate influence, Phil Walker writes about why abolishing the format could be catastrophic for the game.
Just the other week we had Matthew Hayden, in full-bore no-bullshit mode, calling for “agitation” and “visionary thinking” around the programming of cricket because, get this: “The majority of it is irrelevant”. Next up we had Mark Nicholas, inaugurating his tenure as MCC president with the announcement that bilateral ODIs may as well be scrapped because, come on guys, “In a free market the most money wins – and that’s just the endgame”.
Soon, it was Joe Root emerging from England’s penultimate mess, wondering if the 50-over format made any sense anymore – the sooner the better. Amid reports that the ICC will meet as early as May, the tournament is being organized to discuss what’s left of the future
All this takes place in just one week, the third week of the actual World Cup. By the way, it was a week in which Afghanistan defeated two former world champions and the Netherlands had the most destructive batting line-up in the game, but that’s just a side effect anyway.
Does any other sport get this kind of public attention? Would he openly talk about his death during his own flagship event? Anyone else think this is getting a little out of hand? Watch more harrowing acts of intentional self-harm tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. ET. (My theory is a worthy one. Cricket’s ignominious defeat at the hands of corporatism had consequences so mentally debilitating that the shame must somehow go away.)
“Scheduling 50-over cricket alongside T20 would continue the death knell for ODI games,” Nicholas said. Perhaps there is no conflict between the dinner party disaster over the basic structure of international cricket and his job as boss of ICC TV. evangelist. And if he is simply repeating the cowardly behavior of the pursers this month, which is quite possible, what does that say about them? Has the ICC really given up? Did you pull out your last remaining tooth and throw in the towel?
There is a laziness flowing through her, like a tired feeling who has accepted her fate. “As far as the free market is concerned, there is no way to stop it from a competition standpoint,” Wasim Khan, the ICC’s director-general for cricket, told me recently. When they see the wind coming in, they have no control over its strength or direction.
The United States now has its own private league, and Saudi Arabia is not far behind. The latter will happen soon. And if that happens, the most hostile takeover possible would be completed three months after the final stages of the biggest sportswear campaign in history. Meanwhile, IPL owners talk about their “dream” of owning players full-time and loaning them out to national associations at their discretion. The idea that any of these will benefit the game is ridiculous. I found out that the game is available for purchase.
Looking for scum, Wasim was at pains to point out that bilateral cricket remains a “platform” for attention. “Domestic cricket players rarely say, ‘I’m going to bypass this area and go straight there.'” After all, it’s your performance in white-ball cricket that gets you noticed in international matches. It can highlight you on stage and attract attention in some major tournaments and franchises. ”
To put it unintentionally succinctly, international cricket has now become a “platform” on which players can grow. It’s no longer a destination, it’s a runway.
It is an established theory that what a joy it is for the best players. Countless paid dirt. The few wealthy people who have a choice are unlikely to frown at the demise of ODI cricket. Some suspect that Root’s comments simply reflect the general tenor in that dressing room, but draw your own conclusions as to the impact those comments had on their more questionable performances. be able to. But what happens to the rest of us, the underprivileged majority who make up the cricket ecosystem?
The argument is that if 50-over cricket is no longer watched and sold for profit as much as it used to be, then it will be driven by what Nicholas calls the “supernatural powers” of the 20-over players. Who cares whether it’s there or not? It’s all going to sink. Would you like to upload it as “World Championship only”?
Now let’s consider what this actually means. The World Cup Super League, which had provided his background and exposure to ODI cricket in the previous four-year cycle, has been scrapped. The entrenchment of a multi-tiered system that permanently strands countries such as the Netherlands and Ireland, not to mention the likes of Scotland, the United Arab Emirates and Namibia. The deepening stratification of cricket in the West Indies. A three-match ODI series with a large full squad was canceled and with it many core revenue sources collapsed. And unable to really progress in cricket, instead forced to survive on a bloated diet of just 20 overs until his love for cricket as a whole runs out and he decides to do something else with his life. This is the story of the player himself.
No one is saying ODI cricket is untouchable. It lacks the excitement of Tests and the thrill of his T20s. 100 overs in a day is a long time for him, especially when, as this particularly one-sided World Cup has shown, some matches can be effectively decided hours before the end.
In my opinion, 40 overs for each team is the sweet spot. Nevertheless, the Men’s World Cup remains cricket’s biggest tournament for the foreseeable future. It remains the most-watched international event of the cycle. For Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma, these remain important weeks in their professional lives. Gravity cannot be measured in cash. Losing the bilateral ODI would mean trashing the entire show. It would be disastrous for diversity in cricket, reduce the fan experience and further distort the game. It’s not dark yet, but it’s already getting dark.
To bet on the World Cup with our Match Centre Partners bet365 head here.
