One Day Cricket has had its Day

Aside from sledging, racial slurs and political argy bargy, one of the hot topics of discussion in the cricket world is “How much Twenty20 cricket is too much?”. Nobody seems to know the answer. The one thing agreed upon is that demand is high and that T20 is here to stay.

The main problem with playing more T20 is that the cricket calendar is already full. Between Test cricket and One Day cricket, there is not a lot of playing time available. But what is the purpose of T20 cricket and what is it competing with? That is, if more T20 is to be played, what form of the already established games will have to make way?

Make no mistake: The purpose of the T20 cricket is to make more money from cricket by exploring new markets. It is cricket’s Holy Grail – getting people to watch cricket who don’t already do so. For example, citizens of the USA do not tend to like cricket – the traditional game is too slow, the game runs for too long and half the time, you don’t even get a winner! With the rise and rise of India, perhaps the USA isn’t so important, but you can see what I mean. You should also be aware that all Indians love cricket (a well know fact) but most have a definitely leaning towards ODI cricket.

Let me ask this: What is the purpose of ODI cricket? What were it’s origins? The very first One Day international was in 1971 in Melbourne. A Test match was abandoned due to rain and for an exhibition, a one day match was played. One day cricket remained a bit of hit and giggle for the players and a novelty for fans for the next few years. The 1975 World Cup showed the potential of One Day cricket as a crowd pleaser. It didn’t take long for somebody with a serious business brain to latch on. That was one Kerry Packer (RIP). The World Series Cricket (WSC) revolution starting in 1977 changed cricket forever and ODI cricket was the main vehicle for that. It brought cricket to the masses. The money came rolling in. Packer (RIP), by weight of numbers, in the area of money, fans and players routed cricket the administration.

That was the origin of 50 over cricket and its reasons for existing are not dissimilar to T20 cricket. Cricket administration wants to spread the gospel of cricket and in doing so, feel the love in the coffers.

In recent years, there has been talk of ODI cricket becoming tired and predictable. The boring 25 overs between 16-40 (25 overs), that is, the overs between when the fielding restrictions are lifted and the final 10 over slog, were pin-pointed as a deadspot. Rules were changed to add some spice and interest. Cricket Australia is reviewing the format and concept of ODI in the Australian summer. The triangular competition that drags on and on is tired – I would argue that the cricket is actually better than ever but the secret of marketing is new products. Half of the new things released in the world are not better than the incumbent – just newer. This will be the last such triangular series in Australia. What will replace it?

Here is my idea: Let’s just cut to the chase and remove overs 16-40. Oh. That’s pretty much what T20 does. Let’s do away with 50 over cricket, move with the times and replace 50 over cricket with T20. In simple terms, all cricket needs is two forms of the game.

1. Real cricket – Test cricket – must always remain.
2. Cricket for the masses. Who cares if it is T20, ODI (50 over) or whatever. As long as everyone enjoys it and it pays for Test cricket. Who knows, perhaps one day, things will evolve so that the rules become more like indoor cricket. Batsmen won’t be “out”, they will just lose 5 runs. That way, we are guaranteed a full length game.

T20 offers potential of double headers. Don’t worry if you need a full day at the cricket to unwind and get well oiled. You can have two matches per day (at the one ground). It allows both innings to be played under the same conditions. One of the big problems with day-night ODI matches is that particularly under certain circumstances, the team batting at night is significantly disadvantaged. And of course, if you just want one match, it can be played entirely at night, and on week days, you can go after work and see the whole match. I remember when I took my daughter to her first day nighter. It was very disappointing because it was all over before the lights came on! Australia routed South Africa and polished off the runs before it was dark. No such problems in T20.

Cricket administration around the world must accept that T20 is huge and must move with the times. If they do not, someone else will. Correction: Someone else already is. You may have heard of IPL and ICL. These are Indian based organisations geared to turning T20 into billion dollar industries. Many players and ex-players have signed with both groups. That includes most of the Australian cricket team! And while any dissent about this been kept fairly quiet, cricketing boards around the work are not happy. CA is not happy. NZC is not happy. Shane Bond is not going to play for New Zealand again at the request of NZC because of contractual conflicts. One of the articles on Cricinfo even today outlines the concerns of CA and that they might exercise power of veto over players participation in IPL. Folks, we don’t want another WSC war. We don’t need to have one.

IPL and particularly ICL are drawing on many retired players, and second tier Indian players (these are excellent players – a country of 1.1 billion does have the potential to produce more than 15 international standard players). However, the “real players” are involved and we haven’t seen the true impact as yet. The Shane Bond situation should send out alarm bells. There is a great deal of money to be made in T20 and it will happen one way or another. The ICC and local governing bodies need to react quickly and move with the times. The Australian Cricket Board (CA was formerly known as the ACB) took 2.5 years to move with the times when KP (RIP) shook things up in 1977. In 1979, the ACB were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century. Of course, it had really taken them almost 70 years to move with the times.

Don’t be deluded into thinking that players are so well paid now, that a rebel competition could not succeed. While it is true that in 1977 players could easily take the moral high ground of the dispute – they were the key factors in a booming industry and were being paid a pittance. That’s how KP (RIP) got such overwhelming buy in from the players. We all know that the top players are paid a motza now but hands up who, no matter how well you are paid, would not like to be paid more. I don’t see any hands. The IPL and ICL are threats.

Cricket’s governing body could lessen the treats of IPL and ICL simply by flooding us with T20. Satisfy the demand with their own products. The best players, the supers stars, the household names are already contracted to them. They should go with the flow and unleash T20 on the world and retire 50 over cricket. One Day Cricket has had its day.

Appendix 1 – IPL and ICL.

IPL and ICL – what are they? What is the difference?

The Indian Premier League (IPL) is the brain child of The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) – it has official routes. If you want to own an IPL team you will need to fork out between $US 70m and $US 120m. It is still in formative stages, has a 1 billion dollar backing from Sony and many current players have signed.

http://premierleaguecricket.in/

The Indian Cricket League (ICL) is privately run but is a serious concern. It is running now. It comprised 6 teams at present but the vision is to expand to 16 teams by the third year. As already stated the player roster is mostly retired players and second tier Indians but there are some (ex) super stars in the list and some players who could still be representing their countries.

http://www.indiancricketleague.in/

Check out the six captains:

Chris Cairns
Stuart Law
Marvan Atupattu
Inzamam Ul Haq
Craig McMillan
Brian Charles Lara

And see if you recognise any of these names in the six teams.

Andrew Hall (SAf)
Darell Tuffey (NZ)
Hamish Marshall (NZ)
Imran Farhat (Pak)
Dinesh Mongia (Ind)
Chris Reed (Eng)
Ian Harvey (Aus)
Russell Arnold (SL)
Paul Nixon (Eng)
Abdul Razzak (Pak)
Chris Harris (NZ)
Nicky Boje (SAf)
Lance Klusener (SAf)
Nantie Hayward (SAf)
Mervin Dillon (WI)
Nathan Astle (NZ)