Should they stop playing ODIs?

Posted by
< 1 minute read

The 1999 semi-final wasn't bad

Martin Crowe says they should stop playing one-day internationals (ODIs). Do you agree?

We can’t honestly say that we pay much attention to ODIs – even England’s – but set against that, we do have great memories of 50-over World Cups. The Twenty20 World Cup is hugely entertaining, but we’re not sure that’s just because it’s a 20-over competition. We think it’s actually the fact that pretty much all the matches are meaningful.

There’s also the fact that we enjoyed the first Twenty20 World Cup more than the next two. Why was that? It was less predictable. No-one had a clue what they were doing and so you actually had to pay attention. If something of this could be injected into the 50-over World Cup, we feel like it would have a lot to offer. It would once again become ‘an event’.

So yes, do away with ODIs except for World Cups. Or maybe play odd exhibition matches as part of Test/Twenty20 tours. Also, don’t muck about with the rules. You only need to do that because everyone’s so wearied by familiarity. It’s not the rules that are the problem, it’s that matches have become formulaic through so much repetition.


Mike Gatting wasn't receiving the King Cricket email when he dropped that ludicrously easy chance against India in 1993.


Why risk it when it's so easy to sign up?


  1. They are the one to go if something has to go, that’s for sure. The funny thing is that ODIs have become better since the introduction of T20. Now that teams understand just what can be done by six batsmen in fifteen overs (150+ runs maybe), the last 15 overs of an ODI, and the build-up 35 to some extent, have become much more interesting.

    Still, you can’t have everything.

    No, on second thoughts, you can have everything. I want everything, all the time.

  2. You want herpes?

    You want the vertical plates of a stegosaurus emerging from your spine?

    You want Giles Clarke in the passenger seat of your car on the way home, lecturing you the entire way?

  3. 1. What, again?

    2. Yes, yes, yes – who doesn’t?

    3. I want this AND a powerful electric cattle prod.

  4. It doesn’t matter what Martin Crowe says – or you and I for that matter. ODIs still generate a lot of revenue in India and ODIs will stay. I am actually for it – I grew up watching ODIs and would be sad to see ’em go. The ’96 World Cup is still one of my favorite tournaments.

  5. Even number of posts – must be my turn again.

    I remember from last year an article here about changing the use of the word “good” when describing pitches. Always ahead of the game, KC. I suspect that it is the recent SL Vs India series that has tipped everyone else over the edge, but it is becoming hard to find anyone that disagrees with you now. Here is Peter Roebuck’s superb article on the subject:

    It mentions ODIs at some point, so I won’t have it that it isn’t relevant to this article.

  6. I enjoy them more now we have 20-20. They look like serious cricket and indicators of test form by comparison.

    A few less of them might be nice, though.

    You can only get herpes once.

  7. Is it possible to get herpes no times at all or do you have to get it once?

    That is a really strange photo, one batsman seems to have walked off leaving his bat behind, the other batsman doesn’t seem to have a bat at all. I have no idea what the umpire is doing but he is missing one of the fielders doing a rain dance on a length for the right arm around. What happens next?

  8. Thesaurusrus, that is the aftermath of the infamous run-out at the climax of the 1999 World Cup semi final.

    B, the 1999 World Cup is probably the last one we have good memories of. It was five weeks long and felt like an event.

  9. One thing that would get me to watch ODIs again is the removal of the current batch of commentators. Pommie, Robin, Lloyd, Grieg, Gavaskar etc are all really dull and predictable… much like the game.

    2) Forty overs is long enough.

    3) More tests. We need more tests.

  10. If the first T20 World Cup was so good because no-one had a clue what anyone was doing, then maybe each World Cup should be played over a different length so noone would ever have a clue what anyone was doing. The next one could be 30 overs?

  11. That’s a stupid idea that would absolutely work.

    In practice, that idea would work better than any borne of the most comprehensive thinking geared towards making the best competition for any one format.

    Cricket’s about adapting to different situations. That’s the point.

  12. KC,

    My point exactly. So it’s been 11 years since ODIs (including World Cups) felt like an event. Maybe it’s time to scrap it altogether.

  13. Well no, that’s our point; that by limiting other one-day series, it would once again become an event.

    A shorter tournament would help with that as well.

  14. I think Martin Crowe is right. We are liking ODI because we grew up watching ODI. But ODI is popular only in subcontinent. ODI was introduced to popularize cricket. But now t20 has been introduced to popularize it.So, t20 is newest form of ODI. Otherwise it’s very hard to watch every ball in TV or to stay 8 hours in stadium. Test must be kept because it’s necessary for skill & temperament of player. T20 is money maker spectacular. So the only reason to keep ODI is our childhood memories. But t20 is childhood memories of new generation kids. Sooner or later they will ban ODI.

Comments are closed.