It is precisely the tampering over the last decade that has harmed the format. You don’t need changes - you need a fair battle between bat and ball. Including reverse swing. The game has to be better. Not tv viewership. It is what it is.
I don't think it requires any changes. ODI has its place as a true differentiator between good and bad teams. In T20, even a weak team can beat a much stronger opponent on a lucky day. Only ODI serves both as a test of patience and temperament like Test cricket while also having phases of entertainment. We just need to make the pitches more balanced.
i think make odi 40 over with sachins idea of splitting the innings in two with each team have 10 wickets in total for both innings it will reduce the time by more than 1 hour. It will also reduce the disadvantage of toss as both teams have to bat 20 overs one after the other and also reduce the boring middle overs as well. And the most biggest thing if a weak opponent bat first which make odi boring in current time as they were got all out for 200 or less then all interest is gone but in this format weak opponent bat for 20 overs first then other team also have 20 overs time to bat atleast scoring as many runs as possible and another thing it will aslo make it situational as well
I agree. Bowling isn’t as wiley as it is in t20, but isn’t too long. To change the format just to change it is thoughtless. You end up getting things like… sixty60!?
Agreed 100%. Without ODI's what's the point of Associates, what just playing T20I's. Maybe a few First Class matches, a few List-A matches, at best. And the 3 Full Members of Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, & Ireland, would have no real future Cricket, as they all get little to no test matches a year.
T20 cricket essentially "solved" the issue with ODI cricket in that the middle overs were generally seen as boring simply by removing them. To keep ODI cricket, you would need to emphasize the tactical element more - in other words focus on making it a short-form test match, rather than just a longer form T20 game. Introduce a lot more risk and reward, maybe have it so that captains can set powerplay overs as long as they want, but each wicket costs them two wickets, etc.
I think removing bowling limits and making it very bowler-friendly (170-230 par wickets) would instantly make ODI's much better. It would have an identity of being "shortened" test matches. Personally, I like the first 10 overs of ODI's when the ball has some movement. On flat/non-spinning surfaces, the middle overs in ODI are boring because batters just play around 5-6+ runs per over without much risk of getting out. This wouldn't happen on a bowler-friendly pitch where their wickets would be threatened (case in point the India vs Australia WC match at Chennai). If the batsmen want to be aggressive, then there should also be a huge risk of them getting out! Personally cannot stand many of the modern-day 300+ pitches, where there is nothing for the bowlers when the ball stops swinging.
Add a fourth phase in the innings where teams can set their own fields with no restriction like a test match. Would sure spice up the dull middle period.
it will make it worse suppose a team need 80 runs in last 10 overs then bowling team would let 6 or 7 fielders out which will make it boring and in the 1st innings as well the bowling team do this as well in last 15-20 overs which will make it very boring
If by test fields you mean three slips and a gully, they can already do that, but it would make no sense because the balls and pitches do nothing. And if you mean nine on the boundary, that just makes it more boring especially in the middle.
that will be most boring part thats why we have 4 fielder out otherwise with 5 feilder batsmen just take singles only now atleast batsmen try to hit boudries
I just didn't understand the scrapping of the ODI Super League, it gave context which we have cried out for, kept series to three matches and gave associates a chance against the big boys, Zimbabwe got their first win in Australia during it. Dawid Malan played in every England series he was offered rather than going to franchise leagues and look where he is now.
Watching Test matches is far too long for many people it can get slow and takes up to 5 days for a result. T20Is on the other hand are far too unpredictable where the true skill of players cannot be seen as on a lucky day even smaller teams like Zimbabwe, Netherlands and Ireland can beat out England, Pakistan or South Africa. In my eyes ODIs are the quickest paced games where the skills of players are still tested to the fullest.
Yea we can.. Sachin gave the idea of splitting 50 overs as 25 overs per side with 2 innings.. -Just remove the dull period.. -10 wickets for 2 innings.. -With follow on rules.. With a single player replacement for 2nd innings.. you can get a specialist batter or bowler based on conditions
ngl this sounds interesting, but the problem is that it is not solving the issue of odi cricket being too long instead with 4 innings break it would ultimately stretch the game further
I'd go with each innings had 10 wickets that way you are playing a pseudo 20/20 but in a test format the to win you have the combined innings. Then you could do things like well if you dont use all 10 in the first innings you can add to 2nd or some sort of D/L method to add runs to the combined score.
@@rw-xf4cb it's not like you get extra runs for losing less wickets in T20 and also with 10 wickets in each innings it would eliminate the possibility of players scoring big hundreds and 200s which everyone likes to see in odi
Few ideas I've pondered over the years: 1 - I think bowlers must be allowed to bring their own balls to the game, just like batters bring their own bats. I would imagine a set of 3-4 teams balls per innings, each with different degrees of wear - allowing pacers and spinners to choose a ball that makes them immediately effective. The balls would have to be submitted to the umpires the day before the game for their approval. Teams can also submit balls based on their strengths - Don't have too many good spinning options like Australia at the current WC, go in with 2 new balls for the pacers to use and one old ball for the spinners. These balls can be used at any point in the innings, based on the bowler's choice. (Sorry, I typed my comment halfway into your video. The next couple of ideas are pretty much what you pointed to. Lesson learned. :)) Another related idea - Instead of 2 new balls per innings, one from each end, the rules can be changed to allow one ball to be used for 25 overs, and then switch to a new ball at the half way point. This would mean someone like a Shaheen Afridi or Bumrah could attack with a new ball at over 26, adding excitement to the middle overs. Thus far, the approach to making the middle overs more exciting has been from a batter's perspective only. Why not change things up for the bowlers? At minimum, you could leave it to the bowling team to choose how they want to use the second new white ball - right at the start or at over 26. 2 - The wickets for ODI cricket world over suck. Bring bowlers into the game to make for more exciting cricket. The Chennai wicket for the Ind vs. Aus WC 2023 game was fantastic. We need more low-scoring ODIs. 3 - The ODI world cup in its current form, where all teams congregate in one country for 6 weeks to play each other is not ideal from multiple perspectives - finding a 6 week window in a crowded calendar, fans not turning up in stadiums for neutral games, etc. I think the ODI world cup should be played in the UEFA Champions League format - play home/away games for league stages. Play knockout games at based on ranking in the league stage. You could add context to bilateral games through this approach. In addition, you could expand the world cup to include more than 10 teams as you no longer have a 6-week window constraint to conduct all games.
One option is to make it a 2 innings per team t20 game. It's reduced to 40 overs per side, but it allows for more hitting and strike bowling (best parts of t20). You'd also have the added excitement of declarations and innings defeats, which are the best parts of test cricket.
Very timely and relevant video, Jarrod. 👍👍 My suggestion is to reduce the ODIs to 40 overs per side (which you also suggested at 7:49) , USE DUKES WHITE BALL for ODIs and ONLY ONE SINGLE BALL FOR THE WHOLE INNINGS , which will bring Reverse swing back into the game. (Trivia : Dukes white ball was used in 1999 world cup also throughout the whole tournament and has better swing, reverse swing and durability as compared to Kookaburra.)
I think extreme pitches is the best answer. Either roads like Delhi where batters find it easy to keep attacking, or grasslands where the ball is whizzing past helmets, or ragger with massive turn. The balance between bat and ball we strive for is not something I think we can achieve in this format like in test cricket. Just give up on that and make it extreme. Like Gabba 22 or Ahmedabad 21. Except it won't be as bad in ODIs because of the pre-existing rules favouring batters. Slow pitches where no one can do anything is the biggest curse, in all three formats but most of all in ODIs.
All you need is a simple idea..."dish out bowling pitches"...if 50 overs are boring...make sure that none of the teams are able to play out the 50 overs...it made wonders for Test cricket...some of the greater test matches happened in the last 5 years
Instead of trying to make ODIs more batter friendly (yes, everybody likes big sixes, RR of 7+ and high intensity chases), shouldn't we try to make it a more even contest? Right now, the problem of the middle 25-30 overs being a snoozefest is a case of a lack of attacking by both the batters and the bowlers. The suggestion of removing over limits for bowlers would help here, allowing the captains to give a few overs to their strike bowlers try and get wickets in the middle overs instead of just stalling the scoring. And changes to the pitches and balls would certainly help as well. The idea of increasing fielders outside the ring after 10 over periods is a really good one - it will encourage the batters to attack more, even in overs 10-30, giving the bowling team a fair chance of taking wickets. This would effectively reduce the "dull" overs to just 30-40, which would add a nice flavour to the match as a whole. Currently, there's no ebb and flow to an ODI game, it feels as though every game is following a template, and changes like these could potentially "save" ODI cricket, if it does indeed need saving.
I'm not sure subs help. The 5th and 6th bowler problem is one of the few things that lends some tension to the middle overs. When can you safely get through those overs from the part timer. The 5th & 6th bowlers give the batters an attacking opportunity in the middle of the game. I certainly agree with making the game more bowling oriented. T20 is batter focused because you can go hard for the whole innings almost regardless of conditions. Problem is with an ODI, overs 10-35 are boring because you can still lose wickets playing on a road if you push too hard, so teams just bat carefully on a surface giving the bowlers nothing which is obviously tedious. If ODI's were all played on spitting cobras, every ball would be a potential wicket and batters would have to work hard the whole game. More attacking fields, particularly through the middle as bowling sides out (rather than sides getting themselves out) would be a legitimate goal.
How about splitting the match into four innings by giving both captains one declaration each they can use when either batting or fielding between the 10th and 40th over. So if Side 1 lose a couple of wickets and are 65-4 after 14 overs they can declare. Side 2 bats until it declares or chooses to bat all 50 and set a target and Side 1 resumes at 65-4 to get the target. Similarly, if Side 1 are 150-1 after 24 with good momentum, Side 2 can force them to declare to stop that momentum. But when Side 2 bat, Side 1 can then declare on them anytime they want between 10 and 40 overs. It's reduces the impact of the toss and can arrest momentum in one sided games.
We dont need to change ODI. Theres 20/20 If you want something shorter and more exiting, and theres test if you want something traditional. And I feel like ODI you get a bit of both. The slow build up in the middle also make for interesting cricket and almost "plot building".... "will they collapse and score 200 or will they kick on and get 350"
3 things will change the odi cricket and make it more entertaining. 1) no field restrictions i.e. 5 fielders outside circle any time in the innings 2) just one ball for an innings, better seam more shine so it favours bowlers 3) bowler friendly pitches and longer boundaries pls.
I would suggest the following: 1) Substitutions allowed max one while batting and 1 in bowling. 2) reduce to 40 overs with pink ball or more durable balls and only one ball. 3)have balanced pitches like in 40 overs 250 to 280 should be par score. 4) optional may be reduce it to 2 t20 with total 10 wickets where powerplay is at last 5 overs so batsman have to score.
One idea for ODI cricket is to make it a true mix of Test and T20 - two new innings each for both teams like in Tests, of 20-25 overs like in a T20. New ball in each innings. Add in follow on rules. This gives both Test cricket lovers and T20 lovers something to enjoy, and in case of day-night matches where one team gets the advantage of the conditions, there is no such problem
I think bowler-friendly wickets should do the trick. One of the best days of a test match is the 5th day. ODI needs to replicate just the 5th day. I would love to watch ODI matches played on 5th day test wickets with the red ball..
I think the baseball approach would be really good. Just have to make sure they are not taking a new every 10 over instead use the same.The game would ahve so many twists and turns ( literally, cause the ball gets rough and spinner get into the picture) . The ball starts to reverse as well at some point. The pitch is the other part of the equation here, the away team should be given a say on the pitch condition. or atleast the condtion of the pitch should be left to the winner of the toss. say you win the toss, you either choose the pitch or choose to bat/field.
I think its time to get put odi cricket on shelf Let's be honest We watch first few overs for fast bowler swing n unplayable balls n then death overs for explosive batting N between 11 to 40 Its just dull overs... spinners bowling tight ..only singles n doubles Whereas t20 offers u exactly what u want Powerplay fast bowlers swinging N leggies mindgame in middle overs N death Where batters go dynamite I watch odi match just to see my favourite players making records , hundreds But in upcoming years can't see them playing every match coz there's so much cricket So by 2027 Odis should be vanished Tests should be played by top 8 teams only N focus in t20s so associate countries can rise n compete
ODI changes I want:- 1)Ditch bilaterals and get Tri-series, Quad-series and Pentangulars(with one associate nation in Pentangulars like NED/NEP/ARG/UGA/KEN/SCO/DEN) etc. 2)Only ONE ball for an inning 3) Make ground either 80-90m long or make wickets with 250-260 par score 4) More bouncers like 1 bouncer in powerplay, 3 bouncers in Middle overs, no bouncers between 41-45 and 4 bouncers between 46-50 5) 8 runs for sixes over 99 metres. 6) Make Champions Trophy as a direct knock out event with no round robin like it used to be in "98. We can put 16-32 teams there with all big nations in fixtures such that QF would be like IND v PAK or AUS v ENG. At least small teams will get some chance to play. So direct knock out like Round of 32 in FIFA 2026 WC. 7) ODI WC to be hosted by multiple nations and with at least 16-20 teams. Schedule to be released One year before WC so that fans can come.
make it 40 overs with sachins idea of splitting it into two innings with total of 10 wickets like team A bat 20 overs and score 100/3 so then team B would bat their 20 overs and agian team A will bat and continue their innings from 100/3 and set target for team B as- -It will reduce the time by more than one hour -it will reduce boring middle overs -it will make it situational as well as teams would like to score more to make their lead in first innings and in second innings if the team is behind and they have to set the score then aslo they go aggressive to make the target good enough for chasing team -and if a team which are not able to score big runs like currently in asia cup final sl all out for 50 so it make the game boring in second innings and very short as well so in these cases the other team have the chance to bat atleast 20 overs and and eventually they will get chance to bat in second innings as well when they came out bat -it will make odi more interesting for most part as if afg play against ind and afg batting first then in current odi format no one wanna watch afg innings and everyone wants to see ind batting but with two innings rule afg bat only 20 overs firts and then ind can score as many runs in their 20 overs no matter what afg have score in their 1st innings of 20 overs - it will also reduce the advantages and disadvantages of the conditions as both teams have to bat one after the other like in ind vs aus wc match in chennai aus dont know how much runs is good enough or how they can approach the innings but with two innings rule aus bat their 20 overs and then ind would bat 20 overs so when aus comes out to bat again then they can assess how to approach the innings and set the target so this element would make the odi very much ineteresting and fair for both teams
The best part of this idea is we will get a result after 40 overs… Imagine playing 69 overs and still not getting a result. Just a farce! This is good suggestion, also we need the T-10 format if cricket is included in the Olympics. Giving medals just based on seedings is pathetic and a big L for the game. Ironic that it got into the Games after the Asian Games fiasco!
@@ThePinguPenguin T10 is too short not good enough t20 is accurate and olympics sport have sports which go on for more than 3 hours so no problem with t20
As a fairly avid watcher of cricket, ODI cricket has always been a chore for me past say the very early 2010s. Nowadays, outside of the summer of cricket in Australia, typified by test cricket as part of the furniture, ODI cricket is just "there". I treat it like I treat a sport with four quarters- I'll watch the first and last quarters and get a good enough feel for the game. Batters nurdling along in the middle overs is boring as fuck to watch- always the same, spinners bowl something like 20 overs with some medium pace brought in. It's only the first 10 and the last 15 overs that are interesting.
Nice one on having a good but short video. Haven’t time to watch most of your longer videos. Get them down to 15 minutes, that would be great! Why don’t they just reduce 50 overs down to 35. Get rid of 20/20s and just have the 35 over games and tests. A 35 over game would be a great mix and captains would need to decide if they go for the 20/20 type power game or more test like and build a total, and when they hit the go button…and the benefit of not taking 8 hours.
Things which can make ODI cricket more interesting -- * ODI should be reduced to 40/35 overs because in today's world many people are too much busy to spend 10 hours on cricket game. * It should be played with pink ball * Piches should be more bowler friendly And im not talking about spinners it should support more swing, seam and bounce . There should be only powerplay of 8 overs and batting side can choose when to use the powerplay it should not be fixed. * Bilateral cricket should be reduced to 2 home tour and 2 away tour because less is more. "Each tour should not contain more than 3 odis.
Having two bowls, and using them whenever they like is a good idea, like one team can use one ball for like 30 overs and then use the use 2nd one like new ball in tests, or using the pink ball is also useful, apart from them other suggestions just seem a bit far-fetched tbf
Why are we still playing cricket with white balls? We can actually play ODI cricket with a pink ball (which means that you can use one ball for the whole innings).
Listing all these ideas shows how many elements of ODI cricket are just tradition that could be upended. I do like the four 25 innings idea, combined with more bowler friendly wickets. A new ball at the start of each 25 over period. It would significantly reduce the inherent unfairness of changing conditions in day night games and it would introduce a lot of new tactical considerations. Sure, you might have some times when batters play for the break, but alternatively they could be more aggressive to cash in if they’re well set and would have to start again in different conditions later, especially if their team is behind on the comparative score at the same stage. Captains would have to think about when to use different types of bowlers, day or night? If the scores are lower in general than they are now, it could make for tense contests, and I’ll take genuine tension over enormous scores on roads any day.
1 day cricket format should exist with some changes in it like how 60 overs became 50 overs like that it can be 40 overs game with 200 balls in it and 5 balls 1 over.
Keep the fielding restrictions and having one innings with 10 wickets per side. Dump bowler over limits, bat 10 overs at a time and spice up the pitches. I'd watch that.
40 overs a side with max 10 overs per bowler. Then 4 best bowlers bowl - teams play with one extra batter. Must have 2 close-in catchers and max four fielders outside the ring throughout the innings. One ball is enough since only 40 overs - so chance of reverse swing and spinners also to come into play. Overall will result in more attacking bowling and batting (not the boring run fest that T20 is) - and total viewer time of 6 hours (4pm -10pm; or 5-11pm).
What if one ball for 1st 25 overs and another for next 25? 1st New Ball: *Overs 1-10 -Only 2 fielders outside the circle *Overs 11-20 -Only 4 fielders outside the circle * Overs 21-25 -Only 5 fielders outside the circle (much older ball with 5 boundary riders might help spinners) 2nd New Ball: *Overs 26-30 -Only 3 fielders outside the circle (Fast bowlers can be brought back to take wickets while set batters make use of field restriction, which could give the much needed impetus in the middle overs) *Overs 31-40 -Only 4 fielders outside the circle *Overs 41-50 -Only 5 fielders outside the circle
Without ODI's what's the point of Associates, what just playing T20I's. Maybe a few First Class matches, a few List-A matches, at best. And the 3 Full Members of Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, & Ireland, would have no real future Cricket, as they all get little to no test matches a year.
Rule changes have never worked in terms of making the game more popular. ODI cricket peaked in the 90s. Since then we’ve seen rule change after rule change and declining popularity
The reason is T20 and not rule changes. In 90s we never had an option of T20 cricket... So the entertainment part was from ODI. Since 2000s we got T20 which is more entertaining... So ODI was sidelined. It was the rule changes which ensured that ODI survived till 2023.
I have a crazy suggestion: if a batter faces 6 consecutive deliveries with no runs scored by the team, then the batter is deemed out. So a maiden over can lead to a dismissal. More incentive for the batter to score runs and if they become desperate it could lead to a wicket!
Dude. I thought this same thing. I thought it was a crazy Yank idea. Imagine how exciting a maiden over could be! They'd have to get a run on the last ball.
Tbh! As an Indian this year's World Cup feeling lackluster comparing to previous worlds not only becoz of one-sided winning but also coz of very limited venues. 2011 WC is the best everybody talking about it back than, nowadays people just IPL IPL IPL. Cricket is really trying hard to be like soccer, only focusing on premier league and money. That's not real cricket. This is real sports. Playiy for country.
England used to have a pro40 lesgue. What happened to that? I also feel the tri series which were played in Australia back then kept the odis entertaining. Now nobody plays tri series
the think is odi cricket is reduce by one and if we talk about reduce over 30 can be a sweet spot because for a working professional 9hr is impossible beacuse sports is good but food is more important. and it also impossible to see a match during summer in asia
Technically rugby union and rugby league have two entirely different governing bodies whereas all 3 forms of cricket are governed by the ICC. I like your analogy though! They are all very differentiated forms of the game.
I think removing fielding restrictions during middle overs would be cool. Keep the first powerplay as it is and remove restrictions afterwards. Like test matches. This could make it more balanced and interesting. Imagine a spinner boeling with a test match field in ODIs. And Imagine a batsmen making a 100 despite no restrictions in the field, itll feel like a well fought test match 100.
Many are saying 25 overs per side as 2 innings. Thats actually a new tupe of cricket. Not ODi. And why do you need 25 over cricket for 2 innings when we already have 20 overs T20 cricket. 😅
The biggest problem imho in all cricket atm is the competition between bat and ball. Atm it is very much in favour of the bat. Ridiculously big bats that have turn what used to be mishit slogs caught in the infield to sixes. Flat pitches, fast outfields, protective gear, and a plethora of bowling restrictions. Who would want to be a fast bowler these days? The bat issue needs to be looked at. Bring back 90s spec bats. Good shots go to the fence. Bad shots get you out. Take the boundaries out as far as possible. If they won't reel the bats in, then let's see 90-100m boundaries. Given the quality of protective gear, short pitched bowling restrictions (I e 2 per over) need to be removed. Bring back the balance between bat and ball. BTW I find T20 cricket boring.
Tendulkar had once (many many years back) given the perfect answer to save 50 over cricket! Make it a 25 over 4 innings (each team gets two innings) match!
Make it 4 innings of twenty overs each so that it really is the perfect mix of Test match and T20. Including a follow-on rule of 50 runs. This also completely solves the boring middle over problem. Also, get rid of meaningless bilateral games by having all ODI's count towards some sort of qualification, like the WTC. No more 5 game ODI series. The longest a series can be is 3 games.
None of these fixes will work. Only thing that makes me watch the middle over is if my favourite player comes out to bat. I used to watch middle overs for MSD. Nowadays if Surya comes to bat in middle overs I want to watch. Only if teams play their fan favourite in middle overs that will bring viewership.
Just use the pink ball cut 10 overs off to get rid of those middle I’ve they need to add something like the three point line maybe during over 25 to 35 add double runs even it might be a bit gimmicky
I believe just scrap ODIs, it will help cricket. T20 is a huge market. We can replace ODI matches with either tests or a T20. For example India is touring South Africa where they will play 2 test, 3 ODIs and 3 T20s. So, why only 2 test and that too between two good teams. I think instead of 3 ODIs one Test could have been added. ODIs are not relevant anymore, nor it is generating any viewership or money nor it is class cricket like test match so why to keep it. I want more participation in the World Cup and it is possible in T20 cricket only.
To say Sachin’s version won’t work based on that 1 time played in Australia is like saying, well basically everything in the history of working “not working” it needs to be given a chance to actually see its potential, people didn’t know how to go about t20 when it first came out. 180 was considered a good score of 60 overs when ODI was introduced. I feel Sachin’s Version could be the only thing that could save ODIs if there is any. Purely cause it fixes a lot of real issues with ODIs, bowling over limits or fielding limits are not a problem, they exist in t20 too. The problems are with slow paced middle overs and not many close games cause of toss advantages. Sachin’s version deals with both those issues. 6:16
No we cannot. The world's changed a lot. Tiktok and reels have fckd our attention span. I cannot watch the world cup, except when India plays. Thats more due to passion and love.
Leave ODI, I even watch T20 just the overs from 1 to 5 and then last two maybe . Not because I do not love the bowling and want to see only boundaries but because there is not enough competition between bat and bowl. White bowl cricket is like a batsman game these days. I love Test cricket where each over is a contest.
Main problem is that no one wants to seriously improve the game and it also helps boards weaker international cricket more they can promote their leagues and the most beneficial of them is BCCI. You can see in how they organised world cup in lackluster and corrupt manner so that there less buzz around world cup which will help them in future to increase ipl window what a shame
you people are mad. You will keep complaining. ODI is perfect as is. It would be better if the pitches were more green and harder to bat on with longer boundaries. This is the most demanding format and is true test of Cricketing excellence. t20 is a joke. it will remain that. Pakistan played Sri Lanka yesterday, Pakistan was on top for some 30 overs in the middle and as soon as Abdullah Shafiq was dismissed, Sri Lanka was very much in the game as there were still more than 100 to score and Theekshana had several overs left. t20 is not like that. you play good for 10 overs and it doesn't matter how shitty you are, you can keep swinging and 99% of the times will bat the whole innings till 20th over. ODI cricket is the pinnacle of cricket. It will always be there.
@@anshulsaxena4931 test cricket is protected by Aussies and English. And yes, Test cricket is extremely graceful. I love test Cricket. but ODI is just miles ahead even with mismanagement and low effort to keep the game up.
Cricket is not making inroads in new countries. Worse, countries which were better at it are not good in it anymore. There is a time when people get bored of any sport. New audience is required. New competitors, new rivalries.
If cricket gets a permanent place in Olympics, ODIs are pretty much dead. ODI needs to make changes in the format itself as suggested by Sachin to save the game and ODI WC needs to be more inclusive.
In the middle overs, for every block of 5 overs, if the runrate drops below 5 runs/over the batting team looses a wicket or is penalised with an "overs" penalty. By reducing the overs left.
Lets face it, odi is a dying format and the only thing keeping it relevant is the wc. If you want to watch quality cricket u go watch tests. If u want entertainment u go watch t20s. No matter the new gimmicks odi will still remain the older brother who refuses to leave. Its a 7 hour game, its not the twentieth century anymore, no one has the time nor can many afford the time to invest into a 7 hour snooze fest.
End Test cricket. LOL. Five freakin days!!! The hypocrisy and irony is downright ludicrous. No one cares seriously. People who have a problem with ODIs simply have a problem with cricket as a sport at end of day. Just wait and watch, by the time this WC is over, ODIs will be reaffirmed and re established as the perfect pinnacle of Hegelian dialectic between tests and t20s.
not many people like to watch 8 hours of odi cricket ,people can still watch test cricket because it gives something unique and than T20 is the future with exciting cricket continuously for 3.5 hours
I have disliked bilateral ODIs (and now bilateral T20s) for a long time. There is no context, it is often heavily weighted towards the home team, among other reasons. I would prefer if both formats work around triangular tournaments like the Benson and Hedges / VB Tournaments that were held in Australia during the 80s and 90s - the addition of a third team gives it context, and a regular spot in the calendar will allow for such triangulars to get some spotlight, certainly more than bilaterals have ever enjoyed. As for the ODI format, look I am a 90s cricket kid - it was my gateway drug to cricket as a whole, and a part of me will always have a sentimental attachment to that format. It is also the format I least watch now simply because of the excessive tampering that has gone into the playing regulations. In doing so, it is unrecognizable to those who love the format and those who hate it - no wonder then that we are constantly wondering what to do with the format. Personally, ODIs is the right balance betweent the slow burn of test cricket and the rock and roll of T20s. One possible change I would try out: 2 innings of 20 overs / team. Instead of a possible 100 overs, you are reducing the format to a total of 80. I think it would be a great ad for both the structure of test cricket and showcasing the funkiness of T20.
Wrong. The introduction of T20 ruined ODIs. When you have a better entertainment people watch that... People in 80s 90s 2000s just had ODI... So it was living... People since 2010s got T20 cricket... So they switched to T20 from ODI
You could take the piss and do the opposite of your first idea and limit the number of bowlers even further so you have some rubbish bowlers bowling. Could be entertaining!
![The Wall Song ร้องข้ามกำแพง | EP.213 | กรีน อัษฎาพร | 3 ต.ค. 67 [1/5]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3KrlLbCsadI/mqdefault.jpg)
It is precisely the tampering over the last decade that has harmed the format.
You don’t need changes - you need a fair battle between bat and ball.
Including reverse swing.
The game has to be better.
Not tv viewership.
It is what it is.
👍
Fully agree
I would agree with you if we lived a world where things were idealistic and not based on money, if you can't make money it doesn't work
ODI will die
I don't think it requires any changes. ODI has its place as a true differentiator between good and bad teams. In T20, even a weak team can beat a much stronger opponent on a lucky day. Only ODI serves both as a test of patience and temperament like Test cricket while also having phases of entertainment. We just need to make the pitches more balanced.
i think make odi 40 over with sachins idea of splitting the innings in two with each team have 10 wickets in total for both innings it will reduce the time by more than 1 hour. It will also reduce the disadvantage of toss as both teams have to bat 20 overs one after the other and also reduce the boring middle overs as well. And the most biggest thing if a weak opponent bat first which make odi boring in current time as they were got all out for 200 or less then all interest is gone but in this format weak opponent bat for 20 overs first then other team also have 20 overs time to bat atleast scoring as many runs as possible and another thing it will aslo make it situational as well
You're making ODIs look like a complete allrounder when it's just a bits and pieces player
I agree. Bowling isn’t as wiley as it is in t20, but isn’t too long. To change the format just to change it is thoughtless. You end up getting things like… sixty60!?
Agreed 100%. Without ODI's what's the point of Associates, what just playing T20I's. Maybe a few First Class matches, a few List-A matches, at best. And the 3 Full Members of Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, & Ireland, would have no real future Cricket, as they all get little to no test matches a year.
ODI will die
T20 cricket essentially "solved" the issue with ODI cricket in that the middle overs were generally seen as boring simply by removing them.
To keep ODI cricket, you would need to emphasize the tactical element more - in other words focus on making it a short-form test match, rather than just a longer form T20 game.
Introduce a lot more risk and reward, maybe have it so that captains can set powerplay overs as long as they want, but each wicket costs them two wickets, etc.
I think removing bowling limits and making it very bowler-friendly (170-230 par wickets) would instantly make ODI's much better. It would have an identity of being "shortened" test matches. Personally, I like the first 10 overs of ODI's when the ball has some movement. On flat/non-spinning surfaces, the middle overs in ODI are boring because batters just play around 5-6+ runs per over without much risk of getting out. This wouldn't happen on a bowler-friendly pitch where their wickets would be threatened (case in point the India vs Australia WC match at Chennai). If the batsmen want to be aggressive, then there should also be a huge risk of them getting out! Personally cannot stand many of the modern-day 300+ pitches, where there is nothing for the bowlers when the ball stops swinging.
Add a fourth phase in the innings where teams can set their own fields with no restriction like a test match. Would sure spice up the dull middle period.
That will just make it worse
it will make it worse suppose a team need 80 runs in last 10 overs then bowling team would let 6 or 7 fielders out which will make it boring and in the 1st innings as well the bowling team do this as well in last 15-20 overs which will make it very boring
@@raghavsharma4117 Should have clarified. Didn't mean to make it the final phase.
If by test fields you mean three slips and a gully, they can already do that, but it would make no sense because the balls and pitches do nothing. And if you mean nine on the boundary, that just makes it more boring especially in the middle.
that will be most boring part thats why we have 4 fielder out otherwise with 5 feilder batsmen just take singles only now atleast batsmen try to hit boudries
I just didn't understand the scrapping of the ODI Super League, it gave context which we have cried out for, kept series to three matches and gave associates a chance against the big boys, Zimbabwe got their first win in Australia during it. Dawid Malan played in every England series he was offered rather than going to franchise leagues and look where he is now.
Money talks again.
Watching Test matches is far too long for many people it can get slow and takes up to 5 days for a result. T20Is on the other hand are far too unpredictable where the true skill of players cannot be seen as on a lucky day even smaller teams like Zimbabwe, Netherlands and Ireland can beat out England, Pakistan or South Africa. In my eyes ODIs are the quickest paced games where the skills of players are still tested to the fullest.
I know this is with hindsight, but the Netherlands did beat South Africa.
Yea we can..
Sachin gave the idea of splitting 50 overs as 25 overs per side with 2 innings..
-Just remove the dull period..
-10 wickets for 2 innings..
-With follow on rules..
With a single player replacement for 2nd innings.. you can get a specialist batter or bowler based on conditions
Bruh it isn't even sachin's idea wasn't there a match like this btw nz and ind .
ngl this sounds interesting, but the problem is that it is not solving the issue of odi cricket being too long instead with 4 innings break it would ultimately stretch the game further
I'd go with each innings had 10 wickets that way you are playing a pseudo 20/20 but in a test format the to win you have the combined innings. Then you could do things like well if you dont use all 10 in the first innings you can add to 2nd or some sort of D/L method to add runs to the combined score.
@@rw-xf4cb it's not like you get extra runs for losing less wickets in T20 and also with 10 wickets in each innings it would eliminate the possibility of players scoring big hundreds and 200s which everyone likes to see in odi
@@98.951make it 40 over with sachin idea split it in 2 innings of 20 overs for each team with 10 wickets
Few ideas I've pondered over the years:
1 - I think bowlers must be allowed to bring their own balls to the game, just like batters bring their own bats. I would imagine a set of 3-4 teams balls per innings, each with different degrees of wear - allowing pacers and spinners to choose a ball that makes them immediately effective. The balls would have to be submitted to the umpires the day before the game for their approval. Teams can also submit balls based on their strengths - Don't have too many good spinning options like Australia at the current WC, go in with 2 new balls for the pacers to use and one old ball for the spinners. These balls can be used at any point in the innings, based on the bowler's choice.
(Sorry, I typed my comment halfway into your video. The next couple of ideas are pretty much what you pointed to. Lesson learned. :))
Another related idea - Instead of 2 new balls per innings, one from each end, the rules can be changed to allow one ball to be used for 25 overs, and then switch to a new ball at the half way point. This would mean someone like a Shaheen Afridi or Bumrah could attack with a new ball at over 26, adding excitement to the middle overs. Thus far, the approach to making the middle overs more exciting has been from a batter's perspective only. Why not change things up for the bowlers? At minimum, you could leave it to the bowling team to choose how they want to use the second new white ball - right at the start or at over 26.
2 - The wickets for ODI cricket world over suck. Bring bowlers into the game to make for more exciting cricket. The Chennai wicket for the Ind vs. Aus WC 2023 game was fantastic. We need more low-scoring ODIs.
3 - The ODI world cup in its current form, where all teams congregate in one country for 6 weeks to play each other is not ideal from multiple perspectives - finding a 6 week window in a crowded calendar, fans not turning up in stadiums for neutral games, etc. I think the ODI world cup should be played in the UEFA Champions League format - play home/away games for league stages. Play knockout games at based on ranking in the league stage. You could add context to bilateral games through this approach. In addition, you could expand the world cup to include more than 10 teams as you no longer have a 6-week window constraint to conduct all games.
Thing that is most funniest about crowd aspect is people expect packed stadium in the first over of 9 hours game 😂
I think the problem with giving more overs than 10 in ODI to a bowler, would be quite big as captains will then play with more batters.
One option is to make it a 2 innings per team t20 game. It's reduced to 40 overs per side, but it allows for more hitting and strike bowling (best parts of t20). You'd also have the added excitement of declarations and innings defeats, which are the best parts of test cricket.
Very timely and relevant video, Jarrod. 👍👍
My suggestion is to reduce the ODIs to 40 overs per side (which you also suggested at 7:49) , USE DUKES WHITE BALL for ODIs and ONLY ONE SINGLE BALL FOR THE WHOLE INNINGS , which will bring Reverse swing back into the game.
(Trivia : Dukes white ball was used in 1999 world cup also throughout the whole tournament and has better swing, reverse swing and durability as compared to Kookaburra.)
I think extreme pitches is the best answer. Either roads like Delhi where batters find it easy to keep attacking, or grasslands where the ball is whizzing past helmets, or ragger with massive turn. The balance between bat and ball we strive for is not something I think we can achieve in this format like in test cricket. Just give up on that and make it extreme. Like Gabba 22 or Ahmedabad 21. Except it won't be as bad in ODIs because of the pre-existing rules favouring batters. Slow pitches where no one can do anything is the biggest curse, in all three formats but most of all in ODIs.
All you need is a simple idea..."dish out bowling pitches"...if 50 overs are boring...make sure that none of the teams are able to play out the 50 overs...it made wonders for Test cricket...some of the greater test matches happened in the last 5 years
Instead of trying to make ODIs more batter friendly (yes, everybody likes big sixes, RR of 7+ and high intensity chases), shouldn't we try to make it a more even contest? Right now, the problem of the middle 25-30 overs being a snoozefest is a case of a lack of attacking by both the batters and the bowlers. The suggestion of removing over limits for bowlers would help here, allowing the captains to give a few overs to their strike bowlers try and get wickets in the middle overs instead of just stalling the scoring. And changes to the pitches and balls would certainly help as well.
The idea of increasing fielders outside the ring after 10 over periods is a really good one - it will encourage the batters to attack more, even in overs 10-30, giving the bowling team a fair chance of taking wickets. This would effectively reduce the "dull" overs to just 30-40, which would add a nice flavour to the match as a whole. Currently, there's no ebb and flow to an ODI game, it feels as though every game is following a template, and changes like these could potentially "save" ODI cricket, if it does indeed need saving.
I'm not sure subs help. The 5th and 6th bowler problem is one of the few things that lends some tension to the middle overs. When can you safely get through those overs from the part timer. The 5th & 6th bowlers give the batters an attacking opportunity in the middle of the game.
I certainly agree with making the game more bowling oriented. T20 is batter focused because you can go hard for the whole innings almost regardless of conditions. Problem is with an ODI, overs 10-35 are boring because you can still lose wickets playing on a road if you push too hard, so teams just bat carefully on a surface giving the bowlers nothing which is obviously tedious. If ODI's were all played on spitting cobras, every ball would be a potential wicket and batters would have to work hard the whole game. More attacking fields, particularly through the middle as bowling sides out (rather than sides getting themselves out) would be a legitimate goal.
👍
How about splitting the match into four innings by giving both captains one declaration each they can use when either batting or fielding between the 10th and 40th over. So if Side 1 lose a couple of wickets and are 65-4 after 14 overs they can declare. Side 2 bats until it declares or chooses to bat all 50 and set a target and Side 1 resumes at 65-4 to get the target. Similarly, if Side 1 are 150-1 after 24 with good momentum, Side 2 can force them to declare to stop that momentum. But when Side 2 bat, Side 1 can then declare on them anytime they want between 10 and 40 overs. It's reduces the impact of the toss and can arrest momentum in one sided games.
We dont need to change ODI. Theres 20/20 If you want something shorter and more exiting, and theres test if you want something traditional. And I feel like ODI you get a bit of both. The slow build up in the middle also make for interesting cricket and almost "plot building".... "will they collapse and score 200 or will they kick on and get 350"
I think they need to make more bowling friendly pitches. With turn, swing, seam etc..like the Chennai pitch or Lords one.
@@heretichello8253 I agree, the pitches this world cup are looking very flat... but that might change as they wear
3 things will change the odi cricket and make it more entertaining.
1) no field restrictions i.e. 5 fielders outside circle any time in the innings
2) just one ball for an innings, better seam more shine so it favours bowlers
3) bowler friendly pitches and longer boundaries pls.
I would suggest the following:
1) Substitutions allowed max one while batting and 1 in bowling.
2) reduce to 40 overs with pink ball or more durable balls and only one ball.
3)have balanced pitches like in 40 overs 250 to 280 should be par score.
4) optional may be reduce it to 2 t20 with total 10 wickets where powerplay is at last 5 overs so batsman have to score.
One idea for ODI cricket is to make it a true mix of Test and T20 - two new innings each for both teams like in Tests, of 20-25 overs like in a T20. New ball in each innings. Add in follow on rules. This gives both Test cricket lovers and T20 lovers something to enjoy, and in case of day-night matches where one team gets the advantage of the conditions, there is no such problem
I think bowler-friendly wickets should do the trick. One of the best days of a test match is the 5th day. ODI needs to replicate just the 5th day. I would love to watch ODI matches played on 5th day test wickets with the red ball..
I think the baseball approach would be really good. Just have to make sure they are not taking a new every 10 over instead use the same.The game would ahve so many twists and turns ( literally, cause the ball gets rough and spinner get into the picture) . The ball starts to reverse as well at some point. The pitch is the other part of the equation here, the away team should be given a say on the pitch condition. or atleast the condtion of the pitch should be left to the winner of the toss. say you win the toss, you either choose the pitch or choose to bat/field.
It is only the third favorite format in the west. It’s second in South Asia. Test is the only format currently that needs to be rid of first.
I think its time to get put odi cricket on shelf
Let's be honest
We watch first few overs for fast bowler swing n unplayable balls n then death overs for explosive batting
N between 11 to 40
Its just dull overs... spinners bowling tight ..only singles n doubles
Whereas t20 offers u exactly what u want
Powerplay fast bowlers swinging
N leggies mindgame in middle overs
N death
Where batters go dynamite
I watch odi match just to see my favourite players making records , hundreds
But in upcoming years can't see them playing every match coz there's so much cricket
So by 2027
Odis should be vanished
Tests should be played by top 8 teams only
N focus in t20s so associate countries can rise n compete
ODI changes I want:-
1)Ditch bilaterals and get Tri-series, Quad-series and Pentangulars(with one associate nation in Pentangulars like NED/NEP/ARG/UGA/KEN/SCO/DEN) etc.
2)Only ONE ball for an inning
3) Make ground either 80-90m long or make wickets with 250-260 par score
4) More bouncers like 1 bouncer in powerplay, 3 bouncers in Middle overs, no bouncers between 41-45 and 4 bouncers between 46-50
5) 8 runs for sixes over 99 metres.
6) Make Champions Trophy as a direct knock out event with no round robin like it used to be in "98. We can put 16-32 teams there with all big nations in fixtures such that QF would be like IND v PAK or AUS v ENG. At least small teams will get some chance to play. So direct knock out like Round of 32 in FIFA 2026 WC.
7) ODI WC to be hosted by multiple nations and with at least 16-20 teams. Schedule to be released One year before WC so that fans can come.
make it 40 overs with sachins idea of splitting it into two innings with total of 10 wickets like team A bat 20 overs and score 100/3 so then team B would bat their 20 overs and agian team A will bat and continue their innings from 100/3 and set target for team B as-
-It will reduce the time by more than one hour
-it will reduce boring middle overs
-it will make it situational as well as teams would like to score more to make their lead in first innings and in second innings if the team is behind and they have to set the score then aslo they go aggressive to make the target good enough for chasing team
-and if a team which are not able to score big runs like currently in asia cup final sl all out for 50 so it make the game boring in second innings and very short as well so in these cases the other team have the chance to bat atleast 20 overs and and eventually they will get chance to bat in second innings as well when they came out bat
-it will make odi more interesting for most part as if afg play against ind and afg batting first then in current odi format no one wanna watch afg innings and everyone wants to see ind batting but with two innings rule afg bat only 20 overs firts and then ind can score as many runs in their 20 overs no matter what afg have score in their 1st innings of 20 overs
- it will also reduce the advantages and disadvantages of the conditions as both teams have to bat one after the other like in ind vs aus wc match in chennai aus dont know how much runs is good enough or how they can approach the innings but with two innings rule aus bat their 20 overs and then ind would bat 20 overs so when aus comes out to bat again then they can assess how to approach the innings and set the target so this element would make the odi very much ineteresting and fair for both teams
The best part of this idea is we will get a result after 40 overs… Imagine playing 69 overs and still not getting a result. Just a farce!
This is good suggestion, also we need the T-10 format if cricket is included in the Olympics. Giving medals just based on seedings is pathetic and a big L for the game. Ironic that it got into the Games after the Asian Games fiasco!
@@ThePinguPenguin T10 is too short not good enough t20 is accurate and olympics sport have sports which go on for more than 3 hours so no problem with t20
As a fairly avid watcher of cricket, ODI cricket has always been a chore for me past say the very early 2010s. Nowadays, outside of the summer of cricket in Australia, typified by test cricket as part of the furniture, ODI cricket is just "there". I treat it like I treat a sport with four quarters- I'll watch the first and last quarters and get a good enough feel for the game. Batters nurdling along in the middle overs is boring as fuck to watch- always the same, spinners bowl something like 20 overs with some medium pace brought in. It's only the first 10 and the last 15 overs that are interesting.
👍
Then how do you find Test matches?
@@siddharthreddiar3353if you think test cricket is 'batters nurdling along' for 5 days, there's a lot you need to understand.
The situation created by middle overs make last 15 over interesting so middle over is important.
Nice one on having a good but short video. Haven’t time to watch most of your longer videos. Get them down to 15 minutes, that would be great! Why don’t they just reduce 50 overs down to 35. Get rid of 20/20s and just have the 35 over games and tests. A 35 over game would be a great mix and captains would need to decide if they go for the 20/20 type power game or more test like and build a total, and when they hit the go button…and the benefit of not taking 8 hours.
Things which can make ODI cricket more interesting --
* ODI should be reduced to 40/35 overs because in today's world many people are too much busy to spend 10 hours on cricket game.
* It should be played with pink ball
* Piches should be more bowler friendly
And im not talking about spinners it should support more swing, seam and bounce .
There should be only powerplay of 8 overs and batting side can choose when to use the powerplay it should not be fixed.
* Bilateral cricket should be reduced to 2 home tour and 2 away tour because less is more.
"Each tour should not contain more than 3 odis.
I really think that ODI should be played in two innings 25 over per innings.
It will become like a t20 and also like tests.
Having two bowls, and using them whenever they like is a good idea, like one team can use one ball for like 30 overs and then use the use 2nd one like new ball in tests, or using the pink ball is also useful, apart from them other suggestions just seem a bit far-fetched tbf
Why are we still playing cricket with white balls? We can actually play ODI cricket with a pink ball (which means that you can use one ball for the whole innings).
Listing all these ideas shows how many elements of ODI cricket are just tradition that could be upended. I do like the four 25 innings idea, combined with more bowler friendly wickets. A new ball at the start of each 25 over period. It would significantly reduce the inherent unfairness of changing conditions in day night games and it would introduce a lot of new tactical considerations. Sure, you might have some times when batters play for the break, but alternatively they could be more aggressive to cash in if they’re well set and would have to start again in different conditions later, especially if their team is behind on the comparative score at the same stage. Captains would have to think about when to use different types of bowlers, day or night? If the scores are lower in general than they are now, it could make for tense contests, and I’ll take genuine tension over enormous scores on roads any day.
allow substitution in the second innings depending on the changing conditions the two balls is split across innings
1 day cricket format should exist with some changes in it like how 60 overs became 50 overs like that it can be 40 overs game with 200 balls in it and 5 balls 1 over.
Keep the fielding restrictions and having one innings with 10 wickets per side.
Dump bowler over limits, bat 10 overs at a time and spice up the pitches.
I'd watch that.
Instead of butchering odi .. just stop it all together.. this is end of cricket
40 overs a side with max 10 overs per bowler. Then 4 best bowlers bowl - teams play with one extra batter. Must have 2 close-in catchers and max four fielders outside the ring throughout the innings. One ball is enough since only 40 overs - so chance of reverse swing and spinners also to come into play. Overall will result in more attacking bowling and batting (not the boring run fest that T20 is) - and total viewer time of 6 hours (4pm -10pm; or 5-11pm).
What if one ball for 1st 25 overs and another for next 25?
1st New Ball:
*Overs 1-10 -Only 2 fielders outside the circle
*Overs 11-20 -Only 4 fielders outside the circle
* Overs 21-25 -Only 5 fielders outside the circle (much older ball with 5 boundary riders might help spinners)
2nd New Ball:
*Overs 26-30 -Only 3 fielders outside the circle (Fast bowlers can be brought back to take wickets while set batters make use of field restriction, which could give the much needed impetus in the middle overs)
*Overs 31-40 -Only 4 fielders outside the circle
*Overs 41-50 -Only 5 fielders outside the circle
Removing bowler limits and optional new balls are the best ones in this video
Without ODI's what's the point of Associates, what just playing T20I's. Maybe a few First Class matches, a few List-A matches, at best. And the 3 Full Members of Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, & Ireland, would have no real future Cricket, as they all get little to no test matches a year.
Rule changes have never worked in terms of making the game more popular. ODI cricket peaked in the 90s. Since then we’ve seen rule change after rule change and declining popularity
The reason is T20 and not rule changes.
In 90s we never had an option of T20 cricket... So the entertainment part was from ODI.
Since 2000s we got T20 which is more entertaining...
So ODI was sidelined.
It was the rule changes which ensured that ODI survived till 2023.
I have a crazy suggestion: if a batter faces 6 consecutive deliveries with no runs scored by the team, then the batter is deemed out. So a maiden over can lead to a dismissal. More incentive for the batter to score runs and if they become desperate it could lead to a wicket!
Dude. I thought this same thing. I thought it was a crazy Yank idea. Imagine how exciting a maiden over could be! They'd have to get a run on the last ball.
Mmm... More like Baseball where you have strike 1, 2 & 3 here we'll have strike 6
Tbh! As an Indian this year's World Cup feeling lackluster comparing to previous worlds not only becoz of one-sided winning but also coz of very limited venues. 2011 WC is the best everybody talking about it back than, nowadays people just IPL IPL IPL. Cricket is really trying hard to be like soccer, only focusing on premier league and money. That's not real cricket. This is real sports. Playiy for country.
England used to have a pro40 lesgue. What happened to that? I also feel the tri series which were played in Australia back then kept the odis entertaining. Now nobody plays tri series
the think is odi cricket is reduce by one and if we talk about reduce over 30 can be a sweet spot because for a working professional 9hr is impossible beacuse sports is good but food is more important. and it also impossible to see a match during summer in asia
Technically rugby union and rugby league have two entirely different governing bodies whereas all 3 forms of cricket are governed by the ICC.
I like your analogy though! They are all very differentiated forms of the game.
Considering 8-ball overs in a 35/40-over game might be interesting max 320 deliveries
I think removing fielding restrictions during middle overs would be cool. Keep the first powerplay as it is and remove restrictions afterwards. Like test matches. This could make it more balanced and interesting. Imagine a spinner boeling with a test match field in ODIs. And Imagine a batsmen making a 100 despite no restrictions in the field, itll feel like a well fought test match 100.
"A long watch for a little pay off".
Many are saying 25 overs per side as 2 innings. Thats actually a new tupe of cricket. Not ODi. And why do you need 25 over cricket for 2 innings when we already have 20 overs T20 cricket. 😅
The biggest problem imho in all cricket atm is the competition between bat and ball.
Atm it is very much in favour of the bat. Ridiculously big bats that have turn what used to be mishit slogs caught in the infield to sixes. Flat pitches, fast outfields, protective gear, and a plethora of bowling restrictions.
Who would want to be a fast bowler these days?
The bat issue needs to be looked at. Bring back 90s spec bats. Good shots go to the fence. Bad shots get you out. Take the boundaries out as far as possible. If they won't reel the bats in, then let's see 90-100m boundaries.
Given the quality of protective gear, short pitched bowling restrictions (I e 2 per over) need to be removed.
Bring back the balance between bat and ball.
BTW I find T20 cricket boring.
MCC should get rid of that godforsaking leg side fielding restriction rule.
I agree with each and every word your wrote.
Is has become a contest of bat vs bat.
Having a sub player like in IPL would be the good idea. It'll give players more opportunity to showcase talent and itll test decision making as well
Tendulkar had once (many many years back) given the perfect answer to save 50 over cricket! Make it a 25 over 4 innings (each team gets two innings) match!
Make it 4 innings of twenty overs each so that it really is the perfect mix of Test match and T20. Including a follow-on rule of 50 runs. This also completely solves the boring middle over problem. Also, get rid of meaningless bilateral games by having all ODI's count towards some sort of qualification, like the WTC. No more 5 game ODI series. The longest a series can be is 3 games.
With you on the removal of the ring
None of these fixes will work. Only thing that makes me watch the middle over is if my favourite player comes out to bat. I used to watch middle overs for MSD. Nowadays if Surya comes to bat in middle overs I want to watch. Only if teams play their fan favourite in middle overs that will bring viewership.
I think you are right.
I just watch if Virat is playing.
To save ODI cricket reduce it to 40 overs per side. That's it. 50 over seems too long now.
Just use the pink ball cut 10 overs off to get rid of those middle I’ve they need to add something like the three point line maybe during over 25 to 35 add double runs even it might be a bit gimmicky
I believe just scrap ODIs, it will help cricket. T20 is a huge market. We can replace ODI matches with either tests or a T20.
For example India is touring South Africa where they will play 2 test, 3 ODIs and 3 T20s. So, why only 2 test and that too between two good teams. I think instead of 3 ODIs one Test could have been added.
ODIs are not relevant anymore, nor it is generating any viewership or money nor it is class cricket like test match so why to keep it.
I want more participation in the World Cup and it is possible in T20 cricket only.
Great video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👍...
Looks like the bcci is hell bent on destroying the 50 over format from the recent handling of it. So no, there is no way to save it.
No free hits
Unlimited overs for bowlerw
No fielding restrictions
To say Sachin’s version won’t work based on that 1 time played in Australia is like saying, well basically everything in the history of working “not working” it needs to be given a chance to actually see its potential, people didn’t know how to go about t20 when it first came out. 180 was considered a good score of 60 overs when ODI was introduced. I feel Sachin’s Version could be the only thing that could save ODIs if there is any. Purely cause it fixes a lot of real issues with ODIs, bowling over limits or fielding limits are not a problem, they exist in t20 too. The problems are with slow paced middle overs and not many close games cause of toss advantages. Sachin’s version deals with both those issues. 6:16
A sequence of T20s is very much like an ODI.
Well firstly stop being dramatic. Cricket is the only sport where they are ashamed of themselves playing cricket.
No we cannot. The world's changed a lot. Tiktok and reels have fckd our attention span. I cannot watch the world cup, except when India plays. Thats more due to passion and love.
No need to do se as we already have T20🔥
Odi cricket earn most total view in india
Leave ODI, I even watch T20 just the overs from 1 to 5 and then last two maybe . Not because I do not love the bowling and want to see only boundaries but because there is not enough competition between bat and bowl. White bowl cricket is like a batsman game these days. I love Test cricket where each over is a contest.
Main problem is that no one wants to seriously improve the game and it also helps boards weaker international cricket more they can promote their leagues and the most beneficial of them is BCCI. You can see in how they organised world cup in lackluster and corrupt manner so that there less buzz around world cup which will help them in future to increase ipl window what a shame
How about the white Dukes ball?
Make it bowler friendly 40 overs 2 innings 20 over .. only in world cups ...
Negative runs instead of dot balls, would instantly make every ball more interesting
3 balls, 1 belonging to the batting side
3 formats is too much cricket.
One format will eventually suffer.
Right now we're just delaying the inevitable.
Let us bring back 60 overs ODIs.
you people are mad.
You will keep complaining.
ODI is perfect as is. It would be better if the pitches were more green and harder to bat on with longer boundaries.
This is the most demanding format and is true test of Cricketing excellence. t20 is a joke. it will remain that.
Pakistan played Sri Lanka yesterday, Pakistan was on top for some 30 overs in the middle and as soon as Abdullah Shafiq was dismissed, Sri Lanka was very much in the game as there were still more than 100 to score and Theekshana had several overs left.
t20 is not like that. you play good for 10 overs and it doesn't matter how shitty you are, you can keep swinging and 99% of the times will bat the whole innings till 20th over.
ODI cricket is the pinnacle of cricket. It will always be there.
test cricket is pinnacle with its ebbs and flows nobody ever said odis are pinnacle
@@anshulsaxena4931 test cricket is protected by Aussies and English. And yes, Test cricket is extremely graceful. I love test Cricket. but ODI is just miles ahead even with mismanagement and low effort to keep the game up.
go test way, split 100 overs to 25 over per innings.
Cricket is not making inroads in new countries. Worse, countries which were better at it are not good in it anymore. There is a time when people get bored of any sport. New audience is required. New competitors, new rivalries.
If cricket gets a permanent place in Olympics, ODIs are pretty much dead. ODI needs to make changes in the format itself as suggested by Sachin to save the game and ODI WC needs to be more inclusive.
Sachin's suggestion was as dead as odis 😂😂😂😂
ODI+T20=30 over Cricket 🏏
Test cricket 100-150 over one inning
In the middle overs, for every block of 5 overs, if the runrate drops below 5 runs/over the batting team looses a wicket or is penalised with an "overs" penalty. By reducing the overs left.
Test = quality & fame
T20 = excitement & wealth
ODI = ???🙄
It's good as it is... Just reduce to 40 overs.
I’m bored of watching constant 350, 400 runs in flat roads with no assistance for bowlers.
Lets face it, odi is a dying format and the only thing keeping it relevant is the wc.
If you want to watch quality cricket u go watch tests. If u want entertainment u go watch t20s.
No matter the new gimmicks odi will still remain the older brother who refuses to leave.
Its a 7 hour game, its not the twentieth century anymore, no one has the time nor can many afford the time to invest into a 7 hour snooze fest.
Should go back to only one new ball rule
End Test cricket. LOL. Five freakin days!!! The hypocrisy and irony is downright ludicrous. No one cares seriously. People who have a problem with ODIs simply have a problem with cricket as a sport at end of day. Just wait and watch, by the time this WC is over, ODIs will be reaffirmed and re established as the perfect pinnacle of Hegelian dialectic between tests and t20s.
not many people like to watch 8 hours of odi cricket ,people can still watch test cricket because it gives something unique and than T20 is the future with exciting cricket continuously for 3.5 hours
This wc is so boring. All matches are one sided
I have disliked bilateral ODIs (and now bilateral T20s) for a long time. There is no context, it is often heavily weighted towards the home team, among other reasons. I would prefer if both formats work around triangular tournaments like the Benson and Hedges / VB Tournaments that were held in Australia during the 80s and 90s - the addition of a third team gives it context, and a regular spot in the calendar will allow for such triangulars to get some spotlight, certainly more than bilaterals have ever enjoyed.
As for the ODI format, look I am a 90s cricket kid - it was my gateway drug to cricket as a whole, and a part of me will always have a sentimental attachment to that format. It is also the format I least watch now simply because of the excessive tampering that has gone into the playing regulations. In doing so, it is unrecognizable to those who love the format and those who hate it - no wonder then that we are constantly wondering what to do with the format.
Personally, ODIs is the right balance betweent the slow burn of test cricket and the rock and roll of T20s.
One possible change I would try out:
2 innings of 20 overs / team. Instead of a possible 100 overs, you are reducing the format to a total of 80. I think it would be a great ad for both the structure of test cricket and showcasing the funkiness of T20.
better start ipl for odi, more even teams
So much tilting the game in the favour of batsmen has ruined the ODIs.
Wrong.
The introduction of T20 ruined ODIs.
When you have a better entertainment people watch that...
People in 80s 90s 2000s just had ODI... So it was living...
People since 2010s got T20 cricket... So they switched to T20 from ODI
Split the innings with 20 wickets
T20 cricket is just not cricket ... good teams can be defeated by one over
No.
Scrap odi....make t20 wc 4 yr cycle tats it
You could take the piss and do the opposite of your first idea and limit the number of bowlers even further so you have some rubbish bowlers bowling. Could be entertaining!
People who have no jobs only watch odis
moron like u pass such idiotic statement