Cricket Undergoing Change: One Day Cricket, 40 Overs is Mundane
One day International cricket may not be as popular as it was 39 years ago, when it made its way into people’s hearts, but it still is the most competitive format of the game. Unlike Tests, it is fast paced and unlike Twenty20, it requires brains than might. But what has made the game lose its popularity is one of the most asked question these days, and fans feel a little fine tuning can revamp the game, instead of rule changing!
Former Australian skipper Ian Chappell believes that in order to make the format more appealing, on-the-field changes should outweigh off-field tactics. He wrote in his column recently for a local newspaper that captains should become dynamic rather than the officials, and people shouldn’t expect magical turnaround from the proposed two-innings format, they should wait for more imaginative captaincy and less gimmicks.
Chappell might be right because when in 1996, no one made the Sri Lankan coach Dav Whatmore made his two most explosive late order batsmen - Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana - open the innings to maximise the advantage of the 1st 15 overs. He did so, on his own imagination and revamped the way the game was played before.
Similarly, if the cricketers approach the 50 over game the same way they take the Twenty20, scoring in excess of over 400 will become a regular feature. But batsmen, especially captains, are afraid of taking risks and it is the absence of this feeling that has plunged the came into unpopular region.
The Australian Cricket Board feels that by splitting the game into two halves, they might make the game more attractive, but what they fail to realise is that ‘with great powers, come great responsibility.’ If they manage to twist the game’s format, it might lose its essence on the whole. It could be a nightmare for the players who take time to get set before launching into attack mode. Bowlers will get a breather, yes, but it is the batsmen who spectators want to see score runs and break records.
If the International Cricket Council accepts Australia’s proposal, the game might see a change that would take at least 2 years to register into the spectator’s mind; just like the one dayers, which also took its sweet time. Ian Chappell believes that changing the rules will not solve the problem, playing the existing game better would. He writes, “For a game that's supposed to be gasping for breath, the 50-over version is generating serious debate and much of the speculation is emanating from Australia.”
Some might agree and some might not, but the dullness of one day format during the middle overs is what is making it mundane, especially after the advent of Twenty20 internationals. It would be better to trim the number of overs than change the rules to make the game exciting, like it was trimmed in the 80s from 60 to 50 overs. England and South Africa already have 40 over competitions and instead of having 2 innings, having 40 overs might solve the problem.
While the additions like the Power Plays as well as challenging the umpire have made the game more competitive. The ICC was made to take back the stupid Super Sub rule which added comical touch to the game. Haroon Lorgat, the ICC chief executive, however feels the game should benefit from the changes that have been made and the ones that are in the pipeline. On the eve of the 3000th ODI to be played tomorrow between the same teams who played the inaugural one, he said the member boards would continue to experiment with changes to the format that would make it more appealing.
One would hope the changes don’t ruin the essence of the game, which has seen the worst as well as the best of times since its inception in 1971.
Tags: