Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

[rchibawqgc]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Long time taking matches are the only cause of not being one of the most popular game in the world. I think ICC could earn a lot if they could have lots of qualified member countries. Football is a easy game to play and it has never formatted a 5 day format game. That's why it has become the best of all the game. And, I want the Cricket needs the 20 or 25 over format right away.

 

[Beeswax]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Even twenty/20's bubble appears to be bursting over here in England. The crowds for some of the matches have been dismal, but then they tried to cram loads more matches in this year. It has worked out that just about the same number of people are going to the matches overall so the crowds are spread more thinly. Perhaps that might be to do with the World Cup being on, but it hasn't improved even with England's knock out.

The administrators have brought in the boundaries to 52 -55 metres in some grounds in their desperation to get more 'excitement' through the hitting of sixes. I ask you. Talk about u12s. It's embarrassing.

 

[Kram81]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

The administrators have brought in the boundaries to 52 -55 metres in some grounds in their desperation to get more 'excitement' through the hitting of sixes. I ask you. Talk about u12s. It's embarrassing.

Absolutely hate it when they do that.

 

[Boris]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Agree with Kram there.

Same situation as the 50 over format, waaaay too many games being played. It's like having your footy team play 3 times a week, sooner or later your just not going to care. The only sport I have seen that can pull off that many games a week successfully is baseball, which T20 is striving to be, but it's not going to be able to match it in that area.

I think the Big Bash is too long... then I find out how many thousands of games they play in county cricket...

And since I haven't posted in a while I'll continue my ramblings on this topic.

I think this new format will only make things more 'boring'. Splitting the two 25 over segments up will only cause more trouble if you have the not out batsman come back in and continue where you left off.

Not only will you have the obvious problem with the batsmen having to come back in and set themselves all over again (meaning more singles dabbled around like the middle overs), what happens if one innings is ultra short after a collapse? Also what about the strategies used? I can see the two openers becoming your slowest batsmen. They would run singles around for the first block of 25 overs, aim for about 100 runs off them, then the last 25 would effectively become more of a T20, trying to hold as many big hitters in the last 6-7 batsmen that didn't bat at all in the first 'innings'.

This pretty much just renders the first 25 overs pointless. The crowds won't like it and administration will be forced to change it again. And they won't like going backwards, then they will come up with the great idea to change it into two 25 over completely seperate innings.

My 2 cents worth.

 

[Beeswax]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Agree with Kram there.

Same situation as the 50 over format, waaaay too many games being played. It's like having your footy team play 3 times a week, sooner or later your just not going to care. The only sport I have seen that can pull off that many games a week successfully is baseball, which T20 is striving to be, but it's not going to be able to match it in that area.

I think the Big Bash is too long... then I find out how many thousands of games they play in county cricket...

And since I haven't posted in a while I'll continue my ramblings on this topic.

I think this new format will only make things more 'boring'. Splitting the two 25 over segments up will only cause more trouble if you have the not out batsman come back in and continue where you left off.

Not only will you have the obvious problem with the batsmen having to come back in and set themselves all over again (meaning more singles dabbled around like the middle overs), what happens if one innings is ultra short after a collapse? Also what about the strategies used? I can see the two openers becoming your slowest batsmen. They would run singles around for the first block of 25 overs, aim for about 100 runs off them, then the last 25 would effectively become more of a T20, trying to hold as many big hitters in the last 6-7 batsmen that didn't bat at all in the first 'innings'.

This pretty much just renders the first 25 overs pointless. The crowds won't like it and administration will be forced to change it again. And they won't like going backwards, then they will come up with the great idea to change it into two 25 over completely seperate innings.

My 2 cents worth.

The crowds will just treat it like a 20/20 and turn up for the second lot of innings, unless they really want to see one of the openers. Either way, it sounds like a daft proposal. Expect ever shortening boundaries and more powerplays to 'up' the excitement.

 

[Boris]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

The crowds will just treat it like a 20/20 and turn up for the second lot of innings, unless they really want to see one of the openers. Either way, it sounds like a daft proposal. Expect ever shortening boundaries and more powerplays to 'up' the excitement.

For what it's worth I think the powerplays only make it worse as well. They are all very novel ways to come up with an answer, and they are all laughable so far.

Yes powerplays offer a period of excitement, but they also further draw out the parts without excitement. Instead of teams trying to bat through the middle overs holding 5 an over from singles and doubles, working it around smartly, they can now hold back a bit and make sure they have their two power hitters for that segment. This then drags out the 'boring' parts as most teams use the powerplays in the last 7 or so overs, which means they can bat calmly up until then, assured that they will have a period of 5 overs where they can have lots of wickets in hand to really push it.

Then if you don't have the wickets in hand it turns it even worse. You have two batsmen that can't throw their wickets away for the sake of the team, and they have 6 people inside the circle restricting their access to the much needed singles, making the latter overs more sedate and 'boring' as well.

For peat's sake, it's international cricket, not some backyard game with stupid kids rules.

 

[Ljp86]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Australia news: Cricket Australia considering radical one-day changes | Australia Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

Would be truly awful if CA decided to bring this rubbish in, they are wrecking the game not making it more exciting. What a joke.

Michael Hussey and Haroon Lorgat (ICC Chief Executive) have even come out and bagged the proposed changes.

ICC news: Haroon Lorgat, Michael Hussey not convinced on radical one-day modifications | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | Cricinfo.com

 

[Caesar]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

I think it's a bad idea as long as T20 cricket exists, and 50 overs remains the ODI format.

Ideally I'd like 40 over cricket to be the sole limited overs version of the game however.

 

[Roy00]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

the designated hitter would have to be the worst idea i've ever heard

they shouldnt be creating rules with essentially mess with the fabric of the game itself

 

[Ljp86]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

CA ratifies split innings, players angry

It's official, it's in. 45 overs now, up from the original 40. Splits will be 20 overs then 25, bowlers can bowl 12 overs instead of 10 and can bowl two bouncers per over instead of one.

Epic Fail. The only rule I like there is the bouncer rule, the rest are total crap. No surprise to see the players aren't happy at all.

 

[Boris]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

I like the no powerplay rule as well, but that's taken care of with the fielding restrictions being in specific positions.

I even don't like the two bouncer rule that much.

Let's hope nobody turns up to watch this and show CA what is right.

 

[Roy00]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

i'd rather they have two innings each of 20 overs with 10 wickets for each innings..or just a straight 40 overs per side with 1 innings each

this stupid format adopted by CA messes with the fabric of the game. its the worst possible outcome they could've come up with.

its little wonder the Australian cricket team have been languishing in recent years with these clowns in charge.

 

[Boris]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

i'd rather they have two innings each of 20 overs with 10 wickets for each innings..or just a straight 40 overs per side with 1 innings each

this stupid format adopted by CA messes with the fabric of the game. its the worst possible outcome they could've come up with.

its little wonder the Australian cricket team have been languishing in recent years with these clowns in charge.

I much prefer the idea CA have come up with to the idea to the batting twice for 20 overs idea that you said... but it is the lesser of two evils.

I have an idea.

Play a 50 over a side game, with field restrictions in place for the first 15 overs of each innings, that being two fielders outside the circle, and two catchers. After 15 over they can put 5 fielders outside if they like. Bowlers can bowl a maximum of 10 overs each, and each batsmen can get out once only. 11 players are allowed to play with one fielding substitute. No need for power plays, and no need for ball changes.

Then we can invite two teams over here on a rotational basis each summer and have a nice tri-nations tournament, with a best of three finals.

Sounds like a nice idea to me.

 

[Roy00]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

I much prefer the idea CA have come up with to the idea to the batting twice for 20 overs idea that you said... but it is the lesser of two evils.

I have an idea.

Play a 50 over a side game, with field restrictions in place for the first 15 overs of each innings, that being two fielders outside the circle, and two catchers. After 15 over they can put 5 fielders outside if they like. Bowlers can bowl a maximum of 10 overs each, and each batsmen can get out once only. 11 players are allowed to play with one fielding substitute. No need for power plays, and no need for ball changes.

Then we can invite two teams over here on a rotational basis each summer and have a nice tri-nations tournament, with a best of three finals.

Sounds like a nice idea to me.

true..the old WSC had more appeal than the new 5 games against one opponent format..even in its final year.

 

[Beeswax]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

CA ratifies split innings, players angry

It's official, it's in. 45 overs now, up from the original 40. Splits will be 20 overs then 25, bowlers can bowl 12 overs instead of 10 and can bowl two bouncers per over instead of one.

Epic Fail. The only rule I like there is the bouncer rule, the rest are total crap. No surprise to see the players aren't happy at all.

Same here.

So no designated hitter but you can pad the team for fielding AND batting.

What a pile of poo.

Surely one of the joys of cricket is watching tail-enders bat? Well, it is for me anyhow. It would be a shame if the world was deprived of Ruggie or Asif batting to win a match.

Edit: Though having said that, if given a chance I'm sure I'd watch it until there was too many of them like t20 then I'd get real choosy.

A big thing to get people back watching one day cricket, and this is OBVIOUSLY rocket science and won't be considered at all, is to charge less for tickets.

 

[Boris]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

A big thing to get people back watching one day cricket, and this is OBVIOUSLY rocket science and won't be considered at all, is to charge less for tickets.

And THERE is the half the problem.

Many a time I've considered the two and a half hour drive to go see a match, most of the time an ODI because there are so many of them, so I look up the ticket prices on the internet, see that they are $60+ and then the cost of fuel for the 250 km journey and in the past 3 years I haven't gone again.

I even turned down a perfect opportunity with a week off work to go watch the Ashes... saw the $100 ticket prices and now I'm setting up the sound system at home...

 

[Kram81]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

Brilliant move to bring it in just before the World Cup.

 

[OhMyGodTheChips]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

I can't wait until its 10 four over allotments and if three wickets fall in one allotment, it is a change of innings.

 

[Beeswax]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

And THERE is the half the problem.

Many a time I've considered the two and a half hour drive to go see a match, most of the time an ODI because there are so many of them, so I look up the ticket prices on the internet, see that they are $60+ and then the cost of fuel for the 250 km journey and in the past 3 years I haven't gone again.

I even turned down a perfect opportunity with a week off work to go watch the Ashes... saw the $100 ticket prices and now I'm setting up the sound system at home...

Same problem in the UK. They charge obscene prices for tickets.

 

[Beeswax]

Re: Cricket Australia considers new 40-over format

I can't wait until its 10 four over allotments and if three wickets fall in one allotment, it is a change of innings.

They'll have brought in designated hitters by them. It will be one DH per allottment (and it can be the same guy for the innings in each allottment). You'll never be able to get Chris Gayle or Sehwag over and done with in a match ever again.

And the boundaries will be about 48 -52 metres all around the park.

This will be justified with the line 'it's what the fans want'.