It might sound like sour grapes now (esp. after our heavy loss today) but I believe the ICC is right to consider making the biennial Champions Trophy a T20 affair. They should scrap either T20 WC or CT and have just one biennial T20 competition in addition to the main one-day World Cup
There are far too many one-day competitions right now which only diminishes the significance of the main World Cup.
The four-yearly 50-over World Cup MUST retain its standing as the premier limited overs prize
LONDON: Whosoever wins the ongoing Twenty20 World Cup in England will be the title holders for a mere 10 months. There is no doubt that this rather diminishes the prize on offer. It seems hardly worth the bother. The winners and indeed everybody else must go through it all again next April in the Caribbean. The International Cricket Council (ICC) has the intention of holding the Twenty20 World Cup every two years. The World Cup will be held every four years as it has been since 1975, as will a newly revamped Champions Trophy, according to a report in The Independent on Sunday. The Champions Trophy might go through a complete overhaul. This may involve it being played at one venue – possibly Dubai where ICC has its headquarters and where there are two state-of-the-art stadiums – with either 50 overs or more probably 20 overs as the chosen form. That would mean highly prestigious international Twenty20 tournaments being played three years out of four.
Have only two formats : Test Matches and Thirty30.
Thirty30 will only be 1 hour longer than Twenty20 (as much as a baseball game) and would demand some amount of sanity & cautious planning on the part of the batting team. Individual bowlers will get a decent 6 overs each to ply their wares.
Not a bad idea in principle. T30 makes more sense than T20
The only problem there is you still won't get to see many hundreds or 4/5-wicket hauls which have their own charm
I think the answer is:
Four yearly 50 overs aside World Cup which w'd continue to be regarded as the premier limited overs challenge
biennial T30 World Cup which as you rightly say w'd atleast require some kind of organised and cautious planning and execution and not just be a tulla spectacle
The way things are going at the moment...... Test cricket is going to diminish in a few years time... and then our next generation will wonder that cricketers used to play for 5 days ( many of the times without results)..
Like most of us wonder that there used to be no-limit tests and test with 6 days(one day break after first 3 days)...
About T20,, you are both right, its insane to start with, has not much charm of the cricket we used to know...I would rather opt more of no change and ODI setup and give some restrictions on the amount of T20's played every year.
One could argue that we already have the 50-over format for teams to master the art of cautious planning and execution when batting etc.
Back in the 70s and 80s we used to have 40 and 60 over games before they decided to standardise all limited overs games to 50-overs-a-side contest. I think that happened in the 1987 Reliance World Cup jointly hosted by India and Pakistan.
Cricket as much as any other sport is driven by money and T20 was purely designed for that purpose; to attract people who like to see a quick slam bang game and don't want to spend more than three hours watching cricket
T30 would defeat that purpose. It would mean 60 overs in a day which might be a bit too long for some. It might fail to woo BOTH:
T20 crowds who come in purely to watch tulleybaazi AND
purists who like to see both a more even tussle b/w bat and ball AND people scoring hundreds and taking 4 or 5 wicket hauls in limited overs games (cf 50-over games).
So we might have a teetar *and *batere situation
The bottomline is if you are good at cricket, you should be able to do well regardless of the format.
T30 (as per some1) would definitely demand some amount of sanity and organised approach & cautious planning on the part of the batting side (cf. 50-over games) but the problem is you still won't get to see many hundreds or 4/5 wicket hauls - which have their own charm - because the games won't be long enough for players to achieve such feats. Furthermore T30 would lack the thrill of T20.
So T20 and 50-over games should both stay but I would still regard the main 50-over World Cup as the greatest limited overs prize for obvious reasons
But I think CT should be scrapped now. It is not needed anymore as we now have the main world cup and biennial T20 world cup. Having so many limited overs competitions just undermines the significance of the main 50-over World Cup
^ except that a hard-fought test win is far more satisfying and enjoyable than a T20 win for cricket enthusiasts like myself.
Test cricket is the real deal because it truly tests your patience, discipline, stamina, skill and technique. Lesser players are easily found out by test cricket.
Given the choice between watching a T20 70 or 80 or a test double hundred or ten wicket haul, I know which one I would rather watch
And there is no excuse these days for boredom etc. as 85-90% and almost all of tests involving Australia have a result It is largely thanks to the way the Aussies have revolutionised test cricket since the mid-90s and the introduction of mandatory 90 overs per day rule.