Streak's suggestion???

Entertainment Cricket and Other Sports
1

How to avoid one-day lull
By Martin Gough
**
Problem**

Since the beginning of one-day internationals in 1971, there has been regular tinkering to try to keep the game exciting while not losing touch with Test cricket.

However, Streak has led calls for continued experimentation to keep fans on their toes.

“Spectators now have dozens of sports and entertainment to choose from on their TV screens, so cricket has to find a way of holding its own in a crowded market,” he said.

Often, one-day matches begin in a blaze of excitement as batsmen take advantage of fielding restrictions in place for the first 15 overs of each innings.

The tension grows towards the end - usually in the last 10 overs - as batsmen increasingly take risks to score runs.

But there tends to be a quiet period in the middle of each innings as the fielding side is forced to use its back-up bowlers and batsmen are content to protect their wickets.

In a random sample of recent one-day internationals:

* 29.5% of runs were scored in the last 10 overs of an innings
* 25.9% of runs were scored in the first 15 overs
  • 61.6% of wickets fell in either the first 15 or last 10 overs

Moves to avoid these peaks and troughs of runs might help maintain excitement throughout a match.
**
Current solutions**
*
Fielding restrictions
*

In the first 15 overs, only two fielders are allowed outside the 30-yard fielding circle and two must be in close catching positions.

In the remaining 35 overs, no more than five fielders are allowed outside the ring, preventing captains from placing their entire team on the boundary rope.
*
Bonus points*

An extra league point is available in tournaments involving three or more sides, for batting teams achieving victory at a run rate 25% better than their opponent, or for bowlers restricting their opponent to a rate 25% less.

Some sides have looked to chase the extra point, but the overall result has been confusion for anyone trying to work out what a side needs to do when.

It has also provided an opportunity for collusion, as when New Zealand and South Africa managed the pace of a match to deny Australia a place in the 2002 VB Series finals.
**
Possible changes**
*
Fielding restrictions*

Australian domestic cricket has extended the fielding rules so that just three fielders are allowed outside the circle in overs 15-30.

Rather than a sudden shift as the fielders spread, there are still opportunities for batsmen to gamble throughout the first half of the match.
**
Streak suggested breaking the restricted 15 overs into three five-over blocks which the fielding captain could use at his discretion.**

But this system could create confusion on the part of fans, if not players and umpires.
**
Twelve players per side**

Australia has tried out - and subsequently abandoned - an idea featuring 12 players per team, with a designated 11 batting and fielding.

The possible addition of a specialist bowler and a specialist batsman could easily cancel each other out.

But it would cut down on the number of bits-and-pieces all-rounders, who tend to bowl in the middle of the innings, when the risks are less.
**
Twenty20**

The Twenty20 Cup format has so far been restricted to county cricket
Streak was excited by English county cricket’s Twenty20 Cup, where teams face 20 overs each, bowlers have a maximum of four overs and matches last less than three hours.

The game is far better suited to television, because it adheres to a tighter schedule and lacks the middle-over lull, but it may not be as popular with fans wanting a full day’s play.

The International Cricket Council has so far not allowed national teams to play the game, quite simply, because no one has asked to.
**
Verdict
**
Test cricket remains the pure version of the game and should not be tampered with.

In contrast, one-day cricket has always been a way to bring new fans into the game and present a more obvious spectacle for casual fans and TV audiences.

Spectators and players have shied away in the past from innovations that stray too far from the basics of the game.

There is no reason why proposed changes should not be tried out as experiments in domestic cricket.

But any move that increases confusion for casual spectators, or changes the spirit of the game, should be avoided.

What do you guys think??

2

Twenty20 is not meant for international players....

3

The existing one-day format is fine, says Ganguly](http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/JAN/043303_VBS2003-04_13JAN2004.html)

Responding to Heath Streak’s call to revamp one-day cricket, Sourav Ganguly said he saw no reason to change the existing format.

“I believe one-day cricket is doing just fine, and there is no reason why it should be tampered with,” Ganguly said. “It could be said about the one-day games of the past that they could become flat at certain times, but the one-bouncer rule has brought a competitive equation to it.”

Ganguly is a formidable presence in the one-day game, with 9049 runs with 22 centuries at an average of 43.11. But in Tests, where the bowlers hold more sway, he is less authoritative.

The one-bouncer-an-over rule was implemented to give bowlers an element of surprise in what has become a batsman-dominated game. “Now a good bowler has the freedom to test out a batsman. It is not as if the batsmen are having a free run all the time,” Ganguly continued. “But for the fielding restrictions in the first 15 overs, a fielding side and a bowler are free to do whatever they want to on a cricket field.”

Streak had suggested that the 15 overs could be spread out over the innings, to sustain interest in the middle overs. “If I could use the 15 overs in blocks of, say, five overs each, it would allow me to experiment more. It might help change the quiet period you often get in games between 14 and 40 overs.”

ODI scoring rates in 2003


     
           Average runs scored Average run rate 
Overs 1-15    64                4.3 
Overs 16-40   114               4.6 
Overs 41-50   71                7.1

Greg Chappell seconded Streak’s call for changes. “I believe one-day cricket could retain its interest if there is a contest between bat and ball. Without it, the game could turn out to be too flat.”

Limited-overs cricket has come under fire for being repetitive, with interest slacking off during the middle overs of an innings. What is interesting is that, for a while, the one-day game was regarded as Test cricket’s saviour. But the recent pattern of high-scoring result-oriented Tests has brought more people through the turnstiles, and increased television ratings.

4

^^ :k:

5

Thumsup for what?
ya phir aise hi post kar diya??

6

i dun think streak's suggestions r very gd, it gives 2 much power to the fielding side. but the idea to change the format a bit to make it exciting is something that shd be looked into.

7

His suggestion is valid, but the idea he came up with is inacurate.

I understand that One Day cricket is still not suitable for the working individual. Hence, only for India and Pakistan is watching cricket all day fine.

I consider the game still too long. 8 hours a game is very long. When watching the VB Series, the game between India and Australia, the crowd became larger once work ended. One Day Cricket is sensible for Saturday's and Sunday's, when people have the day off, but otherwise 8 hours is still unsuitable.

Maybe this is the reason for it dieing in England? (Also because England has a crappy team).

Twenty20 tournament may be amusing. They should hold a International tournament with 6 teams, and see how that goes. All night games.. watch the stadium be packed.