Australia news August 14, 2010

Players not convinced by split innings

35

Cricket Australia could be sorely disappointed if it hopes its new split-innings format will eliminate the slow-moving middle overs from one-dayers. The concept was trialled in England's county second XI competition this year and it often resulted in a cautious brand of "handbrake" batting at the end of the first innings and the start of the second.

Cricket Australia's format will give teams only 10 wickets across the entire match, so the first innings could be a grind as the top order builds a platform without losing too many batsmen. The Victoria legspinner Bryce McGain has been playing with Essex this month and said the feedback he received from the men involved in the county trial was that momentum was difficult to generate.

"The tactics that they used here - and I spoke to quite a number of guys who experienced it - was that they really wound back those last four or five overs because they didn't want to lose a wicket," McGain told Cricinfo. "Then when you went back in, the batsmen had to get back in so it took four or five overs to get things started again.

"The experience that the English players had was that when you're building momentum it actually put a handbrake on. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. Maybe the Australians will do it tactically a little bit different, but it will certainly make it interesting."

The Australian board is adamant that moving to a split-innings 45-over format was prompted by feedback from the public, but the players remain unconvinced about the changes. The Australian Cricketers' Association said 78% of its surveyed members were against the idea, and there have been mixed responses in the Twitter-sphere.

Graham Manou, who took part in a split-innings practice match this week, wrote on his Twitter page: "Well I'm certainly going to need some convincing that the split 40 over games are good cricket and more importantly spectators."

One of Australia's most successful one-day bowlers in recent history, Nathan Bracken, tweeted: "Not a massive fan of it. Could make some games very boring if a team gets a bad start."

But it was not all negative reaction from the players. Aaron Finch, the young Victorian batsman who established himself as a strong limited-overs cricketer last summer, wrote that the format was "Something new and exciting for both fans and players! Can't wait".

One of the major sticking points for Australia's ODI players is the decision to implement the new format a few months before a 50-over World Cup. Australia's World Cup squad will be announced in December, before the seven-match one-day series against England, meaning that fringe players have virtually no chance to press their claims in the regular format.

During the planning stages, Michael Hussey was a vocal critic of the move and last month he questioned Cricket Australia's timing. After the Lord's Test against Pakistan, the Australian squad was briefed by James Sutherland on some of the possible changes, which were at that stage unconfirmed.

"We've got to be a little bit careful," Hussey said in July after the briefing. "We've got to make sure we try and get as many players prepared for the 50-over World Cup as we can. I'm not sure the timing is great. There's a lot of young guys out there that would see themselves as a chance of making the World Cup squad and they probably need as much exposure to 50-over cricket as possible."

Brydon Coverdale is a staff writer at Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • _Australian_ on August 16, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    Cricket Australia's claim that they went for this concept after feedback from the public is misunderstood. Feedback from the public in majority was for a 2 innings split to match test cricket. i.e. 20 wickets per team not 10. This concept has promise if it was 2 innings of 25 overs per side with 10 wickets in each innings.

  • Danwalsh on August 15, 2010, 21:07 GMT

    hello this is my first commet

    STUPID IDEA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ALL CRICKET IS BRILLIANT ESPCIALLY t20

  • lucyferr on August 15, 2010, 2:12 GMT

    "The tactics that they used here... was that they really wound back those last four or five overs because they didn't want to lose a wicket" - that's a good point. Why split innings at all, when you can have two innings per team, like in Test cricket? With each innings 20 or 22 or 25 innings or something. Look, if you buy a sock that's too big, you don't snip it in the middle - you try to exchange it for two smaller socks. It's clear that ODIs need a change - because they are boring and predictable - but Cricket Australia should be trying out different alternative formats in competition, not just one alternative.

  • raoakram on August 14, 2010, 21:31 GMT

    hello.i have an idea to make one days more interesting.......Retain the first 15 overs remain as powerplay as it before.and make another 3 power plays divided each into 3 overs.and its necessary to take one into 20 to 30 and one from 30 to 40 and 1 from 40 to 50 overs.so it may make one days more interesting.or have the first 10 overs as power plays and make then 4 power plays.and make them necessary for each 10 overs.each pwer play is for 3 overs.and give each team two power play...hope u like it...thankss

  • gramedgar on August 14, 2010, 20:49 GMT

    whilst you cant be overly critical of anyone exploring ways to freshen up one dayers this seems like a messy convoluted way of playing the game and the timing is pretty grim too. it sounds like the kind of initiative the ecb would throw together, not the aussies.

  • klempie on August 14, 2010, 20:11 GMT

    This has cricket administration FAIL written all over it.

  • GavtheKiwi on August 14, 2010, 20:08 GMT

    those australian players that want to push for the ODI team and the world cup this season should come and play in NZ! We'll have them gladly - and there are no such ridiculous manglings of the rules happening over here.

  • alichikhly on August 14, 2010, 20:02 GMT

    A.C.BOARD should acknowledge that the one-day format has had its recent challenges and as a collective they want to help those running the game find the best solution. However, the players don't believe the split-innings format is the best solution and as a result australia should follow what their players has to say who has being playing with lots of experience in present.Rest depends on on their team and captain.cant say more than that!!!!good bye australia n aaaalllll the veryyyyyy best.

  • XooX on August 14, 2010, 12:52 GMT

    I'm not a fan of tweaking the formats further. But even then, I think it is too early for anyone to comment on whether or not a format will be boring or not. Remember that the ODI format itself used to be a very defensive game where batsman kept saving on wickets to use during the slog overs - that was until Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana showed us how the first 15 overs could be taken advantage of..

    Unless you experiment the format in several tournaments with several different groups of players, you cannot actually form a conclusion..

  • on August 14, 2010, 11:03 GMT

    Well, well here we go again. How to get batters to throw there wickets away will not be easy. So may i politely suggest that "IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE ODI CRICKET BE DECLARED DEAD"

    The advent of T20 has actually just taken over 50/45/40 over cricket and why cannot the powers that be just accept.

    Just how many types of cricket can you will the public accept is the question the ICC should be thinking.

    Perhaps the spectators should have a say so:

    ICC REFEREUNDUM THE PAYING PUBLIC ON

    1) SHOULD TEST CRICKET CONTINUE??

    2) SHOULD ODI 50OVER CRICKET CONTINUE??

    3) SHOULD T20 CRICKET CONTiNUE??

    Maybe to have a full days play T20 should just become a double innings game like 1st class/test cricket

    I personally would like to see TEST CRICKET with a fully spectator understood LEAGUE TABLE which culminates in a WINNER/CHAMPION on at least a two year basis.

  • _Australian_ on August 16, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    Cricket Australia's claim that they went for this concept after feedback from the public is misunderstood. Feedback from the public in majority was for a 2 innings split to match test cricket. i.e. 20 wickets per team not 10. This concept has promise if it was 2 innings of 25 overs per side with 10 wickets in each innings.

  • Danwalsh on August 15, 2010, 21:07 GMT

    hello this is my first commet

    STUPID IDEA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ALL CRICKET IS BRILLIANT ESPCIALLY t20

  • lucyferr on August 15, 2010, 2:12 GMT

    "The tactics that they used here... was that they really wound back those last four or five overs because they didn't want to lose a wicket" - that's a good point. Why split innings at all, when you can have two innings per team, like in Test cricket? With each innings 20 or 22 or 25 innings or something. Look, if you buy a sock that's too big, you don't snip it in the middle - you try to exchange it for two smaller socks. It's clear that ODIs need a change - because they are boring and predictable - but Cricket Australia should be trying out different alternative formats in competition, not just one alternative.

  • raoakram on August 14, 2010, 21:31 GMT

    hello.i have an idea to make one days more interesting.......Retain the first 15 overs remain as powerplay as it before.and make another 3 power plays divided each into 3 overs.and its necessary to take one into 20 to 30 and one from 30 to 40 and 1 from 40 to 50 overs.so it may make one days more interesting.or have the first 10 overs as power plays and make then 4 power plays.and make them necessary for each 10 overs.each pwer play is for 3 overs.and give each team two power play...hope u like it...thankss

  • gramedgar on August 14, 2010, 20:49 GMT

    whilst you cant be overly critical of anyone exploring ways to freshen up one dayers this seems like a messy convoluted way of playing the game and the timing is pretty grim too. it sounds like the kind of initiative the ecb would throw together, not the aussies.

  • klempie on August 14, 2010, 20:11 GMT

    This has cricket administration FAIL written all over it.

  • GavtheKiwi on August 14, 2010, 20:08 GMT

    those australian players that want to push for the ODI team and the world cup this season should come and play in NZ! We'll have them gladly - and there are no such ridiculous manglings of the rules happening over here.

  • alichikhly on August 14, 2010, 20:02 GMT

    A.C.BOARD should acknowledge that the one-day format has had its recent challenges and as a collective they want to help those running the game find the best solution. However, the players don't believe the split-innings format is the best solution and as a result australia should follow what their players has to say who has being playing with lots of experience in present.Rest depends on on their team and captain.cant say more than that!!!!good bye australia n aaaalllll the veryyyyyy best.

  • XooX on August 14, 2010, 12:52 GMT

    I'm not a fan of tweaking the formats further. But even then, I think it is too early for anyone to comment on whether or not a format will be boring or not. Remember that the ODI format itself used to be a very defensive game where batsman kept saving on wickets to use during the slog overs - that was until Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana showed us how the first 15 overs could be taken advantage of..

    Unless you experiment the format in several tournaments with several different groups of players, you cannot actually form a conclusion..

  • on August 14, 2010, 11:03 GMT

    Well, well here we go again. How to get batters to throw there wickets away will not be easy. So may i politely suggest that "IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE ODI CRICKET BE DECLARED DEAD"

    The advent of T20 has actually just taken over 50/45/40 over cricket and why cannot the powers that be just accept.

    Just how many types of cricket can you will the public accept is the question the ICC should be thinking.

    Perhaps the spectators should have a say so:

    ICC REFEREUNDUM THE PAYING PUBLIC ON

    1) SHOULD TEST CRICKET CONTINUE??

    2) SHOULD ODI 50OVER CRICKET CONTINUE??

    3) SHOULD T20 CRICKET CONTiNUE??

    Maybe to have a full days play T20 should just become a double innings game like 1st class/test cricket

    I personally would like to see TEST CRICKET with a fully spectator understood LEAGUE TABLE which culminates in a WINNER/CHAMPION on at least a two year basis.

  • jonesy2 on August 14, 2010, 9:50 GMT

    this has to be the stupidest idea ive heard for a long time. just stick to one dayers and t20!! make the odi series half as long-problem solved.

  • cric_san on August 14, 2010, 9:15 GMT

    Modifying 50 overs cricket to 45 overs is still in infantry stage, so cricketers need time to adjust the new format. time for understanding rules and ofcourse mentally prepare for the matches. may be this is the reason most of the cricketers opposing the 45 over one day cricket.

  • on August 14, 2010, 9:07 GMT

    sounds exciting diz format!!

  • jackiethepen on August 14, 2010, 8:23 GMT

    Maybe Australia are getting bored with being the best one day team in the world? But England can't be helped by having no domestic 50 over cricket either. The batting power play should be given more of a chance to change the 50 over game. Batsmen and captains haven't quite got the hang of it, but leaving to the last few overs seems daft.

  • JobeWatson on August 14, 2010, 8:13 GMT

    Don't do it. Its purely ridiculous!!!!!!!!!!! Leave cricket as cricket!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • on August 14, 2010, 7:29 GMT

    Absolutely against it. I think its a ridiculous idea to change the format. It's basically two 20/20 games played in one day.

  • allblue on August 14, 2010, 7:20 GMT

    Daft idea. The dustbin of history awaits.

  • KoolKeshav on August 14, 2010, 6:27 GMT

    I love this idea...

    I will try to spilt the batting order as well, would play 8 batsman, only 4 of them to come in frst half.. unless there is a collapse of course... one of the pinch hitting bowler to come at number 3 or 4....

  • on August 14, 2010, 5:28 GMT

    Why make things so complex. ODi has been through surgery previously. I don't think it's good idea.

  • sanjbudd on August 14, 2010, 5:05 GMT

    Maybe they should change it to both teams bat twice - once for 25 overs and then for 20 overs - split innings. Be like a double T20 game.

    The first innings should be more attacking fields - say 3 in catching positions for 15 overs and 2 in catching positions for the remaining 10. The 2nd innings could also have an extended attacking field session. All these things could be tinkered with but you get my drift - the attacking fields of tests plus the interest of T20 with less of the randomness.

  • on August 14, 2010, 4:16 GMT

    How is a quality batsman meant to build an innings in this format? Some of the best one-day innings have been batsman fighting it out early, building a nice partnership in the middle overs, then wrapping up the innings at the end.

    This just seems to remove an important aspect of batsmanship from the game and encourage a more negetive style.

    Guess we have to just wait and see though.

  • ANIRUDH98 on August 14, 2010, 3:35 GMT

    pls don't comment too much aussies just bcoz u guyzz aren't satisfied with the system u can't ask the whole world to listen to u and not change the format

  • popcorn on August 14, 2010, 2:50 GMT

    I simply fail to understand what is CA's tearing hurry to implement the new format SO CLOSE TO THE ODI WORLD CUP IN FEBRUARY 2011.This experiment will definitely fail because players themselves are against it. The young players do not matter if they are excited. Aaron Finch has never played an international ODI.Hussey isright in questioning the timing.

  • zingzangspillip on August 14, 2010, 1:59 GMT

    This is an absolute JOKE on CA's behalf. If 50-over cricket isn't working, get rid of it. Don't mess around with the rules.

    Personally, I enjoy 50-over cricket much more than 20-over matches. Last night's match in Dambulla showed why 50-over cricket is a superior form. Upul Tharanga played an excellent innings on a difficult pitch to win the game. Twenty20 totally removes technical skill from the game and focuses on strength. Don Bradman would have been a rubbish Twenty20 player because he wasn't strong enough to hit sixes.

    All I want is decisiveness from CA. Obviously, spectators are not happy with 50-over cricket. So, just get rid of it! Withdraw Australia from the 50-over World Cup and get it over with, and end the rubbish discussions about rule changes.

  • rumdale on August 14, 2010, 1:53 GMT

    What a load of rubbish!!!! If Australia still want to be competitive on an internation scale i.e the world cup they cannot do this, this is wrong for the game and is at the wrong time.We have 20/20 for a hit and a giggle leave it at that and leave the one dayers alone.

  • tfjones1978 on August 14, 2010, 1:52 GMT

    I have been pushing for multi-session One Dayers (split-innings) for a while now. I think its a great idea and I like all changed conditions specified (except I would have preferred 25 overs a session, but 20 & 25 is still a lengthy One Day test of skill). Regarding slowing down at middle points of a match. This will only occur until a side starts beating other sides for scoring 60 or 70 runs for 15th to 25th overs. For those that recall, it use to be 2/50 off 15 overs until Srilanka in 1991-92 started being 4/100 off 15 overs. Now days most teams are now around 80 runs off first 15 overs. A similar thing will occur after a while of playing split-innings ... a team cant slow down to score a large score in a 45 over match. Extra playing conditions I would like: (1) "Team with most runs after 20 overs decides who bats next" (ie: ABAB or ABBA). (2) "20 overs each side is needed for a result with first two sessions deciding lengthy rained matches". Please intro this into 4day cricket also.

  • mafiasam on August 14, 2010, 1:14 GMT

    If they think split innings will do any good for one day cricket then they should look at its american cousin.. baseball.. it has nine split innings.. THE MOST BORING SPORT IN THE WORLD.

  • Chris_P on August 14, 2010, 0:53 GMT

    The concept has started already with matches having commenced n Darwin. Interesting comments from Tasmanian captain, Xavier Doherty, "Bowlers can still bowl 10 overs so you only have to pick four bowlers to get the overs completed and I think that's going to be the biggest adjustment," he said.

    "Teams will pick their four best bowlers, without having to go for a fifth or a sixth, and on the flipside of that you play an extra batsman, so the batting strength will be that little bit more as well.

    "So that's what 40-over cricket will bring to the table, you'll get to see more high-quality batting and the best bowlers bowling in it."

    Doherty admitted the rules made all-rounders a less valuable commodity, reducing the need for versatile role-players capable of swinging both bat and ball.

    Seems like having your best batsmen & bowlers playing seems a good idea for a start, but so far, positive feedback.

  • 2.14istherunrate on August 14, 2010, 0:00 GMT

    There is nothing in this idea that tells me that it is not a just a sorry waste of space and a complete bore.

  • wiiCricket on August 13, 2010, 23:49 GMT

    Once again...this is not the right approach. I suggested this idea when most of the boards were sleeping. And somehow now everybody is claiming this to be theirs. Anways... Idea is whoever is batting first will play 25 overs. Opponents will chase the target in 25 overs, if they are successfully able to do that before 25 overs they will have an advantage to pursue and play next 25 overs and give the first batting team a target to chase. So that's an even balance. Now if the team fails to chase the target in the first innings the fielding team can press to go on and bowl next 25 overs to that team again in order to get them out cheaply again. What they are trying to do here is not making any sense.

  • on August 13, 2010, 23:17 GMT

    What a stupid fricken decision by CA. And what for the cricket fans who love 50 over ODIs???? Another stupid version of the game, that will most likely have The same stoopid cheerleaders as the IPL. I hope to god, or whoever, that NZ Cricket don't implement this rubbish before the WC.

  • on August 13, 2010, 23:09 GMT

    I knew this would happen. Batsmen get themselves in in the first innings, then have a huge pause for the other teams inning, and then start over again, having lost all momentum. You see it often in crickets best formats - tests. Players lose all momentum over lunch, tea and stumps. Just leave 50 over cricket alone. If anything needs to change, its this T20 crap. Give what the players want, not the public, otherwise players may go on strike and not play.

  • Bryan999 on August 13, 2010, 22:49 GMT

    Hey BCCI, ECB, PCB, CSA, WICB and all others, please you all also come with NEW/DIFFERENT KIND of format so that the next generation will have THE option of going for TEST/ODI(D/N)/T20/ODI(Split Inngs)/.../... etc..... TO ALL young BATSMEN! if you are all aiming for GOOD-BATTING-TECHNIQUE... LEAVE IT... YOU NEED TO BE LIKE A BASE-BALL/PINCH/HARD HITTER for your future... TO ALL young FAST BOWLERS!... LEAVE YOUR SPEED... LEARN SMART-BOWLING for ECONOMY... GOD SAVE CRICKET!!! --A "TEST MATCH" LOVER from a non cricket playing country....

  • on August 13, 2010, 22:38 GMT

    Yeah another format - ace. Just as Martin Crowe is hammering the nail into 50 overs (when he should be hammering it into the boring popgun t20) we have another format appear. Seriously. How much more can these idots rip the game to shreds. The game is very popular. If groundsmen around the world prepared more good pitches, where bowlers had a chance and batters had to be good to succeed, then we would see better games. If captains were rewarded for going for the win rather than the draw, then this woul be even better Inventing another version of "monkey tennis" cricket is a joke. Hope it dies off really quick

  • Arthaurian on August 13, 2010, 22:34 GMT

    One of the things about cricket that fans, and just the public in general absolutely hate about cricket, is waiting. So why promote that dreadful element? Why promote waiting? We hate waiting. You guys really aren't doing yourselves or the public any favor.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Arthaurian on August 13, 2010, 22:34 GMT

    One of the things about cricket that fans, and just the public in general absolutely hate about cricket, is waiting. So why promote that dreadful element? Why promote waiting? We hate waiting. You guys really aren't doing yourselves or the public any favor.

  • on August 13, 2010, 22:38 GMT

    Yeah another format - ace. Just as Martin Crowe is hammering the nail into 50 overs (when he should be hammering it into the boring popgun t20) we have another format appear. Seriously. How much more can these idots rip the game to shreds. The game is very popular. If groundsmen around the world prepared more good pitches, where bowlers had a chance and batters had to be good to succeed, then we would see better games. If captains were rewarded for going for the win rather than the draw, then this woul be even better Inventing another version of "monkey tennis" cricket is a joke. Hope it dies off really quick

  • Bryan999 on August 13, 2010, 22:49 GMT

    Hey BCCI, ECB, PCB, CSA, WICB and all others, please you all also come with NEW/DIFFERENT KIND of format so that the next generation will have THE option of going for TEST/ODI(D/N)/T20/ODI(Split Inngs)/.../... etc..... TO ALL young BATSMEN! if you are all aiming for GOOD-BATTING-TECHNIQUE... LEAVE IT... YOU NEED TO BE LIKE A BASE-BALL/PINCH/HARD HITTER for your future... TO ALL young FAST BOWLERS!... LEAVE YOUR SPEED... LEARN SMART-BOWLING for ECONOMY... GOD SAVE CRICKET!!! --A "TEST MATCH" LOVER from a non cricket playing country....

  • on August 13, 2010, 23:09 GMT

    I knew this would happen. Batsmen get themselves in in the first innings, then have a huge pause for the other teams inning, and then start over again, having lost all momentum. You see it often in crickets best formats - tests. Players lose all momentum over lunch, tea and stumps. Just leave 50 over cricket alone. If anything needs to change, its this T20 crap. Give what the players want, not the public, otherwise players may go on strike and not play.

  • on August 13, 2010, 23:17 GMT

    What a stupid fricken decision by CA. And what for the cricket fans who love 50 over ODIs???? Another stupid version of the game, that will most likely have The same stoopid cheerleaders as the IPL. I hope to god, or whoever, that NZ Cricket don't implement this rubbish before the WC.

  • wiiCricket on August 13, 2010, 23:49 GMT

    Once again...this is not the right approach. I suggested this idea when most of the boards were sleeping. And somehow now everybody is claiming this to be theirs. Anways... Idea is whoever is batting first will play 25 overs. Opponents will chase the target in 25 overs, if they are successfully able to do that before 25 overs they will have an advantage to pursue and play next 25 overs and give the first batting team a target to chase. So that's an even balance. Now if the team fails to chase the target in the first innings the fielding team can press to go on and bowl next 25 overs to that team again in order to get them out cheaply again. What they are trying to do here is not making any sense.

  • 2.14istherunrate on August 14, 2010, 0:00 GMT

    There is nothing in this idea that tells me that it is not a just a sorry waste of space and a complete bore.

  • Chris_P on August 14, 2010, 0:53 GMT

    The concept has started already with matches having commenced n Darwin. Interesting comments from Tasmanian captain, Xavier Doherty, "Bowlers can still bowl 10 overs so you only have to pick four bowlers to get the overs completed and I think that's going to be the biggest adjustment," he said.

    "Teams will pick their four best bowlers, without having to go for a fifth or a sixth, and on the flipside of that you play an extra batsman, so the batting strength will be that little bit more as well.

    "So that's what 40-over cricket will bring to the table, you'll get to see more high-quality batting and the best bowlers bowling in it."

    Doherty admitted the rules made all-rounders a less valuable commodity, reducing the need for versatile role-players capable of swinging both bat and ball.

    Seems like having your best batsmen & bowlers playing seems a good idea for a start, but so far, positive feedback.

  • mafiasam on August 14, 2010, 1:14 GMT

    If they think split innings will do any good for one day cricket then they should look at its american cousin.. baseball.. it has nine split innings.. THE MOST BORING SPORT IN THE WORLD.

  • tfjones1978 on August 14, 2010, 1:52 GMT

    I have been pushing for multi-session One Dayers (split-innings) for a while now. I think its a great idea and I like all changed conditions specified (except I would have preferred 25 overs a session, but 20 & 25 is still a lengthy One Day test of skill). Regarding slowing down at middle points of a match. This will only occur until a side starts beating other sides for scoring 60 or 70 runs for 15th to 25th overs. For those that recall, it use to be 2/50 off 15 overs until Srilanka in 1991-92 started being 4/100 off 15 overs. Now days most teams are now around 80 runs off first 15 overs. A similar thing will occur after a while of playing split-innings ... a team cant slow down to score a large score in a 45 over match. Extra playing conditions I would like: (1) "Team with most runs after 20 overs decides who bats next" (ie: ABAB or ABBA). (2) "20 overs each side is needed for a result with first two sessions deciding lengthy rained matches". Please intro this into 4day cricket also.