Changes to one-day cricket June 15, 2010

ICC to watch split-innings experiment

55

The ICC will be keeping close tabs on the experiment of split-innings one-day cricket in Australia next year but Haroon Lorgat, the chief executive, remains confident that the 50-over format can continue in its current guise for one-day internationals.

Last week Cricket Australia announced that they will trial the new structure in the Ford Ranger Cup during the 2010-11 season whereby the matches are divided into four 25-over innings. There remains a strong feeling that one-day cricket has to change to survive in the wake of Twenty20 now dominating the landscape and the 50-over format has already been ditched for domestic cricket in England and South Africa.

The 2015 World Cup, set for Australia and New Zealand, is being seen as a potential changing point for one-day cricket and Lorgat didn't rule out that a new structure could be in place.

"We haven't talked about changing that format," he told Cricinfo's Switch Hit podcast. "We will see how the 2011 event unfolds and I'm very confident that you will see an excellent World Cup which means we wouldn't tamper with it for 2015, but it's something we will be open-minded about. Let's see how the domestic trials go, let's see how the World Cup goes and then we can take a view on it."

Australia will begin the trials once the international players have left for next year's World Cup which will be held in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. At a lower level split innings have been used in English second XI this season and, despite Lorgat's confidence over the international game, if 50-over cricket continues to be lost from domestic cricket it would only seem a matter of time before ODIs also evolve.

"Whilst we are trialling these things at domestic level we are still quite confident that 50-overs at international level will survive," Lorgat added. "What we probably need to be focussing on is the context in which it is being played, the quantity of 50-over matches and when it is scheduled. At international level I don't hold the view that the format is as challenged as it is at domestic level.

Lorgat added that any new structure for ODIs would need considerable time to bed in before it was used for a World Cup. "We've always been mindful of giving players sufficient time to become accustomed to whatever changes we might make.

"We have been encouraging members to look at tweaks or fundamental changes to the 50-over format so we can see how it works out and whether it would be something we would be interested in picking up for the international format, so I'm very keen to see how it all unfolds in Australia."

Andrew McGlashan is assistant editor of Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • AARON.IFTEKHAR on June 21, 2010, 12:17 GMT

    I like the idea of split innings 50 over matches, with 10 wickets-a-side. I think we also need of split innings T20 Cricket, with 10 overs 10 wickets per team for more dynamic cricket.

  • enigma77543 on June 20, 2010, 17:00 GMT

    Well,there seems to be a little confusion about how these 4 inns are going to be played, some people are saying it's 10 wickets per side PER MATCH while some are saying it's 10 wickets per side PER INNG (20 wicket in total like in Tests) I'd be ok with the former & I'm sure it'll make ODIs more interesting to watch,may be they should give the reigns to the captains & say either captain,fielding or batting,can call the 1st inngs off between say 15-40 overs & invite the other team to bat/bowl & so on,it'll be very interesting but if they're talking 10 wickets per side PER INNINGS then that'd worst thing to have ever happened to this game (apart from 20-20s of course) because that'd mean more 20-20s & messing up the game even more, I'm sure then they'll somehow also come up with an idea to turn Tests into some sort of 20-20 resembling format to satisfy the freaking BASEBALL fans who only like to see the ball getting smacked around,yes,it'd be baseball then not Cricket for sure

  • sunilvaidya on June 19, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    splitting odi into 25-25 overs is a silly idea. i am sure it will die like that innovation of super sub. that was a silly change and died quickly and splitting the odi idea is also going to prove silly. there will be more questions than answers if this change is made. what are you going to do if there is rain interruption? already in current state of odi there is a lot of uncertainty when there are only 2 innings. if there are 4 innings to be considered it is only going to increase the headache. already duckworth lewis system is being criticized. the 4 innings concept is only going to add to the difficulties in case of rain.

  • Geordie613 on June 18, 2010, 13:47 GMT

    I like the idea of split innings 50 over matches, with 10 wickets per team. would they use a new ball for each segment? Perhaps the batting captain could choose anywhere between the 20th and 30th overs to break, and start bowling? How about being able to use substitutes for the 2nd innings? (Anyone remember the substitute experiment in the Nissan shield in SA?) It sounds juicy...

  • on June 17, 2010, 22:03 GMT

    @sunilvaidya - Of course, the first team will not bat again as they have already won the match. This does not pose a problem for regular ODIs between 2 teams. But it can pose a problem in tournaments like world cups. Several questions will arise as to how to calculate the net run rate for the two teams.

  • TikoloFan on June 17, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    T20 & 3-day Tests (1 innings per team) are future of the game!

  • sunilvaidya on June 17, 2010, 6:55 GMT

    if one side makes 160 for 4 in 25 overs and the other side gets all out on 102 in 25 overs what is to be done in such case? will the first side continue to bat the rest of 25 overs? that would be meaningless as the result is already known. and if the first side does not bat then it is equivalent to the first side declaring the innings closed after 25 overs.

  • Navin84 on June 17, 2010, 6:07 GMT

    Splitting the ODI into 4 inninngs just won't work out. Nothing is wrong with the ODI as it is, it should remain but reduce the amount of it which is being played. However, i would love to see a new format (the 4th) of the game whereby it is slipt into 4 innings of 25 overs each like Test match where one team would have 20 wickets. They can call it "TEST ODI" or "ODI TEST". What do my fellow cricket lovers think?

  • oldmanofsea on June 16, 2010, 21:55 GMT

    To all those who think that the change should not be introduced, why dont you think of some arguements to support your pleas. If you feel one day cricket is very interesting as it is, please explain how split innings cricket will make it any less interesting. And please, for the love of God dont all shout out about one day cricket becoming a 20-20 slog fest. If you do, YOU HAVENT UNDERSTOOD SPLIT INNINGS CRICKET and YOU WILL BE MAKING FOOLS OF YOURSELF.

    So, dont just sit there and say one day cricket should not be tampered with. Once in your life, use your heads and try to come up with some arguements.

  • oldmanofsea on June 16, 2010, 21:46 GMT

    Oh yes, Sachin is the only person who will be allowed to bat twice. This is the only thing the ICC has confirmed regarding the format. All the other players will be allowed to bat only once. But hey, Sachin is Sachin. In fact, I believe that he will be allowed to bat 4 times in test matches from now onwards.

  • AARON.IFTEKHAR on June 21, 2010, 12:17 GMT

    I like the idea of split innings 50 over matches, with 10 wickets-a-side. I think we also need of split innings T20 Cricket, with 10 overs 10 wickets per team for more dynamic cricket.

  • enigma77543 on June 20, 2010, 17:00 GMT

    Well,there seems to be a little confusion about how these 4 inns are going to be played, some people are saying it's 10 wickets per side PER MATCH while some are saying it's 10 wickets per side PER INNG (20 wicket in total like in Tests) I'd be ok with the former & I'm sure it'll make ODIs more interesting to watch,may be they should give the reigns to the captains & say either captain,fielding or batting,can call the 1st inngs off between say 15-40 overs & invite the other team to bat/bowl & so on,it'll be very interesting but if they're talking 10 wickets per side PER INNINGS then that'd worst thing to have ever happened to this game (apart from 20-20s of course) because that'd mean more 20-20s & messing up the game even more, I'm sure then they'll somehow also come up with an idea to turn Tests into some sort of 20-20 resembling format to satisfy the freaking BASEBALL fans who only like to see the ball getting smacked around,yes,it'd be baseball then not Cricket for sure

  • sunilvaidya on June 19, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    splitting odi into 25-25 overs is a silly idea. i am sure it will die like that innovation of super sub. that was a silly change and died quickly and splitting the odi idea is also going to prove silly. there will be more questions than answers if this change is made. what are you going to do if there is rain interruption? already in current state of odi there is a lot of uncertainty when there are only 2 innings. if there are 4 innings to be considered it is only going to increase the headache. already duckworth lewis system is being criticized. the 4 innings concept is only going to add to the difficulties in case of rain.

  • Geordie613 on June 18, 2010, 13:47 GMT

    I like the idea of split innings 50 over matches, with 10 wickets per team. would they use a new ball for each segment? Perhaps the batting captain could choose anywhere between the 20th and 30th overs to break, and start bowling? How about being able to use substitutes for the 2nd innings? (Anyone remember the substitute experiment in the Nissan shield in SA?) It sounds juicy...

  • on June 17, 2010, 22:03 GMT

    @sunilvaidya - Of course, the first team will not bat again as they have already won the match. This does not pose a problem for regular ODIs between 2 teams. But it can pose a problem in tournaments like world cups. Several questions will arise as to how to calculate the net run rate for the two teams.

  • TikoloFan on June 17, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    T20 & 3-day Tests (1 innings per team) are future of the game!

  • sunilvaidya on June 17, 2010, 6:55 GMT

    if one side makes 160 for 4 in 25 overs and the other side gets all out on 102 in 25 overs what is to be done in such case? will the first side continue to bat the rest of 25 overs? that would be meaningless as the result is already known. and if the first side does not bat then it is equivalent to the first side declaring the innings closed after 25 overs.

  • Navin84 on June 17, 2010, 6:07 GMT

    Splitting the ODI into 4 inninngs just won't work out. Nothing is wrong with the ODI as it is, it should remain but reduce the amount of it which is being played. However, i would love to see a new format (the 4th) of the game whereby it is slipt into 4 innings of 25 overs each like Test match where one team would have 20 wickets. They can call it "TEST ODI" or "ODI TEST". What do my fellow cricket lovers think?

  • oldmanofsea on June 16, 2010, 21:55 GMT

    To all those who think that the change should not be introduced, why dont you think of some arguements to support your pleas. If you feel one day cricket is very interesting as it is, please explain how split innings cricket will make it any less interesting. And please, for the love of God dont all shout out about one day cricket becoming a 20-20 slog fest. If you do, YOU HAVENT UNDERSTOOD SPLIT INNINGS CRICKET and YOU WILL BE MAKING FOOLS OF YOURSELF.

    So, dont just sit there and say one day cricket should not be tampered with. Once in your life, use your heads and try to come up with some arguements.

  • oldmanofsea on June 16, 2010, 21:46 GMT

    Oh yes, Sachin is the only person who will be allowed to bat twice. This is the only thing the ICC has confirmed regarding the format. All the other players will be allowed to bat only once. But hey, Sachin is Sachin. In fact, I believe that he will be allowed to bat 4 times in test matches from now onwards.

  • on June 16, 2010, 16:14 GMT

    Its an exciting prospect. . . . . it could bring about +ve reinforcement to one day cricket. . . . & can c sachin bat twice in a day. . . . . .THUMBS UP 4 D NEW FORMAT. . . . . . . .

  • tiger_fahad on June 16, 2010, 15:53 GMT

    I love cricket and want to see as much cricket as possible all over the year i love its all 3 existing formats i never get bored with 50 overs format and i am sure there will be many who like odi criket very much so please dont kill odi format 1 thing can be done that unimportant odi serieses should not be played, like t20, a new format launched just a couple of years ago at international level so why not launch another format, "format number 4" two inns of 25/25 inns a "oneday test match" to make cricket more interesting

  • 2.14istherunrate on June 16, 2010, 15:01 GMT

    We don't see other sports getting mucked about with like this. Are they going to play snooker with bent cues? Are they going to play football with a cube ball? Are they going to play tennis suspended in harnesses five feet off the ground? Or golf using the body of a dog to hit the ball with. Leave cricket alone!!!

  • oldmanofsea on June 16, 2010, 12:57 GMT

    Most of the people who have posted the comments havent understood the nature of split innings cricket that CA is talking about. Please understand that it is not just like two separate 25 over matches where teams start afresh in the 2nd innings. The 2nd innings will be a continuation of the first. So lets say Australia score 160/4 in their first 25 overs. In their 2nd innings they will continue from that position. The batsmen who were not out when their first innings concluded will carry on. The batsmen who got out in the first innings cannot bat again in the 2nd innings. So, the essential concept of 50 over cricket is preserved. It will not just be a slogfest like 20-20. Teams will have to build their innings the same way as they do today.

    Split innings just makes the game more interesting like reducing the effect of toss on the result by evening out the conditions.

    So please understand what CA is talking about before rubbishing split innings cricket as a 20-20 slogfest.

  • Vikram on June 16, 2010, 5:18 GMT

    I wish the trial is successful. I wish the 2011 World Cup goes on in the current format so that Tendulkar can have his swansong - getting India the cup, hitting 50 ODI centuries, and end his career as the greatest ODI batsman ever.

    And then despite India's success at that WC, I wish people agree to change the format for the 2015 WC in Aus/NZ to a 2-innings 20-20 Test match. But some of those things wont happen - if India wins the next WC, BCCI will suddenly decide that protecting the 50-over format is their main job.

  • on June 16, 2010, 3:26 GMT

    So many experiments prove only one thing. People are getting bored with this game. Test matches to 1 days.. then 50 overs each, now 20/20 and tomorrow it would be 10/10. Only game where batsmen has no restriction but bowlers can not contribute unlimited. Baseball has not lost its appeal because its athletic, vibrant and unexpected like soccer. Its a sub continent game which forces you to see stupid advertisements in the name of Cricket.

  • CricFan78 on June 16, 2010, 3:08 GMT

    Aussies and English should stick to their overrated Ashes rather than trying to change the way ODI cricket is played.

  • Rooboy on June 16, 2010, 1:36 GMT

    Did any of the negative commentators here actually read the article? This is a proposed TRIAL to be run in Australia's DOMESTIC competition. Many things have been trialled in domestic cricket which have never made it to international competition, so instead of people whining about what may or may not happen at international level, why not wait and see how it goes at domestic level first AND THEN form an opinion.

  • on June 16, 2010, 1:13 GMT

    Split Innings ODI Cricket = Fail.

    Reducing 50 overs to 40 overs might be the way forward. Sure, T20 has revolutionised the way one-day games are played and that's not a bad thing at all, but before T20s began I wasn't a great fan of 50 over cricket. Split-innings would make it a one-day test match in effect but I think that would kill the game. After all, a Test Match is a Test Match, and nothing should replace or compromise it.

    My honest opinion? ICC should bury this idea and never dig it back up.

  • threeheadedmonkey on June 16, 2010, 0:38 GMT

    I'm pretty sure cricket Australia initially said their 10 wickets carries across both innings, i.e a teams first 25 leaves them at 4/150 their next innings starts at the same point with 4 wickets down. If it sticks to that format it won't be too bad but we'll likely see people saving wickets until the last 25. I for one prefer regular 50 overs cricket.

  • on June 16, 2010, 0:38 GMT

    @Ansu Suseelan: they aren't four innings games, it is a changeover at 25 overs, after the first 2 are completed the first innings resumes for another 25 overs. it is designed to eliminate the 'boring' middle overs between 15 and 40 but unless the players change their style nothing will change i believe

  • that_guy on June 16, 2010, 0:02 GMT

    I think top 4 teams in world should play tests top 6 play ondayers and everyone should be alowed to play 20/20. This will cut down on rubbish onesided matches.

    Alternativly make tests 2 day limited overs of 4 X 50 over inning and onedayers 4 X 25 over innings and keep 20/20 as domestic and minows.

  • lucyferr on June 16, 2010, 0:00 GMT

    PS: some poster said "The 50 over game makes sure that only the best players take part in it, unlike a T20 where one slogger can win the game for you." What a laugh! How many ODI games have been won single-handedly? (e.g. Kapil Dev's 175 off 138 balls vs Zimbabwe, WC 1983) Stop talking about slogging like it's a bad word. It's just another style of play, and the public loves it - only armchair bound tea-swigging purist dinosaurs - or people in denial - don't. I love watching slogging - it usually leads to wickets, and I love watching wickets fall and especially catches :-) Those batsmen who stay at the crease for ages are booooring... Sloggers come, give you a helluva show at the crease, and then get the hell out - never outwearing their welcome. Admit it, you love watching them too.

  • lucyferr on June 15, 2010, 23:53 GMT

    LOL - sure Lorggikins has to make conservative statements like that to the press; but what does he really mutter to himself when he's sitting on the can? :-) Of course 50-over cricket will change if it wants to survive, the only question is whether it'll be 2xT20 or 2xT25, whether innings will be ABAB or ABBA. Personally, I think 50-over cricket should die, but that it will survive for the sake of preserving the ICC cash cow called the ODI World Cup.

  • admshafi on June 15, 2010, 23:46 GMT

    @keith godwin chapman,you'r real cricket fan! i request to all cricket administrators ''please don't kill 50 over cricket by dividing two t20 innings'' please!

  • rickeyre on June 15, 2010, 23:46 GMT

    Why stop at two innings per game? Why not have nine? Our present crop of administrators seem to have a death wish to turn cricket into baseball - or maybe just let baseball take us over.

  • admshafi on June 15, 2010, 23:39 GMT

    Let all three format as they are, traditional format is 'test', real cricket format is '50-over', and t-20 format for those viwers who don't know anything about cricket but just for fun! so you can choose your format!!

  • admshafi on June 15, 2010, 23:21 GMT

    50-over cricket is the best, i love much more 50-over cricket than any other format even than test cricket and i think t-20 is not a cricket anymore! please let 50-over format as it is!!!

  • maverick1212 on June 15, 2010, 22:16 GMT

    I cannot understand why people are so afraid of change. It is just an experiment and if it works well, good for cricket. The purists must realize that it is the audience, the economics and the non-purist masses that make the game today. You can talk about sanctity of a 50-over game all you like, but with 20/20 coming in, 50 over looks like its between a rock and a hard place. Don't be scared if you think 50-50 goes away, it will assuredly be replaced by something better. For people who want pure cricket, Test cricket will always remain the purest form of the game, and will always remain around.

  • Rakesh_Sharma on June 15, 2010, 21:49 GMT

    It is not the problem with ODI but playing unlimited number of international matches. Totally illogical. Cricket is hijacked by india which indulges in playing useless matches year round. Again useless Asia cup, Champions trophy regular triseries and what not .tThe game is diluted all around . Just keep one world cup ,a multi nation trophy. keep its importance like Fifa world cup.

  • D.M.G.K. on June 15, 2010, 21:23 GMT

    Innovation is the spice of cricket. I am sure that "cricket purists" almost had a heart attack with the advent of the overhead delivery, the present cricket bat, "colored pajamas" and a white ball, not to mention the obviously heinous crime of severely shortening a test to just 50 overs. A true cricket lover will understand this and, once the change can be for the better, accept the inevitability of change in the gentleman's game.

  • Rake1 on June 15, 2010, 21:18 GMT

    Perhaps 2 innings of 25 overs each but with 10 wickets spread out over the two innings. Maybe allow 2 substitutes (who can bat or bowl) at mid point - i.e. completion of first innings by both teams & before the start of 2nd innings. Just a thought. .

  • Deenesh on June 15, 2010, 21:10 GMT

    whats the point of making the oDI format like this? Just lenghthen the T20's to 25 overs, and watch that instead. Not even a decade after the advent of T20 and ODI's are possibly on the way out. In 2 or 3 decades, will tests also be gone? Or will they split it into 8 innings, 4 each for a team? Absolute rubbish. Cricket will not be a timeless sport if they continue to tamper with it like how a novie side tampers with thier batting lineup.

  • boombasticl101 on June 15, 2010, 20:26 GMT

    I really don't understand why anyone that claims to be a cricket lover, and regularly visits this website, would possibly think that radically changing any current format of cricket (obviously excluding 20/20) is required. I agree that the odd variation for exhibition matches is fun, experimental and pulls in some extra capital for all those concerned. But why the hell would you want to crucify the purity that is test and 50 over cricket for the entertainment of the masses, that don't understand the sport. If you are one of those people, then maybe you should be watching baseball instead.

  • oldmanofsea on June 15, 2010, 19:48 GMT

    This is an awesome change that could make ODIs even more interesting. I dont disagree that ODIs are still interesting. However, I feel that some set patterns have crept in. One of the biggest benefit of split ODIs will be that toss wont be a very determining factor. There are so many interesting possibilities to consider just with respect to the toss.

    1) We can have two tosses - one for each innings. 2) We can just have one toss, but the captain who loses the toss can decide whether to bat or bowl first in the 2nd innings. 3) or we could use the same batting order for the 2nd innings as the first innings

    All the above will serve to reduce the impact of toss on the result. This is because the conditions faced by the teams will be more or less evened out especially in day-night matches.

    But I must stress that the second innings ahould be a continuation of the first, not a restart. Otherwise, it is just like 2 back to back 20-20s.

  • Thunee_man_Naidoo on June 15, 2010, 19:44 GMT

    They should have split innings (2 innings of 25) but with 10 wickets spread out over both innings.

  • aleem-basraa on June 15, 2010, 19:29 GMT

    Every type of the game has it's own taste. Test, one dayers and T20. If anyone has any good idea, it SHOULD be tested. BUT in any case 50 over games should not be replaced !!

  • on June 15, 2010, 19:28 GMT

    I think split innings will take away all the fun One Day provides... Test and One Day is good in it's current format. with split innings it will be hard to get centuries in one days. instead of 10 wkts there will be 20 wkts to offer from same match etc. it shouldn't be called one day-ers then any more :)

    I think the main concern is not being able to accommodate many matches with all these formats. I feel what all teams and ICC should look for is two separate teams i.e. one team for test and one day in it's current format. a separate team for 20-20. Thus India can play 20-20 and One day the same day. Similarly Aus can play 20-20 with India and One Day with SA the same day. what we need is two all together separate teams so more matches can be played...

  • on June 15, 2010, 19:27 GMT

    We don't want to see T20 rubbish slogging always. No more T20 cricket slogging please. Preserve the one day cricket which allows us to watch the TRUE TALENT. I think three formats enough at this time. 1) T20 2) one-day 3) five-days

  • on June 15, 2010, 18:29 GMT

    Cricket was a lovely game till money came in and spoiled the show. Now everyone wants to be on the money train and the fact that cricket is being decapitated does not concern anyone. The main problem is that the administrators want to make it a game for the masses and that cricket in its purest form is not. Let the masses have its T20 or T10s it is the duty of the ICC to keep Test and ODi as free as possible from the corruption of money.

  • on June 15, 2010, 18:22 GMT

    max cricket was so much fun... hitting 12s was awesome...

  • on June 15, 2010, 17:58 GMT

    We as fans need to understand that they are just bored with their jobs and want to make them feel important and look important and thus bringing in the ridiculous changes. Australian authorities must be feeling very important and good about themselves already.

    Moving on, if it happens they have once more complicated the rules in cricket. How does the ICC expect a country like USA to catch up a sport so complicated?..its absurd really. And to make things worse they complicate the rules further more. The future of 50 over game is fine...we fans love it..but the authorities just cant help poking their fingers and bringing in stupid changes :)

  • on June 15, 2010, 17:50 GMT

    Please dont introduce this split innings format cause it will kill the 50 over game. If anybody watched the game just concluded between Sri Lanka and Pakistan they will testify to what a nail biting contest it was. Both teams rebuilding from early losses and the bowlers coming back again at the death. Wasnt a rebuilding innings from Afridi more entertaining than a slogging innings if it was a 20 over game?

    The 50 over game makes sure that only the best players take part in it, unlike a T20 where one slogger can win the game for you.

  • Allan716 on June 15, 2010, 17:40 GMT

    Split level cricket was pioneered by Martin Crowe in his Super Max series. In that scenario runs were doubled when hit the max zone and each innings was new one. With the model that the Australians and Sachin Tendulkar is talking about is continuing the innings in the second half, I think this will rearrange a lot of strategies around the game and that might also create a scenario where teams break their batting order into different innings. The opportunities are immense and it will bring some variety to the game. However, captiains of teams should be encouraged to innovate in their strategies rather than play one dimensional cricket where the bowling powerplay is taken after the first ten overs and the batting powerplay taken at the end rather than when two well settled batsmen are at the crease. A good thing to do is start each innings with a new ball. Then there won't be the need for mandatory ball changes as the Kookaburra White ball is good for 25 - over cricket

  • popcorn on June 15, 2010, 17:30 GMT

    Silly to tamper with the current 50 over format. It's working well.I watch EVERY BALL with interest. Who says it is boring?

  • sjohn on June 15, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    I don't agree with many on tampering with test matches. The essence of test matches is that a team capable of getting twenty wickets at a better rate than the other wins the game. The paradigm shifts to runs scored when it's a limited overs game. We already have ODIs and T20s catering to this but test matches should remain as it is lest the art of wicket taking gets banished. Peace.

  • Dr.Raza on June 15, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    i personally am totally against this NEW split innings concept. If we have the new OD format then how will be able to see innings like the following

    Shoaib Malik V india at centurion in 2009 Stephen fleming v South Africa in 2003 worldcup Shahid Afridi Today v sri lanka in asia cup 2010 Sachin Tendulkar 200 not out v south africa Mathew Haydon 183 v newzealand in 2007 so basically my point is. All the famous innings like these will vanish. these are the sort of innings are played when everything's lost by the batting side but yet this changes the whole scenario

  • Paul-in-Finland on June 15, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    A One Day Test....brilliant, should have been this way all along.

  • andrewstrauss on June 15, 2010, 15:55 GMT

    rakesh, you need to learn that test cricket is the pinnacle for any performer and that it has more thrills and drama in it than any 20/20. edgebaston 2005, when has any 20/20 been that exciting

  • LeaderARH on June 15, 2010, 15:32 GMT

    Splitting one dayers is a very bad idea.No more short versions,please.It takes the charm of the game away.

  • jackiethepen on June 15, 2010, 15:06 GMT

    Test cricket is already exciting. That is why it plays to packed houses in England. It is the most popular form of the game. I suggest that pitches are made less batsmen friendly in India and stadiums more spectator friendly and Tests will revive there. To fulfill all the tactics and strategy in cricket you need time to play for win or draw. The threat changes the game and can cause a collapse.

    Splitting the one dayers is a very bad idea. Groan. Not more T20 cricket slogging please.

  • on June 15, 2010, 15:05 GMT

    I FULLY support the Post by Rakesh_Sharma

    Infact the Test matches must be limited to maximum 70 overs per side .These can be finished in three days. Do not keep any restrictions.Just play it with normal test cricket rules.Keep follow on runs as 150. Make pitches slightly less batsmen friendly.Test cricket will be an extremely exciting stuff. Introduce T20 cricket in Olympics so that more countriest ry the game as therewill be Gold medals involved(Men and wome) Two gold medals ( total six medals..Sureshot recipe for Cricket getting popular globally not just with indian immigrants in different countries. If unknown sports are in olympics ,Cricket whic is followed by 25% of world population must get automatic entry. Cricket will be a truly global game within 10 years.Not just with indian immigrants globally.

  • on June 15, 2010, 14:50 GMT

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out in a rain affected match. If it rains during the first innings of the team batting second, will they cut the match to one innings per team or will they have a shortened second innings for both teams as well. It will be interesting to see how D/L plays out if it rains in the second innings..

    I think it will make ODIs more interesting ...more like having two twenty-20s per day....nightmare for bowlers though.. now you have to get a Sachin or Sehwag out twice....!!!!

  • Rakesh_Sharma on June 15, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    Infact the Test matches must be limited to maximum 70 overs per side .These can be finished in three days. Do not keep any restrictions.Just play it with normal test cricket rules.Keep follow on runs as 150. Make pitches slightly less batsmen friendly.Test cricket will be an extremely exciting stuff.

    Introduce T20 cricket in Olympics so that more countriest ry the game as therewill be Gold medals involved(Men and wome) Two gold medals ( total six medals..Sureshot recipe for Cricket getting popular globally not just with indian immigrants in different countries. If unknown sports are in olympics ,Cricket whic is followed by 25% of world population must get automatic entry. Cricket will be a truly global game within 10 years.Not just with indian immigrants globally.

  • Anant.Sonthalia on June 15, 2010, 14:36 GMT

    I personally think that splitting the one dayers is a very bad idea as it is basically changing it into a t20 which is destroying a vital part of the international circit

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Anant.Sonthalia on June 15, 2010, 14:36 GMT

    I personally think that splitting the one dayers is a very bad idea as it is basically changing it into a t20 which is destroying a vital part of the international circit

  • Rakesh_Sharma on June 15, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    Infact the Test matches must be limited to maximum 70 overs per side .These can be finished in three days. Do not keep any restrictions.Just play it with normal test cricket rules.Keep follow on runs as 150. Make pitches slightly less batsmen friendly.Test cricket will be an extremely exciting stuff.

    Introduce T20 cricket in Olympics so that more countriest ry the game as therewill be Gold medals involved(Men and wome) Two gold medals ( total six medals..Sureshot recipe for Cricket getting popular globally not just with indian immigrants in different countries. If unknown sports are in olympics ,Cricket whic is followed by 25% of world population must get automatic entry. Cricket will be a truly global game within 10 years.Not just with indian immigrants globally.

  • on June 15, 2010, 14:50 GMT

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out in a rain affected match. If it rains during the first innings of the team batting second, will they cut the match to one innings per team or will they have a shortened second innings for both teams as well. It will be interesting to see how D/L plays out if it rains in the second innings..

    I think it will make ODIs more interesting ...more like having two twenty-20s per day....nightmare for bowlers though.. now you have to get a Sachin or Sehwag out twice....!!!!

  • on June 15, 2010, 15:05 GMT

    I FULLY support the Post by Rakesh_Sharma

    Infact the Test matches must be limited to maximum 70 overs per side .These can be finished in three days. Do not keep any restrictions.Just play it with normal test cricket rules.Keep follow on runs as 150. Make pitches slightly less batsmen friendly.Test cricket will be an extremely exciting stuff. Introduce T20 cricket in Olympics so that more countriest ry the game as therewill be Gold medals involved(Men and wome) Two gold medals ( total six medals..Sureshot recipe for Cricket getting popular globally not just with indian immigrants in different countries. If unknown sports are in olympics ,Cricket whic is followed by 25% of world population must get automatic entry. Cricket will be a truly global game within 10 years.Not just with indian immigrants globally.

  • jackiethepen on June 15, 2010, 15:06 GMT

    Test cricket is already exciting. That is why it plays to packed houses in England. It is the most popular form of the game. I suggest that pitches are made less batsmen friendly in India and stadiums more spectator friendly and Tests will revive there. To fulfill all the tactics and strategy in cricket you need time to play for win or draw. The threat changes the game and can cause a collapse.

    Splitting the one dayers is a very bad idea. Groan. Not more T20 cricket slogging please.

  • LeaderARH on June 15, 2010, 15:32 GMT

    Splitting one dayers is a very bad idea.No more short versions,please.It takes the charm of the game away.

  • andrewstrauss on June 15, 2010, 15:55 GMT

    rakesh, you need to learn that test cricket is the pinnacle for any performer and that it has more thrills and drama in it than any 20/20. edgebaston 2005, when has any 20/20 been that exciting

  • Paul-in-Finland on June 15, 2010, 16:33 GMT

    A One Day Test....brilliant, should have been this way all along.

  • Dr.Raza on June 15, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    i personally am totally against this NEW split innings concept. If we have the new OD format then how will be able to see innings like the following

    Shoaib Malik V india at centurion in 2009 Stephen fleming v South Africa in 2003 worldcup Shahid Afridi Today v sri lanka in asia cup 2010 Sachin Tendulkar 200 not out v south africa Mathew Haydon 183 v newzealand in 2007 so basically my point is. All the famous innings like these will vanish. these are the sort of innings are played when everything's lost by the batting side but yet this changes the whole scenario

  • sjohn on June 15, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    I don't agree with many on tampering with test matches. The essence of test matches is that a team capable of getting twenty wickets at a better rate than the other wins the game. The paradigm shifts to runs scored when it's a limited overs game. We already have ODIs and T20s catering to this but test matches should remain as it is lest the art of wicket taking gets banished. Peace.