Tom
Finding an off-field solution that gives ODI cricket enough space to breathe in an increasingly crowded calendar is going to have to involve compromise. And given the rate of change and the recent doom-mongering, that compromise is going to need to come soon, else there will be nothing left to save. Private leagues are going to need to be better regulated, including running some of them concurrently, but the international game will inevitably need to make concessions too. What we might accept may differ but I think it is clear the status quo is unsustainable.
The ICC would do well to act and use the next 4 years, where all full member ODIs are effectively friendlies, to experiment with new playing regulations, and to plan for the future of all three formats beyond 2027 and 2031. Whether we can count on that level of coherent thinking is unlikely, the ICC’s record suggests they’ll make the wrong decision too late. Maybe this time they’ll get it right, we can only hope.
Is ODI cricket dead or just this World Cup? (Contains obligatory Karan KC one-man army reference) via @NatSportUAE #CWC2023 https://t.co/24qA406skB
— Paul Radley (@PaulRadley) October 27, 2023
Adit
It’s worth noting that even in football, a sport that is lightyears ahead of cricket in terms of how it revolves around privately-owned leagues, international matches are still present even outside of major tournaments. These internationals (whether they are friendlies, parts of wider Nations League structures, or part of major tournaments and their qualification pathways) still persist because they are still profitable and thus the powers that be set aside windows for these matches. It might not be a pleasant reality for us cricket followers accustomed to the internationals-first status quo, but given the choice of this and all franchise leagues all the time, I know which I’d rather.
The other reason why international cricket matches, major tournaments or not, will 100% be sticking around is one that I don’t necessarily like but is also present in football: they present free scouting opportunities for franchises. We’ve already seen Josh Little get an IPL deal from last year’s T20 World Cup, Bas de Leede will be swimming in offers by the end of this one. I suspect this is what Nate means by cricket not being allowed to shoot itself in its franchise foot – for all the problems the franchise system has, it is undeniably also doing a lot of good. Like Tom says, it’s better that we get ahead of it and get as good a deal as possible.
Rod
The Cricketer has just reported that the ICC will meet in November ‘to discuss the future of ODIs’, allegedly in the light of poor attendances at the World Cup. No matter that the 2019 version in England attracted good crowds, or that fans in India perhaps love Indian cricket rather than the game as such. Or that high ticket prices might be a disincentive. Or that meaningless bilaterals might be rather less interesting than a Super League which was woefully under-promoted but which was part of a World Cup qualification process. Discussions like this one take on more than passing significance if the Powers That Ought Not to Be are plotting the demise of the format, clearing the decks for yet more T20 franchise cricket.
Lalit Modi said from the outset in 2007 that the IPL would take over world cricket, and the BCCI has single-mindedly pursued its expansionist agenda ever since. The campaign to kill off ODIs fits that agenda all too well. As we have indicated in this discussion, there are ways to keep the one-day format relevant and attractive, but that requires the Board to find its backbone and tell the BCCI that international cricket – all international cricket – is too important to be the mere plaything of a few sporting oligarchs. And we need to help them in the search for their spines.
We need to mobilise now to nip this nonsense in the bud.
Tom
It’s astonishing, really, the rate of change we’re currently facing. The World Cup has faced a sluggish start, no thanks to a 10-team group stage that dilutes the value of each game (I digress). As soon as it seems the tournament might just be gathering some on-field momentum, with a series of competitive games, and even reports of record viewing figures, we’re hit with another manifestation of the existential threat.
Giving up on ODI cricket is giving up on International cricket. https://t.co/OjdXR5A2wO
— Bertus de Jong (@BdJcricket) October 23, 2023
I worry what cricket looks like without ODIs acting as an intermediary between Test and T20. It’s already difficult for teams to balance the skill sets required for the longest and shortest formats, so without ODIs offering a proving ground for both sets of skills (even if it’s neither to its fullest extent), test and T20 almost look like separate sports!
I can’t foresee Associate members, and even the smaller Full members such as Ireland and Zimbabwe, investing heavily in both. The likelihood is that they will focus their resources on developing skills for T20s, given how much more lucrative they are (and the lesser investment to get to a competitive level). This could leave as few as nine nations playing Tests, with no hope of ever expanding that pool, and only likely to shrink as the financial gravity pulls ever stronger towards T20.
The death of ODIs could be a chronic blow for the longest format too.
Rod
Interestingly, the ICC has just produced a very upbeat media release boasting that the current event ‘has set more record-breaking numbers as hundreds of millions of fans engage with the biggest World Cup ever.’ The figures they cite include not only a 43% increase in overall viewing minutes (taking in television and digital streaming), but – a little surprisingly – attendances totalling 542,000, up 190,000 from the equivalent point four years ago. Whatever the enemies of the ODI might want to argue, these statistics don’t suggest a format which is inherently broken. And that was before the nail-biter between South Africa and Pakistan.
Continued on the next page
