Is LOI international cricket turning into a gap filler?

[zen]

As for me, the next LOI tournament that I look forward to following (not necessarily watching every game) is the ODI WC in 2027. 

At this point, regular international LOI cricket has turned into a gap filler between IPLs. 
 

Other advantage that IPL has - it brings almost all your favorite Indian cricketers in action at the same time while also bringing in the cream of overseas players. All teams are more or less competitive. 
 

Test cricket’s charm remains but it is restricted to major series and the WTC final. 

—-

 

 

At this point, innovators and early adapters appear to have moved towards IPL. The early majority could be on its way. Late majority and laggards would come around at their own pace when it could be obvious. 

—-

 

Discuss - is LOI international cricket turning into a gap filler between IPLs? 

 

 

[deathmonger]

Yes. Bilateral white ball will die out with IPL expanding.

[tapandrun]

Yes.

Bi-lateral T20Is remain a side gig in international cricket, serving primarily as a testing ground for upcoming talent. Only the T20 World Cup is treated with absolute seriousness. Most top-tier players are routinely rested for bilateral series; unless SENA+I teams are playing each other, countries rarely field more than 70% of their full-strength squads.

ODIs are rapidly moving in the same direction. Previously, SENA+I nations fielded 100% full-strength sides against one another. Today, that has dropped to 80-85%. When these powerhouse teams play non-SENA+I opposition, squad strength often plummets below 60%, essentially becoming experimental development sides.

Consequently, the T20 World Cup and the IPL stand as the pinnacle of the shortest format, while the ODI World Cup remains the sole pinnacle for the 50-over game.

This shift stems from multiple reasons. Many top teams have aging star players on their last legs. Having failed to develop equivalent replacements, teams are managing workloads to extend these veteran careers in specific formats—often Tests or ODIs, as seen with Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli.

Ultimately, T20Is function as a vital proving ground. They allow selectors to see how standout IPL performers adapt to foreign conditions and transition into genuine international prospects.

 

 

 

Edited May 20 by tapandrun

[Lord]

Yes bilateral ODI doesn’t serve any purpose 

 

To save it they can have tri series

[tapandrun]

5 hours ago, Lord said:

Yes bilateral ODI doesn’t serve any purpose 

 

To save it they can have tri series

Tri-series does not help as well, atleast in bi-laterals ppl come to stadium to watch the game. No one comes to watch 2 neutral sides playing.

 

Even the stands were empty in wc and ct games. And imagine matches with non-full strength sides and neutral sides wth multiple unknown names

 

And if the home side exits every no1 is interested in the finals as well.  

[Lord]

3 minutes ago, tapandrun said:

Tri-series does not help as well, atleast in bi-laterals ppl come to stadium to watch the game. No one comes to watch 2 neutral sides playing.

 

Even the stands were empty in wc and ct games. And imagine matches with non-full strength sides and neutral sides wth multiple unknown names

 

And if the home side exits every no1 is interested in the finals as well.  

Thats the risk in ICC tourneys too. You have to take it.

 

OTOH, TV revenues will likely be higher as interest will be high with something at stake in most games.

 

Gate receipts are small part anyway

[tapandrun]

14 minutes ago, Lord said:

Thats the risk in ICC tourneys too. You have to take it.

 

OTOH, TV revenues will likely be higher as interest will be high with something at stake in most games.

 

Gate receipts are small part anyway

No  pak tried it and still trying, it looks v.good in theory and may bring nostalgia to few thats all it does.

 

Smallest tri series is 4 games, non-finalist plays 2 games and finalist plays 3 games. This does not serve any purpose and logistically hectic unless playing multiple games on same grounds.

 

So basically broadcaster and sponsors would only be paying for 3 games <-- 2 games for home side and 1 final which is eqvlnt to 3 game try series.

Any team losing 1 game means they are out of the finals which does not tell which was better team.

 

And if each-side plays other side 2x it means 7 games again 2 neutral side games and 1 finals.

 

Previously teams used to play full sides , there were not this many games , so any competition of a top batter with top bowler was something ppl liked to view.

Now there are so many icc events ppl are already getting that and these days teams mostly play 75% of full strength in non-icc events. 

 

 

 

Edited May 21 by tapandrun

[zen]

5 minutes ago, Lord said:

Thats the risk in ICC tourneys too. You have to take it.

 

OTOH, TV revenues will likely be higher as interest will be high with something at stake in most games.

 

Gate receipts are small part anyway

If the interest in meaningless bilaterals and tri-series (aka Agarbati Cups) is fading,  the focus shifts to what is driving the growth (IPL). 
 

Australia discontinued its once famous tri-series. 
 

 

[G_B_]

Tri series have their place.

 

Gives you knockout thrill