Tendulkar for two innings each in ODIs

[newmanthepunter]

Firstly how can u even compare tht retarded ponting with the best batsman ever ... Tht's a criminal offence in India .. :winky: Sachin retired cos his body needed rest ... Ponting retired cos he is faking so tht selectors don't sack him .. So he needed to show tht he is giving up something and results will be good in future... which u can bet will never be till he is captain.. :D

There is nothing wrong in comparing these two.. Ponting has nearly 12000 test runs which aint a mean feat... Perhaps one day you might see him go past sachin... U may not like it but it can happen. If his body needed rest then probably he shd quit Intl as well. And ponting has no need to fake to selectors .. they have already sworn him as the captain until 2011.... Further his captaincy has been commended by english commentators even tho he lost

[Anakin]

It's so funny to see kids in action.

[vvvslaxman]

7 to 15 overs is hardly boring in T20s.taking wickets is exciting but how is that possible in flat wickets in ODIs.that should be done in Test cricket on sporting wickets wat i meant was that while in T20s,batsman are always looking for that extra run,fielders r alert.in ODIs,between 15-40 overs,game goes to sleep,batsman are jogging the singles taking 4-runs per over n fielders r happy with it n dont try hard to stop it.exciting doesnt mean fours n sixes surely i agree. i have never rejected the idea of batsman a price on thier wicket,let them do that in Test cricket on tougher wickets.even in ODIs wen do it on tougher wickets,its watchable,but wen they do it on pattas,its plain boring n unacceptable

Assume it is a flat deck. What do you think is the best total a team should score in 50 overs? Give me a number.

[Lord]

Assume it is a flat deck. What do you think is the best total a team should score in 50 overs? Give me a number.

if u mean flat decks in test cricket,than since it is test match,i would want atleast 200 +.but in an ODI since u only have to play 50 overs,i would expect atleast 300. i see ur point.u say the longer the duration,the lesser risks the batsman will take.but i dont dislike that.wat i hate is wen the batsman jog singles, n bowlers dont try to take wickets too,there r no close fielders.there is hardly any such moment in test cricket.wats the point of try to save ur wicket wen there is no close fielders n the wicket is flat?dont u find it boring? therefore SRT 's idea makes perfect sense.reducing the overs would ensure the boring overs r minimised.n two innings would eliminate the toss n luck factor

[Feed]

Kirsten backs Tendulkar's proposal to revive ODIs India's cricket coach Gary Kirsten today gave a thumbs up to Sachin Tendulkar's idea of splitting the one-dayers into four innings of 25 overs each to revive the format, saying the senior batsman's proposal should be given a thought. More...

[vvvslaxman]

if u mean flat decks in test cricket,than since it is test match,i would want atleast 200 +.but in an ODI since u only have to play 50 overs,i would expect atleast 300. i see ur point.u say the longer the duration,the lesser risks the batsman will take.but i dont dislike that.wat i hate is wen the batsman jog singles, n bowlers dont try to take wickets too,there r no close fielders.there is hardly any such moment in test cricket.wats the point of try to save ur wicket wen there is no close fielders n the wicket is flat?dont u find it boring? therefore SRT 's idea makes perfect sense.reducing the overs would ensure the boring overs r minimised.n two innings would eliminate the toss n luck factor

But it is entirely upto the batsman isn't it. Look at michael clarke. Be it is 1 to 15th over or 15th to 40th over or 40th to 50th over he gets stuck . On the other hand someone like Yuvraj can unleash strokes at any stage of the game.

[Lord]

But it is entirely upto the batsman isn't it. Look at michael clarke. Be it is 1 to 15th over or 15th to 40th over or 40th to 50th over he gets stuck . On the other hand someone like Yuvraj can unleash strokes at any stage of the game.

well exceptions r there but the general trend is to go for ur shots for first 15 overs,tuk-tuk for 15-40 n all out slogging after 40 overs,its predictable n boring

[cowboysfan]

I want to suggest 10-over innings twice over for T20s.

are you making fun of GOD?. are YOU really making fun of god?.

[vvvslaxman]

well exceptions r there but the general trend is to go for ur shots for first 15 overs' date='tuk-tuk for 15-40 n all out slogging after 40 overs,its predictable n boring[/quote'] With 4th power play being chosen by batting side that is not the norm anymore. Infact yesterday match showed first 15 overs were tougher to score. It depends on several factors to follow the typical norm. Quality of opening bowling, Quality of opening batsmen, weather condition, pitch condition. . Your objective is to win the match in any way possible. Best way possible is the one you mentioned. Why would they want to change it if it involves more risks. Some teams go after part timers that are introduced after 20th over Look at this score http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/345471.html Pakistan 1-15 overs 56 runs 3.73 RR 16-40 overs 169 runs 6.76 RR Objective is to win the match. It doesn't matter how you achieve it.

[Lord]

With 4th power play being chosen by batting side that is not the norm anymore. Infact yesterday match showed first 15 overs were tougher to score. It depends on several factors to follow the typical norm. Quality of opening bowling, Quality of opening batsmen, weather condition, pitch condition. . Your objective is to win the match in any way possible. Best way possible is the one you mentioned. Why would they want to change it if it involves more risks. Some teams go after part timers that are introduced after 20th over Look at this score http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/345471.html Pakistan 1-15 overs 56 runs 3.73 RR 16-40 overs 169 runs 6.76 RR Objective is to win the match. It doesn't matter how you achieve it.

yes batting powerplay is a good innovation.it takes away some of the predictability.the matches in england cant be used as my example,coz the new ball tends to swing around,wat happened yesterday was also predictable in the sense that it happens in english conditions. that. match between ind n pak can be called an exception.i cant remember it so cant comment how it was. i'm not wanting the teams to change thier strategy.obviously they r there to win would do anything to win.but i want a change in the format to make it more entertaining for spectators

[vvvslaxman]

It is the attitude that matters. 10 years Test matches were like that. Australia changed the way Test matches are played. Jayasuriya/Kaluwitharana changed the way how opening overs are played. It is important we maintain a balance between bat and ball. Scoring 300 runs on a regular basis is also boring. You need some low scoring matches where teams struggle against good bowling. Through 1970s, 1980s, 1990s . teams crossed 300 plus 88 times In 2000s teams have crossed 300 plus staggering 239 times How comes one dayers were better in the 90s, 80s. There is nothing wrong with format. They tweaked rules to overly favor the batsmen. If we keep changing rules to favor the batsmen more and more it will be even more boring.

[Desi Cartman]

The only way to save ODIs is to BAN sri lanka from hosting any ODIs.. They are all low scoring and the team winning the toss mostly (if not always) wins the game.

[Lord]

It is the attitude that matters. 10 years Test matches were like that. Australia changed the way Test matches are played. Jayasuriya/Kaluwitharana changed the way how opening overs are played. It is important we maintain a balance between bat and ball. Scoring 300 runs on a regular basis is also boring. You need some low scoring matches where teams struggle against good bowling. Through 1970s, 1980s, 1990s . teams crossed 300 plus 88 times In 2000s teams have crossed 300 plus staggering 239 times How comes one dayers were better in the 90s, 80s. There is nothing wrong with format. They tweaked rules to overly favor the batsmen. If we keep changing rules to favor the batsmen more and more it will be even more boring.

again u misunderstand me. i'm not saying 300 should be regularly.but i'm saying 300 should scored IF it is a flat deck.i'm all for sporting pitches but expecting them in ODIs is too much for ICC. also ODIs were ecxiting in those dayscoz pitch always had something to offer.there were close catchers.so batsman also had to be cautious n aggressive at the same time. today with T20 the pitches r its flattest.if T20 is offering u same slam bang action why would anyone watch ODIs.pitches r flat both in ODIs n T20s but run scoring is faster in T20

[vvvslaxman]

One day pitches were flat in 90s as well. Remember Sharjah. Dead pan. Only difference is attitude of batsmen. They have more power plays. Their approach has changed over a period. Compared to the one dayers in the 90s they score much quicker in the 2000s. But lot of teams are unevenly matched. Even if you score 700 you could still end up witnessing a boring contest because other team may not be able to reach. In subcontinents team chase totals like 300 plus with ridiculous ease. India reached 300 plus total of Pakistan in 42 overs which was unrealistic even in Richards days. I do not think teams fail to capitalize on flat tracks. India scored heavily in NZ in almost all the games except the one where ball was darting around a bit. Only teams like England struggle even on flat tracks which was the same case even in the 90s. It is the responsibility of the teams to lift their game to match the opponent. We cannot keep reducing the overs to accommodate the mediocrity of some teams.

[Lord]

One day pitches were flat in 90s as well. Remember Sharjah. Dead pan. Only difference is attitude of batsmen. They have more power plays. Their approach has changed over a period. Compared to the one dayers in the 90s they score much quicker in the 2000s. But lot of teams are unevenly matched. Even if you score 700 you could still end up witnessing a boring contest because other team may not be able to reach. In subcontinents team chase totals like 300 plus with ridiculous ease. India reached 300 plus total of Pakistan in 42 overs which was unrealistic even in Richards days. I do not think teams fail to capitalize on flat tracks. India scored heavily in NZ in almost all the games except the one where ball was darting around a bit. Only teams like England struggle even on flat tracks which was the same case even in the 90s. It is the responsibility of the teams to lift their game to match the opponent. We cannot keep reducing the overs to accommodate the mediocrity of some teams.

well said that the teams r unevenly matched n thats why the no of overs should be reduced,the lesser the overs,the tighter the contest.on the same hand having it two times would take away the luck factor n better team will still win. wen we chased 300 in 42 overs,it cant be called boring,perhaps the lack of crowd makes u think like that. other things in the perception.in 90s there were no T20s,so ODI looked very ecxiting as compared to ODIs.now with T20s,ODIs in present form r bound to look boring

[vvvslaxman]

Our team will be the worst affected. Indian team especially this one is very good at scoring quickly for longer periods. Probably the best in the world in that regard. Against regular teams we have lost Five T20 matches in a row because T20 reduces the class difference between teams. It is even more boring when our team keeps losing :winky:

[Lord]

Our team will be the worst affected. Indian team especially this one is very good at scoring quickly for longer periods. Probably the best in the world in that regard. Against regular teams we have lost Five T20 matches in a row because T20 reduces the class difference between teams. It is even more boring when our team keeps losing :winky:

we lost these games because they were one-off,the luck factor was huge.but doing it twice would eliminate it n ensure the better team wins

[vvvslaxman]

Teams are getting the hang of T20. Especially bowlers. If we don't improve in our bowling department we will continue to be inconsistent in T20s. Remember we conceded 41 runs in 2.5 overs to WI to lose the match. With 50 over game our batsmen are able to compensate.