Cut to October 2007 - The first ever T-20 World cup was going to be held in South Africa. Folks in England and South Africa were harping about this new format of cricket called Twenty -twenty which the BCCI wise men had not woken up to. If anything, they were looking at T20 with caution – the between-overs commercial breaks were going to get reduced – from 99 to 39! That certainly couldn’t be good from a revenue standpoint. So, they rested the big 3- Sachin, Ganguly, Dravid. However, time had something else in mind – India won the world cup under a brand new captain, and that started it all … T-20 as a format was here, and here to stay. The rest – ICL, IPL, player auctions, IPL-2 etc – is history thats documented to death all over the internet, so no point mentioning that again.

However, recently, there have been a lot of discussions about how ODIs as a format has suffered with the advent of T-20. Big cricket commentators, cricketers, even the spectators have written obituaries about the most popular format of the game till 2007. So much so that, Sachin Tendulkar, the highest run getter in ODIs and the greatest modern day batsman ever, suggested a ‘Sachin format‘ for ODIs in order to keep up with the current T-20 style cricket.

To save One-Day Internationals from extinction, revamp them by giving both sides two innings of 25 overs each. Think of it as a sort of ‘Test T-25′! Today, we can tell the result of close to 75% of matches after the toss. We know how conditions will affect the two teams. But it (splitting the game into two innings) is not too dependent on the toss because, (if) for example it’s a day-night match, then both the teams will have to bat under lights. In those 25 overs you can use your 10 wickets the way you want. Suppose if it rains, then (also) you can plan.

However, the question is has T-20 actually led to this fear of extinction of ODIs?  Is T-20 v’s ODIs a Zero-Sum Game? I don’t think so…Here’s why:

Hypothesis  1: Rather than T-20 affecting ODIs, its the presentation of T20 as a complete entertainment package thats making ODIs as a format look forlorn and lost.

What I imply is that had there been an IPL for ODIs, it would still have been a huge hit. T20 format is incidental, its the ICL and IPL type of leagues that have suddenly exposed the unattractive nature of ODIs. According to me, ODIs per se aren’t bad at all. Its the teams that play that have too much of a differential. In the IPL, you had 8 genuinely competitive teams. If ever there is a ODI IPL among these 8 teams, it would be a winning proposition even in the current format of ODIs. What is hurting cricket as a whole is the yawning gap that exists between national sides- a gap that becomes all the more obvious in a 50 over game. In a 20 over game, there is a greater possibility of an upset than in a 50 over game, if the lesser among the two sides as a genuine game breaker – either in batting or bowling. So, while the Worldcup T20 wasn’t as big a crowd puller as the IPL, it did stand its ground.

However, the wise men from the BCCI and ICC aren’t quite sure if ODI world cup would stand its ground in its current format, particularly in the face of the Champions’ trophy for clubs- another T20 tournament lurking in the background. Its the efficient administration and the competitive teams that makes T20 a bigger crowd puller than ODIs in current format.

Hypothesis 2: T20 hasn’t been harmful to ODIs. If anything, it has opened up another opportunity for ODI cricket. Its perhaps a Pareto Improvement (one element making the other better off due to its change)

You can call it the ‘Lalit Modi’ effect. Whatever it may be, but Lalit Modi did bring a fresh perspective to the business of cricket administration. While most of what he did was pioneered by ICL officials, it was Lalit Modi’s IPL that exploited organisational possibilities to the fullest- much to the delight of the team owners, administrators, sponsors and spectators. There is certainly a case for introducing marketing gimmicks into the ODI format as well. The question is, why wasn’t cheerleaders, DLF maximums, Citi Moments of success etc thought of for ODIs? It was a case of the administration not taking the ODI event organisation to another level. And for this, ODI as a format should not be blamed. Its the non-opportunistic behaviour of the tournament organisers that has to be blamed for this.

The Opportunity – The IPL has shown the way, how a tournament has to be organised. Today, spectators want a complete entertainment package. If ODIs can provide that, spectators will surely come back. Perhaps, the Sachin format mentioned above could be one of the marketing gimmick in order to revamp the game. But that should not be the ‘Be-all-and-end-all’. There should be a conscious effort to reduce the number of teams. Whats the point in having 60% hopelessly non-competitive matches in a 45 day world cup as we witnessed in West Indies 2007? The tournament should get over in at max a month’s time. There is definitely a future for ODIs, if only the ICC/BCCI put in some effort behind its organisation.

Lets hope that instead of frowning over the loss of a huge cash cow, the cricket administrators take some positive steps and revamp the 50-50 format – not because it has to be saved from extinction, but because they themselves have taken ‘cricketainment‘ to another level with the IPL!

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Related posts:

1. India at World T20 – What went wrong?
2. Comparing EPL & IPL
3. IPL Perspectives
4. ImProbabLe
5. Dont be a Leader… Be a Thought-Leader!!