The Calm Before the Storm - ODIs vs Twenty20

With the creation of Twenty20, and it's infectious spread across the globe, it seems that One-Day matches are becoming less and less user-friendly. The predictable nonsense spell that occurs between the 15th and 35th overs of a One-Day innings have made ODIs appear sedated in comparison to Twenty20 Cricket. Fans are certainly voting with their feet, as Twenty20 draws greater and more enthuisiastic crowds, who get to see a compressed and entertaining version of cricket.

The way in which a Twenty20 match unfolds before you like a highlights reel is so much more fulfilling than a One-Day international. I think the ICC and regional cricket boards need to prevent Twenty20 from eradication ODIs (One-Day matches domestically too), and try and evolve the non-entity that is the middle overs of a One-Day Innings. I like to call this the calm before the storm, or after if Jayasuriya's opening. For the sake of One-Day Cricket, which I find more entertaining than Twenty20, I think something needs to be done about the "middle section".

Possible ideas:

- The two power-plays (optional ones) have to be taken intermittently, rather than allowing captains to get them out of the way early on. Maybe an allowance of one power-play per "third of the match". The thirds would have to be uneven - 17 overs, 16 overs, then a further 17 overs. The compulsory ten overs would be taken immediately. The next power-play would then have to be taken between the 18th and 33rd overs. And the last between the 34th and 50th.

- More field restrictions outside of power-plays.

Admittedly, it's increasing the odds in favour of batsman, but that's the nature of the game nowadays. The casual cricket fan needs to be entertained, and the dull period isn't doing it.

One factor which I think brings the quality of both Twenty20 and ODI cricket down is the way teams use these bit-part "spin" bowlers as a means to slow the pace off the ball. Not that they should be blamed as it has often been effective - Chris Gayle can be regarded a top-notch fully fledged all-rounder in the one-day format of the game. But this is the sort-of sleep-inducing cricket that is causing people to switch away from the ODI format of the game.

The first 15/20 overs are often eventful, one way or the other. With the field in, the batting team has an incentive to to attack. At the same time the ball is new and swinging, and with attacking field necessary by default due to restrictions bowlers strive to look for the edges. Then come the lifting of the final powerplay, you have the field spreading and these itty-bitty offies come on. The batsmen look to paddle the ball around, and pick up 4-5 singles an over which the fielding team is often content to concede. And you have a period of 20 overs going through the motions before some action happens towards the death end.

I believe the answer is to encourage more attacking bowling throughout the 50 overs of a One-day game. To achieve this, there should be a rethink of the bowling quotas. I would raise the maximum to 13 overs per bowler. This rule change would reward teams picking attacking bowling line-ups, and allow the possibility of teams to get through their overs with 4 specialist bowlers. The current maximum of 10 makes it necessary for teams to get atleast 5 and more often in practice upto 6-7 bowling options, which is why you see these part-time batters who turn their arm over getting picked time and time again at the cost of the quality of cricket on display. You don't see teams in test matches picking an XI so that they can fit in 7 bowling options, but this is the norm in ODI cricket. Didn't the West Indies recently field an entire XI without a single specialist bowler? This is the sort of artificial imbalance that needs to be weeded out.

That's not a bad idea at all and if you thought of it yourself, well done.

That would certainly increase my interest in the game, particularly while Pakistan was fielding. Eg., 50 overs of quality bowling to watch.

At the same time though, it wouldn't help the cause of big hitting, which generally is what seems to get the crowd going.

To balance that, it might be cool to have the first 10 overs with compulsory fielding restrictions and each alternate block of 5 overs also. The batsmen can do their accumlating stuff while the field is spread but then try to take advantage of each alternate block of 5 overs.

For instance, a batsman comes in around the 30 over mark after a fellow team mate gets out. He then has potentially 5 overs to acclimatize to the conditions without fielding restrictions. Then the next 5 overs he knows he has to go all out. Alternatively, a batsman comes in in the middle of a fielding restriction block and he has to pretty much take advantage and go after the bowling as soon as he can.