The 50-50 conundrum: Is ODI cricket dying or being pushed to its deathbed?

In conversation with Business Standard, Irfan Pathan, Manoj Tiwary and Arun Lal, cricketers from three different eras of ODIs share their views on future of the format in wake of Stokes' retirement

In the wake of one of the world’s best all-rounders Ben Stokes retiring from ODI cricket, the debate on whether the format (50 overs per side) is sustainable anymore or not has been reignited. While the viability of three different formats has always been part of the discussion, the focus has now shifted to ODI cricket's existence.

With World Test Championship, Test cricket has revived to some extent with games becoming more result-oriented. T20, with its leagues, has the money and fun. So where does ODI stand? Is it boring, is it too long to be fun as T20I, or too short and less observing to be as seriously fascinating as Tests?

Answering this, former India all-rounder Irfan Pathan in a conversation with Business Standard said, “One Day cricket needs revamp. It shouldn’t be scrapped at all as it is financially very important for the broadcasters as you have 100 overs of ad sponsorship, which neither T20Is nor Tests provide in a single day.” 

Does ODI cricket need a revamp?

Pathan, who represented India in 120 ODIs, taking 173 wickets and scoring 1544 runs, said, “I believe it should be made 40 covers each side, which will allow the boring parts of the 50 overs format (Overs 25-40) to be done away with.”

Irfan’s idea has already been in play in the English domestic circuit where Pro-40 matches are played for the Royal London One Day Cup, their premier domestic tournament. Even Sachin Tendulkar suggested that ODIs could be made a four-innings game with each innings having 25 overs.  

But, despite a successful ODI World Cup in 2019, where live coverage reached a global cumulative average audience of 1.6 billion viewers, why is there talk of ODI cricket dying? The answer on everybody’s lips in unison is “increased workload.”

Also read: Keep pushing yourselves to absolute extremes: Stokes in retirement speech

Is ODI cricket really increasing the workload or is it being made scapegoat?

The workload debate has intensified so much that after Stokes’ retirement, former cricketers like Wasim Akram and Nasser Hussain suggested that the ODI format needs a re-look, with Akram even suggesting to totally scrap the format. 

“T20 is kind of easier, four hours the game is over. The leagues all around the world, there is a lot more money – I suppose this is part and parcel of modern cricket. T20 or Test cricket. One-day cricket is kind of dying,” Akram was quoted as saying on Vaughany and Tuffers Cricket Club podcast.

However, if workload really is a problem, then it has not been because of the ODI cricket, it is rather the other formats that are being played more in comparison to ODIs by the major cricketing nations. 

Ever since the World Cup 2019, only 246 ODIs have been played, out of which, 96 have been played by non-Test playing nations. On the other hand, 868 T20Is have been played since July 2019. There have also been 121 Tests in the same period, which will account for 605 days of red-ball cricket, almost thrice the number of ODI matches.

The unplanned scheduling of ODIs

Apart from the World Cups, World Cup qualification and continental tournaments, what is the need for so many bilateral T20Is when the countries already have their leagues running for almost two months involving international stars?

On the other hand, ODIs have no such leagues and their existence is entirely dependent upon bilaterals. Scheduling by boards is being done in such a way that the ODI bilaterals are being compromised upon to try and put more T20 or Test cricket. As a result, players like Stokes, or in the future, stars like Virat Kohli and Kane Williamson might pull out of the ODI format (they have complained of extra workload too).  

However, Manoj Tiwary, who has represented India in 12 ODIs and three T20is and has been part of 98 IPL games for four different sides, believes that only those players are pulling out or thinking to pull out of the ODIs, who have a leveraged position in terms of hefty IPL and other T20 league contracts. 

“It is an individual’s decision on what he wants to play. But if you look at it, only players with Rs 10-15 crore IPL contracts are pulling out or thinking to pull out of the ODIs. They have already secured their financial stability so they can afford to pull out. 

But just because five out of 100 active players are pulling out, you cannot just scrap a format altogether. ” Tiwary told Business Standard. 

On the declining interest of the people in the 50-over format, the 36-year-old, who very recently scored a century in the Ranji Trophy Quarter-Final against Jharkhand said, “There is no gap between series.” 

“Earlier there used to be a huge stretch of gaps between one series and another, while currently, the audience is not even having enough time to jump from one series to another. ICC and cricket boards need to make sure that there is no overdose.”

It's a demand-supply issue

Arun Lal, a former India cricketer, says that it is all a matter of demand and supply. Speaking to Business Standard, Lal said, “While I agree with most people on the fact that ODI cricket is less inviting for both the audiences and the players, the reality is that game is not guided by how fit Ben Stokes is or what Wasim Akram has to say about a format?”

“The quality of the sport wouldn’t suffer because of someone retiring because the younger generation will get a quicker chance to play at the highest level and who knows, they might be better than those who retired.

Nobody has to decide whether the game is dying or not, if it's dying, its sponsorship, its viewership will decline automatically and TV channels will pull out from live coverage of the game,” added Lal. 

Where is the format eventually headed? 

The ICC introduced ODI Super League as the qualification tournament for the ICC ODI World Cup 2023. Since Covid-19 struck at the very start of the league, it was haphazard for audiences to understand. 13 teams are part of the league and each team has to play 24 games, 12 home and 12 away. 

The 12 games are part of four series of three matches each. Every team doesn’t have to play every other team and thus the format of the league doesn’t even make sense. 

It has been so much neglected by the respective boards that South Africa forfeited its three-match series against Australia to accommodate its new IPL-style domestic T20 league. 

ICC needs to have clarity on the Super League. Just like the World Test Championship has been revised and now every Test match played is a part of the WTC, Super League’s functioning could also be made more linear and understandable to the audiences for starters. 

Whether the 50-over format is on a deathbed or not is debatable, but if it is, the onus clearly lies with the ICC and the boards for not giving it enough context and meaning, nor the gap for the audiences to understand the game in an era of T20 leagues and WTC fascination.