Fifty,run out

Seven years later,the first ICC World Twenty20 was held in South Africa in 2007. The idea spread like wildfire around the cricketing world and disproved the common belief that cricket,because of its inherent nature,was never going to be attractive to modern audiences. T20 came along and revealed,quite starkly,cricket’s major weakness. It was not so much the lack of action that the new audience failed to connect with but what the sport asked of it: time,and too much of it. People just did not have the kind of time needed to watch cricket: eight hours of a weekday to watch a 50-over match or 35 hours over five days to watch a Test match. T20 made a lot of sense in a world where time is at a premium. That is the greatest strength of T20 — not the fours and the sixes,as a lot of us would like to think. As long as the world remains a busy place,T20 will remain a part of our lives.

As of now,though,we have three variants of the sport co-existing,but for how long? The next decade could hold the answer.

For me,of the three,one-day cricket is the most dispensable format. Because limitations on everything is basic to its concept,it also produces cricket and cricketers with limitations. Players who are neither exceptional batsmen nor exceptional bowlers,but in-between,bits-and-pieces cricketers. Tests and T20,on the other hand,call on cricketers with specialised skills to be involved and make a mark. As a result,there is cricketing excellence of two different kinds on view.

Nevertheless,the ICC cricket World Cup remains the flagship event of cricket. I wonder if that alone is keeping ODIs relevant. That this World Cup is being held in India is a bonus. Come what may,India will make this event a success and because of that,the world may assume that 50-over cricket is still viable. But the real test will be its appeal to cricket fans after the 2011 World Cup.

I did a statistical exercise a couple of years ago after yet another forgettable one-day series in Sri Lanka. I found that 80 per cent of the runs scored in the series were singles and twos. Imagine that! The spectators were mostly watching batsmen taking ones and twos. With the odd exception,that is more or less the scenario in a one-day series. Fielding captains are not too worried about batsmen taking singles,which also means that 80 per cent of the time,a one-day series lacks intensity and a competitive edge. No wonder so many aspects of one-day cricket had to be tweaked to make it more interesting. Seasoned marketing men also tell me that three versions of cricket do not make their job of selling the game any easier. “It dilutes the market.”

Meanwhile,Test cricket has been the real surprise package. We had thought that the pure,gentleman’s game had no chance in the big bad world of cricket,post Twenty20. But we were wrong. Granted that the stands are mostly empty,and TRPS are not encouraging over all five days,but the number of people following a Test match on television and on the internet remains very impressive. An interesting story,with a lots of twists and turns and high drama,is being told over five days,and fans are hooked.

That’s also an opportunity for sponsors to make their money. If it is selling at the right price,there is a strong demand from multimedia companies to buy Test cricket rights. It is also turning out to be cricket for the intellectuals,who in between their busy,working lives keep in touch with what is going on.

And one-day international cricket,perhaps,because of its sheer excess,is not quite holding viewer interest as it used to. That Sony Max did not even bother to air an international cricket series it had bought rights to,tells us something. The same TV channel paid a billion dollars to buy a franchise-owned domestic cricket tournament,the IPL,and hit a jackpot.

When the time comes,there won’t be too many people shedding tears over the demise of ODI cricket.

The author is a former India cricketer and commentator.

& The Last Decade