Save the ODI from Becoming an Elongated T20 run-fest

Tim Wigmore Believes That the Essence of the 50-over Game is Being Destroyed by the Manic Chase for Huge Totals.

- Tim Wigmore

One-day international cricket has traditionally been a halfway house between cricket’s other two formats. It provides both power-hitting of the ilk rarely seen in Tests with slow-burning drama of the sort that T20 is not designed for.

But, increasingly, ODIs are resembling elongated T20 games. That’s particularly true in India, where the pitches are flat, the boundaries are often short, and conditions are designed squarely with runs, runs and more runs in mind. The start of the ODI series has proved as much, providing a thrilling exhibition of the best of modern-day hitting but little to give bowlers heart.

Even early wickets – especially when England take them – seem to make no difference at all.

England have only reached 350 ten times in their history. The first was against Pakistan in 1992 in a 55-over game, and the second against a ragtag Bangladesh in 2005. The other eight times have been since the 2015 World Cup, in just 33 completed innings.

Yet England can also feel the flip side of this revolution in the game. After two ODIs against India, they have already conceded the fourth most runs in any three-match series they have played in history, and with a full match to come.

How has ODI cricket got here? The curiosity, perhaps, is that it has taken so long. From 2002, the year before T20 cricket was launched, to 2012, the average run rate only increased from 4.94 to 5.05, actually a slower rate of increase than in the previous decade.

The rules were then tweaked, to make ODIs far more batting friendly. From October 2011, the ICC agreed that all ODIs should be played with two balls – one from each end – to stop the ball going soft and becoming harder to hit.