Cricket: Sun setting on one-dayers

In England, they're changing to 40 overs.

In South African, they play 45 overs but are considering ditching it altogether.

Shane Warne thinks it should be dispensed with, while Sachin Tendulkar wants to see two innings each of 25 overs.

One-dayers have become the ugly duckling of the cricket world.

Its popularity is waning, as fans, players and broadcasters clamour for the cash and bash of Twenty20.

Just last week, only 2000 people turned up to watch Sri Lanka take on New Zealand in Colombo. The Black Caps might not be the most alluring side but close to six million people live in the greater Colombo area.

You can hardly blame them, however. It wasn't exactly compelling viewing, as just 335 runs were scored - and no sixes - on a dreadful pitch. But Sri Lanka have a proud history in one-day internationals and were world champions in 1996.

As the world contemplates the place of one-day cricket in an increasingly congested schedule, New Zealand watches with interest.

New Zealand Cricket have no plans to ditch the 50-over format and won't until, or if, the format of the World Cup is changed.

As NZC chief executive Justin Vaughan says: "We want to win World Cups, so we need to retain the same format as what the World Cup will be."

When the first limited overs international was contested at the MCG in 1971, it was played as a means to give Melburnians something different after a test was rained out.

Few had little idea what would eventuate but the creation of the first World Cup in 1975 and the proliferation of 'pyjama cricket' following Kerry Packer's revolution transformed the game.

It became tired, however. The introduction of batting power-plays 18 months ago enlivened it to a degree but one-day cricket seems to be experiencing a slow death.

The fact there are myriad meaningless contests and others as bloated as seven-game series, like the present one between England and Australia, doesn't help.

"We are lucky to have three versions of the game but it's trying to find the balance and the 50-over game is the one being squeezed," Vaughan says.

"One of the advantages of 50-over cricket is that batsmen can craft an innings while bowlers need to bowl more than one spell. I think there is merit in the longer form."

Broadcasters agree - for the time being, at least. One-day cricket allows more advertising breaks than Twenty20 and a lower cost-per-view hour. Again, however, there seems to be a shift.

"The data suggests that an average person watches more minutes of a Twenty20 game than a 50-over game because very few watch 50-over cricket from start to finish," Vaughan says.

"They might watch the first few overs, go off and come back at the end of the innings and do the same for the second innings. Many more people will watch a Twenty20 game from start to finish.

"Broadcasters, like it or not, are one of the shaping forces behind the game. We are starting to see broadcasters moving towards a model that Twenty20 is almost valued as much as 50-over cricket. As soon as there's no financial incentive to play 50-over cricket, then I think questions will start to be asked at ICC level."

The ICC are committed to one-day cricket for the time being and the 2015 World Cup, to be hosted by New Zealand, is currently locked in as a 50-over tournament.

The present broadcast deal is also through to 2015, so many believe 50-over cricket will remain at least until then.

One thing that is artificially controlling the continued presence of one-day cricket is a limit imposed by the ICC on the number of Twenty20 internationals each country can play. If this were opened up, things could change dramatically.

Vaughan believes, and it's a view shared by many, that cutting back the number of one-day internationals would ensure its continued popularity.

"If you allowed the market to take over, you would probably see more Twenty20 cricket and less 50-over cricket," he says. "I'm not averse to that.

"One of the things that could make 50-over cricket special is that if we actually made it a more scarce product.

"We could reserve it for special occasions, like World Cups and the Chappell/Hadlee Trophy, and use Twenty20 as our standard short form.

"We are not there yet and it would need a change in policy from the ICC to allow countries to play unlimited amounts of Twenty20 internationals."

ENGLAND HAVE traditionally been the forerunners for change.

Although the balance of power has shifted in recent times to the Subcontinent, a recent shift has caused considerable debate.

They have taken a stand, after consultation with the first-class counties on their domestic programme, and scrapped the 50-over competition in favour of 40-over cricket from next year, complete with the same restrictions on powerplays and fielding as internationals.

One-day cricket was the least popular version with the public and reducing the number of overs was seen as a way to rejuvenate it.

It's not a new phenomenon and England played 40-over cricket as recently as 10 years ago.

The decision has not been universally supported. England selector Geoff Miller said he had "a problem with it" and England batsman Paul Collingwood voiced his disapproval.

"We want county cricket to mirror international cricket, simple as that. It is important that players are getting the experience before they get to the international stage," he said, before remembering his paymasters and adding: "Forty-over cricket is what the public want in England, so it's been pushed in that direction."

England are said to be pressing for the ICC to formally review the future of one-day cricket after the 2011 World Cup in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

They might consider a suggestion from Indian batsman Sachin Tendulkar, who touted the idea that one-dayers revert to two innings each of 25 overs. He is a fan of one-dayers but believed this change would help alleviate the advantage gained by the team winning the toss.

Kapil Dev didn't like the idea. "The more you muck around, the more you spoil cricket," said the former India skipper.

Former New Zealand opener Mark Richardson suggested a different format if one-day cricket was going to disappear.

"If you are going to lose one form, I would be in favour of slightly lengthening Twenty20 to make it 25 overs each," he says.

"But one-day cricket is simply a money-spinner and there is room for two limited-overs versions if they are making money. If one of them stops making money, it will be a very simple decision. It will be canned."

NZC have reduced slightly their domestic one-day programme to cater for both an enlarged Twenty20 and four-day schedule.

The Twenty20 competition will now be played over two full rounds - last year it was eight rounds - but the 50-over competition will also feature an expanded semifinal system much like the NRL.

"One thing that we are driven by is that domestic cricket is a breeding ground for international cricket, so we want to create more games of meaning where players are put under pressure," Vaughan says.

"That's a good way of sifting out players who can cut it at international level. It's also appealing to fans."

The public will be the ones who ultimately decide one-day cricket's fate.

If it falls even further from favour, the ICC will act because they do not want another dire World Cup like the last one in the Caribbean.