No one was ready for Ben Stokes to retire from One-day International (ODI) so early. he was just aging 31 and still had plenty to offer for the 50-over format where he was crowned as the World Champion and one of the stars of the last ICC Cricket World Cup in 2019. As an allrounder, Stokes had so much to the format that it is still hard to accept his "premature" retirement.
Stokes was appointed as England's Test captain earlier this year and said that playing three formats was "just unsustainable for me now" and that he felt as though he was blocking opportunities for other players.
He had been due to play all six of England's ODIs this summer and rest throughout their T20I commitments against India and South Africa, as well as the Hundred, but has now opted to quit the 50-over game in order to give "everything I have to Test cricket" and "my total commitment to the T20 format."
The decision of Stokes has led to the debate of the heavy workload, the top players digest these days.
The emergence of Twenty20 Leagues has added enough pressure to the players and the lucrative returns from such domestic leagues are such that it has become hard for the players to ignore. Again, one of the powerful boards in world cricket - BCCI - endorsing such leagues and forcing the International Cricket Council (ICC) to discover a separate window for them, has made things complex.
BCCI is powerful and with big powers come big responsibilities, which the BCCi have always forgotten and emphasized more on running the crazy money train named the Indian Premier League at the cost of longer-formats.
At present, if any format is in big trouble then it is 50-over cricket.
A few days ago, Wasim Akram endorsed the idea of putting the 50-over format to rest.
"Him deciding that he is retiring from one-day cricket is quite sad but I agree with him," said Akram.
"Even as a commentator … one-day cricket is just a drag now, especially after T20. I can imagine as a player. 50 overs, 50 overs, then you have to pre-game, post-game, the lunch game."
"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."
"It is quite tiring for a player to play one-day cricket. After T20, one-day cricket seems it is going for days. So players are focussing on more shorter format. And longer format obviously [with] Test cricket."
Asked if administrators should consider scrapping ODI cricket, Akram said:, “I think so. In England, you have full houses. In India, Pakistan especially, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and South Africa, one-day of cricket you are not going to fill the stadiums.
“They are doing it just for the sake of doing it. After the first 10 overs, it’s just ‘OK, just go a run a ball, get a boundary, four fielders in and you get to 200, 220 in 40 overs’ and then have a go last 10 overs. Another 100. It’s kind of run-of-the-mill.”
Akram's statement was a shocking opinion for me because Akram might have completely forgotten what this format has given Pakistan and as well as India - it has put these two nations right on the map.
Had the 50-over formats not been started, neither India nor Pakistan could reach the level at which they are in and include Sri Lanka in this group as well.
If Akram thinks that the 50-over format is dying then he should have spoken in favour of it and stated strongly that if nay format that is disturning the overall health of cricket then it is the Twenty20 format and the Franchise Leagues.
The ebb-and-flow of the longer-formats make it a special one and not everyone's cup of tea.
Most importantly, the 50-over format has given Test cricket a new life, when it was suffering badly in the 50s and 80s.
Whereas Twenty20 Cricket might have given money, surely, it is killing the soul of cricket slowly - it is like slow poisoning.
Then, what is next?
Will people start talking about abolishing Test cricket because it is too long?
If they can suggest scrapping the 09-over format then they can hunt after Test cricket as well!
Former cricketer and head coach of India, Ravi Shastri said, "If you want Test cricket to survive you cannot have 10, 12 teams playing. Keep the top six, keep the quality of cricket going and respect quality over quantity. That's the only way you open up a window for other cricket to be played."
I agree with Ravi Shastri.
There has to be more emphasis on quality rather than quantity in Test cricket and to play the best format of the game, a cricket-playing nation needs to ensure technical and temperamental efficiency rather than taking the format for granted.
I would endorse the idea of a two-tier system that would ensure quality more than quantity in Test cricket.
The Top 6 or 8 teams should be categorized as top tier teams and if a team fails to remain in the top 6 or 8 then their Test status should be abolished and to achieve it again have to work harder.. in the meantime, the facilities which they used to receive as a Test nation should also be cut off.
While being in the second tier, they would play 4-day matches against each other which would be rated as first-class matches and if one of them comes top then just one and only one team would join the first tier and compete for survival.
Such steps would force cricket nations like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Ireland, and West Indies to take Test cricket seriously.
Frankly, speaking teams like Bangladesh don't give Test cricket anything rather than disgrace and have taken this format for granted in the last 22 years.
Finally, I would request ICC and Big 3 to rethink the strategy regarding the longer formats.
Money is needed but for that, the soul of cricket should not be murdered.
Thank You
Faisal Caesar
No comments:
Post a Comment