Which World Cup is more important: ODI or T20I?

[Kriterion_BD]

My personal taste is pro ODI world cup both in the 10 team and the 12-16 team versions. 16 teams was probably too many back in 2007, but I think now 14 is good, but 16 would work well too.

That being said, its clear the cricket landscape now views T20 cricket as the main format. Sad but true.

[Andy31]

My personal fav is a 16 world cup.

Having the associate nations brings a bit more variety to it. People want to see upsets and also grows the game.
Having a tighter schedule for games is what is needed.

I agree 20/20 seems to be what they are pushing, otherwise why give every country 20/20 status

[andrea lanzoni]

ODI is getting anachronistic. Even more after next Olympics where the world will know cricket in its T20 format.

Test cricket will remain because neither ODI or T20 have dented what Test may offer to fans.
Test cricket is likely to be like lawn tennis: lawn tennis is played once a year during the month of June and early July, but in that small period of time it monopolizes world tennis attention.
I envisage in the future there might be two months, tentatively February and July (not by chance just before and after IPL) in which all nations will concentrate all their Test matches (Ashes aside of course).
The rest of the year will be the province of T20 leagues.

Question mark is The Hundred format. I don't think it should make T20s switch into 100 balls matches, but it's maybe too early to say.

[Pat_Bee]

There’s the main man sitting pretty in the World Cup. Nice one.

England can’t concentrate their home tests in February everyone else probably can.

Hundred is just a boozer league for school kids and single mothers. That isn’t kicking off globally any time soon. T10 probably has that market sewn up elsewhere.

[andrea lanzoni]

There’s the main man sitting pretty in the World Cup. Nice one.

England can’t concentrate their home tests in February everyone else probably can.

Hundred is just a boozer league for school kids and single mothers. That isn’t kicking off globally any time soon. T10 probably has that market sewn up elsewhere.

I was honestly wondering who could be so smart to remind that in England it is too cold to organize cricket matches in February! Thanks for contribution...Hahahaha.
Maybe I can oversmart you by saying that in June subcontinent is in the middle of rainy season and just some areas may hold test matches.
and in June it's winter in New Zealand....

Seriously speaking and going a step beyond primary school geography knowledge, in the future Test matches wil be called to have decent attendance. Decent attendance is not what you see in West Indies for example.
To have decent attendance you got to concentrate most fixture in precise periods along the year, not as it is today.

February and June-July may accomodate all matches for a WTC (in a two years span).
If most Test matches are in the same period of the year Test may be competitive and not suffering too much from T20 leagues competition.

The alternative is just keeping the status quo as it is today, then wondering how come (Eng & Aus aside) test matches are played in front of empty stands....

[Pat_Bee]

There’s the main man sitting pretty in the World Cup. Nice one.

England can’t concentrate their home tests in February everyone else probably can.

Hundred is just a boozer league for school kids and single mothers. That isn’t kicking off globally any time soon. T10 probably has that market sewn up elsewhere.

I was honestly wondering who could be so smart to remind that in England it is too cold to organize cricket matches in February! Thanks for contribution...Hahahaha.
Maybe I can oversmart you by saying that in June subcontinent is in the middle of rainy season and just some areas may hold test matches.
and in June it's winter in New Zealand....

Seriously speaking and going a step beyond primary school geography knowledge, in the future Test matches wil be called to have decent attendance. Decent attendance is not what you see in West Indies for example.
To have decent attendance you got to concentrate most fixture in precise periods along the year, not as it is today.

February and June-July may accomodate all matches for a WTC (in a two years span).
If most Test matches are in the same period of the year Test may be competitive and not suffering too much from T20 leagues competition.

The alternative is just keeping the status quo as it is today, then wondering how come (Eng & Aus aside) test matches are played in front of empty stands....

England is too cold all the time guys playing at Worcester today and it’s like 10 degrees.
Yeah I knew sub continent monsoon season is like june. Don’t know anything about nz’s climate. Australia, sub continent, WI, us, South Africa I guess, there is year round cricket there though.

Got to make it affordable to the locals to have a decent attendance. WI haven’t always done that. Get more tourists than locals because they can’t afford it.

Tests also need to be exciting to attract crowds. One day is 20% of a match. Takes a certain kind of guy to sit through turgid 3 runs an over for 90 overs and not even have a result at the end of it. It’s a commitment

[TapsC2]

I have seen some players suggest that ODI cricket only be played at the actual world cup. No bilaterals. I wonder if that would work. At the moment I would say the ODI world cup still has an edge. The fact that the T20 world cup is every 2 years doesn't help either.

I still prefer ODI's because it gets the slower but more solid batsmen involved. You also have a better chance to recover. 3 bad overs in T20s can decide a game.

[andrea lanzoni]

I have seen some players suggest that ODI cricket only be played at the actual world cup. No bilaterals. I wonder if that would work. At the moment I would say the ODI world cup still has an edge. The fact that the T20 world cup is every 2 years doesn't help either.

I still prefer ODI's because it gets the slower but more solid batsmen involved. You also have a better chance to recover. 3 bad overs in T20s can decide a game.

In my opinion bilaterals are a legacy of an imperial time.
In todays hectic pace they no longer make sense, regardless they are T20, ODI or Tests (Ashes aside).

Future will be for matches within a tournament where winning or losing makes you climb or fall notches in the tournament.

If Test can concentrate its fixtures in some precise periuods of the year, for WTC ranking, it may still gather in those periods top players and avoid T20 leagues competition.

ODI can't give what Test does and doesn't have the short time which T20 have.
In todays world time has become an even scarcer resource: at grassroot level families have no longer time to give cricket a full day, neither have time, as audience or viewership, to follow a match for an entire day: three hours for T20s and fit and they are enough. Just like the time supporters spend for international major sports such as soccer, baseball, basketball, etc.

On the other hand pundits would definitely prefer spend much time to watch Test rrather than ODI.

Finally: ODI will be dead very soon.