Thank you, John Buchanan!

CricketNext stands vindicated once again. John Buchanan, the erstwhile mega successful coach of the famous Australian team has openly advocated that to make ODI cricket more spectator-friendly and give it a dramatic new format, it should be made 25 x 4 overs, as opposed to the current 50 x 2 overs.

About three years ago, I had suggested exactly the same to the International Cricket Council (ICC), which was acknowledged by the General Manager Dave Richardson as an interesting suggestion that ICC would consider in its future meetings. I have not heard from ICC since.

I will be delighted if ICC incorporates the suggested changes, as it will not only revitalize ODI cricket, but would give it the necessary complexion to becoming an engrossing affair, and thus an exciting alternative to the burgeoning popularity of T 20 cricket.

But please note, this is not a John Buchanan original recipe. It started with CricketNext and was authored by yours truly.

I reproduce below verbatim the entire article published about three years ago in CricketNext.

Reader feedback will be highly appreciated.

25 x 4 is THE solution!! (Published in 2005 in CricketNext.com)

Australian coach John Buchanan has just stated the obvious recently. Almost every player and coach has been calling for revamping of the ODI structure.

It is now apparent that 20-20, the charade that is being tried out to save the ODIs, is useless. We present 25 x 4, suggest an exciting, novel and practicable format for one-day cricket which is a vast improvement over the current one-day format.

This concept has been sent to the International Cricket Council for their read-through. David Richardson, the former South African wicket-keeper who is now the General Manager (Cricket), ICC reverted back saying the cricket's governing body would take up this matter in their next meeting.

The spectators, players and coaches alike have been calling for a revamp in the structure of one-day cricket for some time now. For the spectators, overs between 15 and 40 become monotonous and then, from the players' point of view, the ODIs are killing the bowlers.

We suggest an exciting, novel and practicable format for one-day cricket which is a vast improvement over the current one-day format which has got relatively predictable. Our primary focus has been on the following:

1. Spectator interest to escalate with new introduction

2. Reducing the impact of the "toss factor" in a 1-day match

3. A level playing field for both batsmen and bowlers.

4. Increasing performance levels of players given the operational flexibility

5. Making the Duckworth-Lewis rule more fair in application.

One of the biggest criticisms against one-day cricket has been the "toss factor." A glaring example of the predictability element of the game is the India/Kenya Semi-Final during the World Cup 2003, wherein the toss issue had become such a paramount one that there was an attempt by several countries to even lobby for a venue change; the principal apprehension being that batting second under floodlights was a calamitous proposition.

In no sport does the toss play as crucial role as in one-day cricket. 20-20, which is being currently marketed as a panacea for making cricket more entertaining is a guaranteed recipe for a monumental disaster. 20-20 makes cricket look like a bizarre pyjama-party being played by a bunch of over-zealous professionals, and ridicules the great game of cricket giving it a farcical complexion.

We suggest the ODI match be played in two innings per team, with each innings of 25 overs. The team batting first (Team A) faces the first 25 overs of the allotted 50 overs (first innings) and the team batting second (Team B) faces the first 25 overs.

The Team A plays out the remaining 25 overs (their 2nd innings) and the Team B attempts to win in the remaining 25 overs.

Advantages:

1. We neutralize the frequent lop-sided advantage of "winning the toss" factor, where even a modestly rated team can have a humungous advantage simply on the luck of toss of the coin.

2. It creates a level-playing field; both teams have to bat both in normal daylight and floodlit conditions in the night, and factor in dew conditions, etc.

3. Cricket becomes fabulously entertaining, for spectators and television viewers as one can gauge run-rate difference at the half-way stage for both teams.

The second innings will provide for wholesome entertainment as both teams will be aware of their net runs, wickets and run rate position.

4. 25x4 is highly effective and consistent as it does not tamper with the basic laws of cricket.

5. The applicability of Duckworth-Lewis rule will be more fair on both sides in this version.

RECOMMENDED

OPTION 1

We implement 25 x 4, with all other rules exactly as they are today for a 50 over game.

OPTION 2

We implement 25 x 4, with the following additional changes :

1. Two bowlers per team are allowed to bowl up to 15 overs each

Advantage:

ODI cricket is batter-friendly; this will give the two best bowlers of a team an equally good opportunity to attack and contain batsmen. Once again, creates a level playing field.

2. Consequently, teams can play with just four specialist bowlers should they wish to, with the fifth or sixth bowler an option, but not mandatory. A level playing field is established.

3. Respective teams will thus have the flexibility of strengthening both their batting and bowling resources.

4. Limit the fielding restrictions to 12 overs instead of the current 15 overs at a stretch, with six overs per innings having restrictions only. This in effect means that fielding restrictions will apply at two stages of a 50 over match, making it more interesting and intriguing for both teams --- the spectator will have a lot to look forward to.

· Even middle order batsmen will have the opportunity to play with fielding restrictions, and mid-way into the match it could be highly absorbing feature, an opportunity for the batsmen and a challenge for the bowlers.

5. Allow for two substitutions per team while batting. For instance, the captain can call in a batsman even if he is not out and replace him with another. However, the replaced batsman can bat again lower down the order, after a minimum gap of ten overs.