A Brief History of ODI Cricket - The advent of Version 4.0 Where do India stand?

The first ODI game was played at the Melbourne Cricket ground in 1971, when the Test Match scheduled was rained off. The idea did not take root too well and only 82 ODI games were played in the 1970's - a substantial portion of them in the two World Cups. England, Australia and the West Indies were the top ODI sides in this decade. India didn't really play ODI cricket too seriously. Pakistan did better than India. Cricket 1.0 was a plebeian pursuit - the pleasant interlude in the real business of Test Cricket.

In the 1980's, ODI cricket exploded, especially with the emergence of the annual World Series Cricket tournament in Australia and India's victory in the World Cup. India won two major tournaments in the early to mid 1980's and the subcontinent emerged as the market that the ODI phenomenon needed in order to establish itself as the equal of Test Cricket. This was ODI Cricket 2.0. The format was beginning to distinguish itself tactically from Test cricket. Other teams not as naturally inclined to the format as the flamboyant West Indies began to come to terms with it. West Indies and Pakistan were the best teams in the late 1980's, however with the advent of contrived restrictions like the 30 yard circle, tactics and methods became crucial. It ceased to be purely a contest between bat and ball. The clock and fielding restrictions began to make their presence felt as well. It changed the way batsmen batted, it changed the way bowlers bowled. Many time honoured principles about batting fell by the wayside. Some teams embraced these changes more than others - none did so better than Bobby Simpson's Australians of 1987, who laid the foundations of modern ODI cricket during their World Cup triumph. The principle was simple - make the most of the resources you have - play for the single, run correctly between the wickets, field well, bowl with discipline. The cricket world then had only one Viv Richards, and scoring 5 an over was considered very quick. The action became more intense and demands on fitness and endurance increased. With the 1987 World Cup, ODI cricket acquired centre stage in the Indian sub continent. 513 ODI games were played in the 1980's.

The 1992 World Cup marked the beginning of Cricket 3.0 - with teams rethinking ODI batting. Hitting over the top became an acceptable part of strategy and the 50 over limit meant that batting sides tended to take greater risks. This remained the prevalent format for the next 15 years or so - aggressive opening stands - by pinch hitters who were eventually succeeded by really good batsmen who performed the role with plenty of skill and class. Fielding standards improved - in great part due to the arrival of the South Africans on the international scene. More than any other side, the South Africans have tended to play the most studied, measured and to use a phrase from another context - focus group tested cricket amongst all international side. They trained themselves to execute ODI cricket rather than letting natural gifts rule. Their traditional strength in fast bowling - both bowling it and facing it, stood them in good stead, and they emerged as the most successful team of the 1990's - a decade which saw 932 ODI games and 3 World Cups. Sri Lanka's victory in the 1996 World Cup marked the maturation of Cricket 3.0. The next 8-10 years saw minor variations of the core theme. Fielding standards - set by the incomparable Jonty Rhodes continued to improve and sides began to crave brilliant fielders. Average batsmen with extraordinary fielding skills began to get selected ahead of terrific batsmen who were not quite as agile. Here too, it was the South Africans who led the way. Cricket 3.0 also marked the beginning of another trend - that of the ODI specialist. Australia briefly had two separate teams with two separate captains in the 1990's. Early ODI specialists tended to be bits and pieces men - who could bat a bit as well as bowl a bit, in addition to being brilliant fielders. The most successful sides were the ones who had the best all rounders to support the specialists. Great fast bowling was of course the great distinguishing characteristic - separating the great team from the good.

The defining characteristic of ODI cricket has been the development of batting methods. The greatest weapon in ODI cricket has been quality fast bowling. Batting methods have evolved as each era has given way to the next - and have tended to counter fast bowling better (purely in the ODI context - it has impacted Test Cricket too, but that is another story). The orthodox spinner ceased to be a realistic bowling option a long time ago. This has given us - in a cricketing version of Darwinian natural selection - two of the greatest spin bowlers ever - Shane Warne and Mutthiah Muralitharan. Orthodox medium fast bowling is increasingly becoming ineffectual as well.

The advent of ODI Cricket 4.0 sees a quantum development in batting. This is the closest cricket has been to total cricket. Today most batsmen in a top ODI team would not think twice about attempting a stroke only Viv Richards might have played during Cricket 2.0. Its one of the reasons why Richards was as great as he was - he was ahead of his time. Stroke play becomes more and more exhilarating, and hitting is being nailed down to a science as much as batting was in England in the mid to late 19th century. The reverse sweep, the lofted cover drive, the slog sweep, the paddle sweep, the upper cut, hitting on the rise - every top order batsman is expected to be able to play these strokes as a matter of course. These strokes are practiced and perfected.

Just as engineers take great ideas and engineer them into everyday realities, todays cricketers and coaches have taken the brilliance of Viv Richards and turned it into routine batting. These changes have occured primarily in batting. Fielding has been impacted too.

Some teams have embraced Cricket 4.0 more readily than other teams. There are plenty of reasons for this differential development. Australia and South Africa have been at the fore front of these developments, in part because they have invented them. They have invented them from the point of view of their strengths as cricket nations - strong, powerful, hard wicket players - natural athletes who grow up playing not just cricket, but many other sports. Subcontinental teams have always lagged a couple of yards behind these two sides - mainly because they have had to embrace ideas and methods that are inherently alien to their cricketing upbringing. They have been attempting to implement borrowed ideas, and have been unable to make these ideas their own. This is why subcontinent v Southern Hemisphere contests have always been about the all round excellence of the Southern Hemisphere teams vs the individual genius of the subcontinent. For it is only the geniuses who have been able to compete on even terms with these players. The Pakistanis have done better than the Indians historically, because their players are essentially sub-continental talent honed in county cricket - with the sole exception of Inzamam Ul Haq.

India will never master Cricket 4.0 if it continues to seek to play the Australian way. It has to embrace its own way. Its one of the reasons why India are so much better in India than they are abroad. Because the Indian way works in India.

How then does India bridge this seemingly perpetual generational gap? That is the challenge before BCCI and India as they seek to restart the process begun by Chappell - with or without Chappell. The stop gap World Cup side has failed. There is no going back to the Ganguly era now. BCCI has to dig in for the long haul. It took Australia 13 years - many victories and numerous failures to reach their peak in 2000, and they haven't looked back since.

India began something with Wright and Ganguly, and Chappell is but another stop along the way. What price will an inherently non-sporting nation pay to reach the standards of the most sport embracing nation of the planet? Unless this is understood - the ability to embrace sport, India will never play Cricket 4.0 with distinction.

Cricketing View