The most pointless ODI Series of them all?

 
At first we thought it was an April Fool. Then we checked the date.

Just one week after the World Cup had finished, Australia was playing a ODI in Bangladesh. Come again?

Apparently the match on Saturday was the first of three ODI series - the second is currently in full swing as we type.

We cannot fathom the utter futility of Cricket Australia agreeing to this venture so soon after a World Cup on the subcontinent that lasted (or so it seemed) for ten years.

On the whole, the World Cup has breathed life back into the 50 over format and despite the ICC's attempts to immediately sabotage this revival by banning the Associates from the next tournament, there is a pretty good vibe about Twenty 20's big brother at the moment.

But, it is pointless ODI series like these that give the format a bad name and cause cricket viewers to search for the off button.

Michael Clarke may have marked his first match as official Australian captain by scoring a hundred, but even he may be forced to admit that it was a pointless innings in a pointless first match of a pointless three match series.

Thank God for the start of the County Championship season and the lightning starts of young English starlets like Adil Rashid and Ben Stokes.

Where next?

Arrogant ICC takes the magic out of the World Cup by killing the Associates

Tweedledum & Tweedledee made new Australian Cricket Captain & Vice-Captain

Ricky Ponting falls on his sword, but leaves with his head held high

County Cricket Preview - Players to watch: Adil Rashid

County Cricket Preview - Players to watch: Ben Stokes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Comments

[yenjvoy]

This is such BS. Explain how exactly is a new side going to get better and capable of giving Australia a fight in the long run, by playing LESS against Australia. On the one hand you are unhappy about ICC excluding associates from the World Cup, and on the other you are complaining about a top 3 side playing a full strength squad against a bottom 2 side. Schizophrenia, anyone? This is precisely why I think most of the non-South Asian bloggers bellyaching about the ICC's 'no associates in 2015' decision are a bunch of sorry hypocrites - they are worried about Ireland, not associate cricket. In fact if Bangladesh and Zimbabwe had been dropped from the next WC and Ireland and Scotland or Ireland and Holland been added instead, I swear 80% of the bloggers of non-subcontinental origin would have been perfectly fine with it. Blog after blog is full of two faced tripe like this one - don't ban associates, but don't play against them either. WTF?

[Steve]

I'm afraid I agree with the above poster, particularly seeing Watson's blistering 185 from 96 the other day (with 15 sixes). If they'd batted first they could well have got over 400. Instead they simply ended up chasing 220ish with 24 overs spare. A true batting master-class. And he even managed a smile!

[The Reverse Sweep]

Au contraire. I have no problem with Bangladesh playing Australia. As
you say they are not going to get more competitive by just playing the
likes of Zimbabwe or maybe even England!

My gripe is the timing. Only one week after the World Cup has ended,
there is another ODI series. There are not even any Tests so the whole
thing seems like a complete waste of time.

As for the Associates and the World Cup, I have always consistently
said that they should have a seat at the table. Not in a seven team
format designed to breed loads of pointless matches. But in a four
groups of four format whereby if for example England lose to
Bangladesh, then there is a good chance of them getting knocked out at
the group stage.

It is called the magic of the cup.

[yenjvoy]

I guess the timing might have more to do with the demands of the international cricket calendar. It is winter for Australia right now, but for Bangladesh this is the last 2 months before rains kick in, and it rains a whole lot. I wish each of the top 4-5 sides actually squeeze in 2 such series against bottom 5 sides each year - even 3 ODI series help these teams get better. Imagine if Ireland, Kenya, Canada etc can play 2 such series every year, against Aus, India, Pak, SL, NZ etc. 1 at home and at least 1 away. Then, when the next cup comes around, maybe we won't hear the commentators call them "minnows" in that supercilious way they have.

[simon]

@yenjvoy -- I don't think you know who your friends are, mate. There's nothing inconsistent in arguing that present ODI series between Aus. and Bangladesh is poorly conceived and being a staunch supporter of more top-class cricket for the smaller teams.

A series like this, so soon after the World Cup and in identical conditions, is merely grist to the mill of those who see Australia playing Bangladesh as an utterly pointless and unattractive proposition.

What we need is more of the bigger teams playing smaller teams as warm-ups and preludes to tours, not "after the lord mayor's show". Teams which tour England should play Ireland, the Netherlands and/or Scotland, for example.

As far as Bangladesh is concerned, well, they're a full test-playing nation, so a three-ODIs-and-then-home series is an insult to them, imo.

[The Reverse Sweep]

The series may be pointless (I am not going to change my mind on that one), but Watsons innings was a spectacular display of hitting even if the bowling was as abysmal as I have seen from a supposed international attack.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Three games is just the right amount for a ODI series - seven matches really is overkill. I agree that the bigger nations should play one or two warm-up series against the leading Associate nations plus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh a year - maybe as warm-ups to major series i.e. India are in England this summer, so could play a couple of games against Ireland, Netherlands and/or Scotland.

 

I still think this particular series is poorly timed and unnecessary. The players must be knackered after the World Cup - let them rest.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Great minds think alike Simon. Or so it seems!