Column

India’s long-awaited rise to the top spot in the One-Day rankings, ironically, came without much hoopla. Friday’s victory over New Zealand in the tri-series was a trifle laboured, but given the slow pitch, well executed all the same. The team had adjusted quickly to the conditions and the absence of a regular opener to partner Sachin Tendulkar did not matter too much.

Fireworks lit up the Colombo skyline after the winning runs were scored, and some champagne would have been in order to herald India’s rise to pre-eminence even if for a day (a defeat on Saturday would peg the team back to second spot). Yet, a half-filled stadium for this key match would have reignited the debate whether ODIs have become passé.

Television ratings for this tournament – which should throw better light on the situation — will only be known much later, but even if they are modest, I am unwilling to sing a dirge for ODIs just yet. True, Twenty20 has had a cyclonic impact on the sport, but I believe it is still untested for longevity.

Remember, one-dayers have been around for almost half a century, and how their appeal has grown is evident from this simple bit of statistics: Between 1980 and 1989, 516 ODIs were played. This grew to a whopping 1353 matches between circa 2000 and 2009. Rejecting such a successful format without due consideration is perilous.

The Twenty20 format is exciting if matches are close, but one-sided matches can be a bore. Nevertheless, the two big issues which confront the one-day game today are its texture and, ironically, the time it consumes. The appeal of Twenty20 is that it is unpretentious in its purpose, and takes half the time of a one-day match. That’s heck of a lot of saving in these frenetic times. If Test matches fulfil the need of classical cricket, T20 holds out the promise of non-stop thrills and spills, with ODIs often falling between two stools.

Yet, one day cricket has its appeal still (Friday’s game had some stellar and tense moments too), and it is entirely likely that cricket’s huge global audience might absorb different formats without too much complaint. Some tweaking of rules and conditions – as suggested by Tendulkar amongst others — might help break the predictability that many critics believe is afflicting the ODIs.

The next 18-20 months are going to be crucial, but in the short run I see no grave threat to one-dayers – at least in the sub-continent. The World Cup is due here in 2011, which means that administrative effort will be redoubled. And if the Indian team continues to do well and retains the top spot, not only the spectatorship but also the marketability of the one-day game will multiply manifold.
***
In spite of Indian cricket’s climb to the top in ODI rankings, the past few weeks have truly belonged to other sports. If Force India’s podium finish at the Belgium Grand Prix was an astonishing achievement, Pankaj Advani winning the World Professional Billiards title was perhaps a notch ahead.

As I write this, those marvellous and indefatigable tennis pros Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi (with their respective partners) will face each other in a short while to add another Grand Slam title to their kitty. Meanwhile, in Milan, Vijender Singh has promised that he will pull no punches in aiming for a boxing gold. He is already assured of a bronze.
Is India just perhaps finally taking that big leap into becoming a true sporting nation, I wonder.