The Corridor

Recent Posts

PLEASE NOTE The Corridor is moving grounds at the moment. This is the old site, and comments have been disabled. Check back tomorrow and we should be safely ensconced at our new home


Triangular tournaments in Australia

By Scott 2 years ago, at the start of February Leave a comment on this post

I am so not entertained by the ODI Triangular tournament currently going on in Australia. The format is tired and stale, and the current game, between Australia and South Africa, is suffering because of the slow, low pitch, which makes for hard work for both bowlers and batsmen.

I would much rather just have three or five ODI games between Australia and the touring sides, rather then the traingular format. What do readers think? I’m especially interested in the views of English readers, where the triangular format has only recently be introduced.

Tags: , , , , , |

8 Responses to “Triangular tournaments in Australia”

  • Zainub wrote:
    February 3rd, 2006 at 4.47 pm

    I don’t have that much of a problem with the triangular format to be honest, more the number of games they play. Last year they tried a new two games against each opponent format and I liked that much better then the present 3 against each opponent format, I don’t know whey the reverted back to the old format again.

    But seeing the amount of crowds that turn up to watch each and every single match, you can’t really say people are bored of it all, can you?

  • Wraye wrote:
    February 3rd, 2006 at 6.20 pm

    I have to confess that I too find myself increasing bored with the triangular format. I wonder about the amount of cricket played and what is strictly necessary, and what is more window dressing.

    Much as I would like to, I cannot follow all games and you start to get selective and chose your favourites. Sometimes you end up with a gem like the Bangladesh win vs Aussies in Cardiff in 2005. But the Aus vs SA game, sorry yawn, check in 2 or 3 times a day, otherwise have better things to do wih my time, like organising the local Womens cricket training camp. Much more important to me by half.

  • Sean wrote:
    February 3rd, 2006 at 9.21 pm

    Not fussed about the format but the commentators………. gimme a break - who let Healy & Taylor behind a mike? And we thought Nicholas McSmug-Slime was bad.

    Oh Lordy-mama

  • Hammy wrote:
    February 4th, 2006 at 9.56 am

    Sean, turn the radio on if you don’t like the commentators on the telly.

    Perhaps there are a few too many games played in Australia during the triangular series but we have a lot of venues and cricket-mad fans to satisfy. I must admit that it feels more interesting when the Aussies are on an overseas tour and it us us-against-them. There appears to be much more fighting spirit shown from both teams involved rather than some lacklustre effort when three teams play.

    With the triangular series if the
    Aussies dominate and the other two teams can’t make up their mind who is the second best team then it only becomes really interesting when the finals start. How seriously are the Sri Lankans taking it anyway?

  • Nick wrote:
    February 4th, 2006 at 10.43 am

    I would like things to go the other way - bring in one of the Associate top-six teams to make it a four way comp. Fewer matches between each team, say 2, and one match for the final. Us-against-them series can be fine, but they can be a washout if one sided. No-one wants to watch a 7-0 series!
    I know there are people out there who think the Associates will get rumbled every time they play, but the only way they won’t is to play more top flight cricket. Most Aussies in the team play more ODI matches in one year that an associate team does collectively. Change that, and you will start to see them playing very competetively indeed. Plus they have the hunger.
    Regards commentary, radio over tv any day!

  • Poddar wrote:
    February 4th, 2006 at 11.55 am

    I think it shoud remain a tri-series, but yes, I do feel that very often, the last two to three games become meaningless. Therefore, I would like to see a shorter series with eac side playing the other twice. I agree with Nick that associate teams need more exposure, but I am not sure that Australia would be the right place for them to start playing cricket at the highest level. A one-on-one series will in all likelihood be more boring with Australia romping home easily. Atleast this format creates some kind of contest between the two teams besides Australia.

  • RL wrote:
    February 4th, 2006 at 11.35 pm

    It’s been so popular in England after last year’s exciting and unpredictable England-Australia-Bangladesh encounter that the concept has been, er, dropped for the 2006 season, to be replaced by a bi-lateral series against each of the touring teams (Sri Lanka and Pakistan).

  • akr wrote:
    February 6th, 2006 at 5.00 am

    yeah England has decided to go back to bilateral series. odd, though, that a lot of the complaints we seem to have with the triangular format are the reasons we complain about bilateral ones as well- less at stake, can get one sided, etc…but yeah, i guess the VB series is too long. especially cause it always ends up as a ‘who’s going to plau aus in the final?” situation…at least this one has gone down to the last league match


    • « Plumb or plum LBW? | Main | Andrew “Roy” Symonds »