Flintoff could emerge as a real star (Allsport).

By David Clough, PA Sport

A clutch of massively talented cricketers will reach superstar status at the 2003 World Cup.

Adam Gilchrist, Lance Klusener, Virender Sehwag - even England's Andrew Flintoff - are among the list of likely candidates.

But why is it men who have proved themselves capable of turning Test matches on their head need the platform of the one-day game to truly capture the imagination of the cricketing world?

What does limited-overs fare have over and above Test match cricket when it comes to reaching a wider audience?

Perhaps the most important element is encapsulated in the nature of the World Cup itself.

It is a multi-nation competition, a festival of cricket - something to which the Test match format will never feasibly lend itself.

With the advent of the ICC Champions Trophy a worldwide cricket tournament takes place every two years. That means cricket can in one way at least rival the winning recipe which has made football the global sporting currency - and it means those who succeed at the highest level can benefit from the extra exposure.

One-day cricket's other priceless asset is its immediacy in an era when anything which wants to be accessible to modern minds needs to be instant.

If Gilchrist blasts an unbeaten 170 in 120 balls as Australia chase a record total to beat India in the World Cup final his feat will be broadcast universally - he might even rate a mention in the Americas, where cricket is an alien concept.

A parallel achievement even in an Ashes series would be lauded by those who know about such things but would never filter into the wider consciousness.

When was it then that international cricket's often formulaic offshoot grew bigger and stronger than the original?

It was destined, of course, to do so from its very inception.

Limited-overs cricket is the game played at club level in many countries, and within months of the first one-day international taking place the first World Cup was rightly being mooted.

When it materialised in 1975 there was no denying the marketability of the deeds of men such as West Indies captain Clive Lloyd or Australian pace sensation Gary Gilmour.

In the intervening years we owe many of our most memorable cricketing moments to the one-day game.

Viv Richards, Kapil Dev, Sanath Jayasuriya and others in a select cast are undoubted greats in both forms of the game - but the limited-overs version has showcased their talent best of all.

One hour of brilliant batting or bowling will delight and astound whether it comes in a 50-over or five-day match. But the time constraints of the former mean one-day cricket will always hog the likelihood of the batsman chancing his arm or two teams thrashing and hurling their way to a last-ball finish.

Just as importantly, one outstanding performance will very often prove decisive in the shorter form of the game. That will make the cricketer in question not only a supreme entertainer but also a match-winner - he will therefore be double the hero and he will have double the news value and pulling power.

One-day cricket rewards attacking batting more often than inspired bowling, and Test cricket has recently seen what appears to have been a knock-on effect.

Captains such as England's Nasser Hussain have noticed a faster pace to the five-day game as hugely talented batsmen return from towering limited-overs performances in the sure knowledge they can dominate a Test attack too if the circumstances are right.

Gilchrist, Nathan Astle and Jayasuriya have all proved the point. India's shot-a-ball opener Sehwag, meanwhile, is threatening to take the whole process on to a new level.

The signs are that Test cricket is entering a stage of accelerated development, after which there will be no going back.

For better or worse, the limited-overs game is shaping the skills and mentalities of cricket's future.

No one yet knows who is the next mega-talent to follow Gilchrist et al. But he will surely hit the ball even harder and to even odder parts of the ground.

If he cannot he will not measure up in one-day cricket; he will not be the hero we all thought he was going to be... but for the time being at least he will be able to ply his trade in Test matches.

ออ