• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Poll on the Concept of Super Sub

Poll on concept of Super Sub

  • Like it, keep it going.

    Votes: 13 21.7%
  • Hate it, scrap it now.

    Votes: 47 78.3%

  • Total voters
    60

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Well it was introduced by the so called pundits at the ICC about 6-8 months ago, IIRC.

In my personal opinion it has made very little impact on the game and apart from having the potential to give an unfair advantage to one Team over the other, it has done very little to make the game any more exciting than it was.

And personally I don't like the concept . But here's a poll to see what every one thinks of it .
 

ClownSymonds

U19 Vice-Captain
It's a ridiculous corruption of the game. There wasn't really a problem in the first place, so it fixes nothing. Another example of the bloody useless ICC trying to find something to do and just messing things up.
 

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
I reckon it's simply a ploy to get sides to bat second. It's pretty much a given that on most ODI pitches (barring English) that if you bat first you will most likely win. You get the advantage of batting in natural light and a more consistent pitch if you bat first; now there's usually a moment of hesitation after the toss.

I still think there a subtler ways of squaring the ledger, though. ;)
 

James90

Cricketer Of The Year
Pretty comprehensive results. It's not too bad, does add a little bit to the same and has a small amount of interest. I can't see anything really beneficial about having it however. If it's not broke don't fix it.
 

Josh

International Regular
Bugger it off. Bugger it all off. The Power Plays are just as bad everyone just takes them straight away. You'd be better off making it 20 overs of restrictions.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
Pity it's not a public poll - would love to see who voted yes!
Guilty as charged ;) Let the captain declare the 12 before the toss but allow him to declare the supersub after the TOSS.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
so far,it hasn't made a difference.

The main problem is that the super sub is normally a player who isn't good enough to get into the 11 in the first place so he's not likely to make a significant contribution anyway.

lets take 2 scenarios;batting first and second.

scenario 1-batting first
England play Solanki as super-sub,they're in a bad position so they sacrifice a bowler in the hope of getting extra runs,Solanki makes 60* to get England up to 200. Problem is,200 still isn't a very good score especialy when they've sacrificed a bowler to get it.Australia end up winning comfortably,to make any difference on the match,Solanki would have needed to make a very very quick 100,which is very unlikely.

scenario 2-batting 2nd
Australia make a good score,around 270ish,England sub Harmison for Solanki to bat 6/7.Now 2 things could happen here,England get stuck in a rut and Solanki needs to make a quick 70 odd or England cruise to victory.Either way,the super sub is questionable.If England cruise to victory then he wasn't needed,if he plays a significant part in winning,its unfair on Australia because England had
effectively played with 12 men.

TBH i'm not sure what the ICC were thinking when they made it up,batting 2nd you get an un-fair advantage,batting first if you sub a bowler your usualy going to end up with a below par scorw anyway,and without a 4th/5th bowler tod efedn it its even harder.

The power plays are an idea from 1996,not 2005.If every team opened with Afridi and Jayasuria,them maybe,but the fact is that no one does anymore.In every game i've seen,the captain has nealy allways played the powerplays in the first 20,even if the opposition has got a good start.
 

Maison

Cricket Spectator - 1st Warning
i voted "I HATE IT!"

i dont hate it THAT much, but the old system was better, i also dont like the super sub. rubbish.

there was nothing wrong with the old-school rules, why change them ? :/
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yep the super sub idea has stunk, I wouldn't mind particularly but why did the main 'trial' (I believe there was an earlier trial of it in Australia?) of it have to be so long and involve the top level of cricket?

I still believe having one or two more fielders in the circle during the dull overs is the way to go - there has to be value and reward for good shots, this way you'll see less of a pattern of 1s and 0s and more maidens as well as big overs and boundaries.
 

Josh

International Regular
Yeh a better structure might be:
10-20 overs: max 2 fielders outside circle
20-30 overs: max 3 fielders outside circle
30-40 overs: max 4 fielders outside circle
40-50 overs: max 5 fielders outside circle
 

Josh

International Regular
ClownSymonds said:
What was the stated reason for introducing these senseless changes, anyway?
Trying to "liven up" the game and make it more "public friendly" were some of the reasons.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
^i agree.

i think the ICC have been forced to change something because the public perception was that games have become increasingly routine. First of all,that is also the ICCs fault for organsing toooooo many games,and secondly they weren't becoming any less dull/
 

Top