How Should These Games be Handled?

[Goughy]

The team I coach played a 20/20 game today.

We knew the opposition would not be that strong so I mixed the batting line-up around and we scored 170-2 (with 2 players retired).

When they batted, I decided to give my 2nd string bowlers a go as I was very confident we would not lose.

Anyway, without bowling my usual openers we had them 9-7. I then gave most of the non-bowlers a bowl and we bowled them out for 22. 22 all out with 12 wides, 1 nb and a bye. Thats 8 runs of the bat and 4 of those came from a nick between keeper and slip. I bowled 7 bowlers in 11 overs.

My question is, despite making sure our strongest players didnt bowl we rolled them over, how do you prevent you and your team looking like bullies? How could I have made the game more competetive? or even should I be interested in trying to make more of a game of it?

Looking at the scorecard it appears we tried to destroy them, which is far from the truth. Im just wondering how people think these type of games should be handled.

 

[superkingdave]

I'd be thankfull you batted first, we used to get cup games at school where the other team would bat first and the game would be over in next to no time.

Think you did the best you could tbh, just seems there must have been too big a gap between the sides.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Always make sure you bat first but I guess you already knew that, and have a limit on your bats, 30 and out or summat. Other than that I agree with skd, not much else you can do if the oppo are so poor.

Edit: we used to have a "can't be out on your first ball" rule too.

 

[Dravid]

If the opposition is a really poor side, let them bat first. Saves both team a lot of time and also makes you look less of a bully for not dragging the match on for a few hours.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Make all your players bat and bowl with their weak hand?

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

I'd be thankfull you batted first, we used to get cup games at school where the other team would bat first and the game would be over in next to no time.

Think you did the best you could tbh, just seems there must have been too big a gap between the sides.

Yeah, played a few of them in my time.

Like Dave says, you couldn't really do much else. Maybe retiring players earlier to give more people a bat would be the way to go.

 

[silentstriker]

I mean, its probably good practice for your team anyway. So bat first and have some fun. If you play fairly and don't gloat or anything, I don't see a reason why you shouldn't go all out.

 

[Dravid]

I'd be thankfull you batted first, we used to get cup games at school where the other team would bat first and the game would be over in next to no time.

Think you did the best you could tbh, just seems there must have been too big a gap between the sides.

It's good practice, but when your the other team that sucks, it's going to be one long day for you. I remember in the past when I had games where we played the top teams in the league and they had to bat first. I used to get so annoyed because I knew there was no chance of us winning the game and it's going to be long as hell.

There was a match this year where we were playing the best possible team in the league, with a few players who qualified for the USA team once. They batted first and scored 334 with the opener scoring 200*. You have no idea how long that inning was.

 

[Neil Pickup]

That's generally how I work the uncompetitive games too - you can't really do any more without showing the other side complete disrespect; if it's league then they know what they're in for.

 

[Goughy]

That's generally how I work the uncompetitive games too - you can't really do any more without showing the other side complete disrespect; if it's league then they know what they're in for.

Agreed, thats the hardest thing. I guess we could have bowled underarm and batted left handed but that never even entered my head. That makes a mockery of the game, makes the game pointless and shows the opponents a complete lack of respect.

Giving everyone a chance to contribute and have a go whilst at the same time minimising the impact of the 'better' players is the way to handle it.

It was our 1st game of the season and it was good practice, but I wish it didn't look so crushing.

 

[archie mac]

Maybe you could have your spin bowlers bowl pace and vice versa

I am captain this year (don't get too excited it is only 5ths) they gave me my side, which contained only one pace bowler who was not under 18.

I now have two over 18 pace bowlers, but the problem is if the juniors bowl in their own morning game they can't bowl in the afternoon for the seniors.

They are very strict with how many overs juniors can bowl, is this the same in other countries?

I am just going to hope that all of my youngsters bat in their own games, otherwise the Mac will have to bowl for the first time in 10 years.

 

[steds]

Just thrash them.

 

[Burgey]

Stop bullying the England one-day side like that!!

 

[silentstriker]

If that kind of thrashing demoralizes them, then wait for a final of some kind and have them play against the Indian national team just so the kids can get their confidence back.

 

[adharcric]

It's competitive cricket and there's no reason you shouldn't be going all-out. Don't be arrogant and ****y obviously, but the killer instinct and desire to dominate should not be sacrificed simply because the opposition is weak.