• 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.

Should the laws regarding bad light and rain be reviewed?

GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
There has been a lot of displeasure expressed on this board over the last few days regarding the amount of time lost to bad light/rain. The light, though, has been far from total darkness and the rain has been light. Fans are paying £65 for tickets at Lord's (though not today) and this works out at more than a pound an over if you went on Thursday.

Should umpires prolong play as much as possible, or are they already doing so? Are the laws as they are correct, or do they need reviewing to ensure that test matches finish with a result wherever possible.
 
Barney Rubble

Barney Rubble

International Coach
IMO it's very difficult to review the rain rules, but the bad light rule should be scrapped. Unless it gets to the point where it is actually dangerous to the batsman or fielders to continue playing, they should keep going.

And I dunno WTF is going on with this ridiculous rule about finishing at 7pm whatever happens, either.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Barney Rubble said:
IMO it's very difficult to review the rain rules, but the bad light rule should be scrapped. Unless it gets to the point where it is actually dangerous to the batsman or fielders to continue playing, they should keep going.

And I dunno WTF is going on with this ridiculous rule about finishing at 7pm whatever happens, either.
Click to expand...

It's so the players can have a shower then watch Coronation Street
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Going off in drizzle like this is just ridiculous. It's one thing if it's pissing down, but half the time it's just absurd, as is the bad light rule. Get out there and play ffs.
 
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
I think that the 7pm rule is in place because of broadcasters' push to keep play within certain times so that it can all be shown live. For example, if the over rates are slow, it might push into other programming - so whether they leave early for normal programming, or stay with the cricket, there are always complaints.
 
Mister Wright

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The reason why you have to go off during drizzle is because it can make the pitch wet and make it unsafe for bowlers, who can slide during their landing stride, very important to go off.

The light is a hard one, because if the light is poor the ball can be hard for the batsman to pick off the pitch, moreso than out of the hand. However, I do think they do go off a little too early for the sake of light.
 
Dasa

Dasa

International Vice-Captain
I don't really have much of a problem with the current arrangements when there's bad light or rain about, as long as they're applied consistently.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Personally I don't have a problem with either rule - what I have a problem with is the fact that orange balls and floodlights can't be used when the light is poor. Ball-changes happen all the time, it's not remotely difficult to swap a red ball for an orange one "in similar condition" if the light demands. But the poor TV producers can't use colour monitors. 8-) No, no, have to be black-and-white.

If you want to fix rain, though - only one way, put a roof on the stadium. And that being a costly business, it ain't happening any time soon.

In any case, me, I'd just like to see a statutory minimum overs in a Test, where you cannot have a draw until those overs have been bowled. 450 would seem the sensible figure. And you play however many days it takes to bowl those overs, and no slow over-rates can take time out.

That, of course, would not be easy to schedule, but the schedules have enough absurdities as it is, and I don't think many would dispute that they're too tight as things are.
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
howardj said:
In general, bad light is the most exaggerated thing in cricket.
Click to expand...
Too right. Look at the WC final - the Sri Lankan tail enders were able to survive against Australia!! What's wrong with these blokes? Get out there and have a go, fgs.
 
cover drive man

cover drive man

International Captain
Bad light isn't much of an issue if the batter's say "We can't see the ball because it's too dark" Then play should stop. It's nothing for the umpires to judge.
 
Mister Wright

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
cover drive man said:
Bad light isn't much of an issue if the batter's say "We can't see the ball because it's too dark" Then play should stop. It's nothing for the umpires to judge.
Click to expand...
LOL! :laugh:

"We're 9/89 and we need 360 to win. We definitely can't see the ball, because we're crap tailenders who can't bat...oh yeah, it's too dark."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top