• 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.

negative vs positive play.

slugger

State Vice-Captain
Re: Test Match

There is basically two ways to play, a postive and a negative approach.
So how long does a team apply the attitude to play positively, most of us would agree under normal circumstancers up to the 3rd inn. therefore you could summrise that by the start of the 4th inn. most teams will know how great their chancers are of winning the match depending how high that is they will play in a positive manner.

so therefore a match to end in a draw requires one team or even on rare occasions both tems to play negatively.

As a batting team it would seem a little easier to play negatively, keep attacking shots to a minimum and defend your stumps, as a bowling team playing negatively would seem much harder but it is possible as the wide rules are lot loser you are bowling no to get hit at all, usually a bowling team only adopts this practise when the match is these to lose.

Do you agree with my theory on negative and positive play and is it a justified approach for team to take or better yet should it be availible for teams to take (under current rules)

I believe the only way to limit draws to a minimum is to apply rules to prevent teams the option of playing negatively.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
The skill of all individuals and teams in cricket is finding that balance between attack and defence.

Adding rules to overly promote one approach or the other takes possibly the most important desision making aspect away from players and lessens the game.
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Add in rules to overly promote one approach or the other takes possibly the most important desision making aspect away from players and lessens the game.
And that's why rules like the one-bouncer-per-over-per-batsman rule eventually fell over adn other proposed ones like balls bowled into the rough outside leg-stump automatically called wide were knocked on the head, as they should have been. There's a place for both attack and defense in cricket. I prefer all-out attack but that's me. :D
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Occasionally, going on the attack at the wrong time is to invite defeat (a one-day final in September at Lords when you have lost the toss and been put in on a green top) springs to mind.

Like Top-Cat says though, all-out attack is great fun. Better to crash and burn than to never have flown at all.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Occasionally, going on the attack at the wrong time is to invite defeat (a one-day final in September at Lords when you have lost the toss and been put in on a green top) springs to mind.
Which game are you referring to?
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Re: Test Match

There is basically two ways to play, a postive and a negative approach.
So how long does a team apply the attitude to play positively, most of us would agree under normal circumstancers up to the 3rd inn. therefore you could summrise that by the start of the 4th inn. most teams will know how great their chancers are of winning the match depending how high that is they will play in a positive manner.

so therefore a match to end in a draw requires one team or even on rare occasions both tems to play negatively.

As a batting team it would seem a little easier to play negatively, keep attacking shots to a minimum and defend your stumps, as a bowling team playing negatively would seem much harder but it is possible as the wide rules are lot loser you are bowling no to get hit at all, usually a bowling team only adopts this practise when the match is these to lose.

Do you agree with my theory on negative and positive play and is it a justified approach for team to take or better yet should it be availible for teams to take (under current rules)

I believe the only way to limit draws to a minimum is to apply rules to prevent teams the option of playing negatively.
What rules could possibly do that? You can hardly give a batsman out for scoring too slowly or warn a bowler for bowling a nagging line and length.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Occasionally, going on the attack at the wrong time is to invite defeat (a one-day final in September at Lords when you have lost the toss and been put in on a green top) springs to mind.
Which game are you referring to?
There was a time particularly in the 80's when in both the Benson and Hedges and Gillette Cup Finals batting first was decidedly difficult. The one that springs immediately to mind is this one which was decided by the toss.
 

archie mac

International Coach
A game when it is all for the bowlers and the batsman is being beaten on a regular basis, and the batsman plays a defensive game, that is some of the best cricket there is for my money
 

slugger

State Vice-Captain
While the weather over the first four days made a draw the inevitable result no-one would have guessed that it would get so close to providing a possible victory for New Zealand.


McGrath provided a moment of controversy when bowling several balls of his penultimate over well wide of off stump.

New Zealand needed 15 runs off the last over but it never had a chance as Waugh quite rightly set his field back and left no gaps for the New Zealanders to exploit.

New Zealand loss the chance win by only 9 runs. (match drawn).
As I said it is rare for the bowling team to play negatively, but will only do so when it is theres to lose

http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/63953.html
 

slugger

State Vice-Captain
I know alot of people on cricketweb dont get hang up on draws and believe some of these make the best games..

is that because no one (supporter) of either team has to feel the despair of a loss and watch the other bask in the glory of a win.

when you think about it, cricket is really set up not to have draws.. I mean serously 5 days.. can actually equal no result... how is that possible... thats what the outsider is thinking..

in an odi series they introduced the bonus point.. even though one team was going to lose the other win.. (outside a tied match) there was that added incentive to win and win well...and keep your team at the top of the table.. etc..

can test cricket adopt something like this to minimalise a drawn game and a drawn series.
 

slugger

State Vice-Captain
sorry other games that end in a draw.. no wait thats not really going to settle the debate.. becauase the diffence between cricket and other sports is that a draw in cricket is a excepted result.. rugby leaue recently introduced extra time if there is a drawn match.. and in dmestic cricket level you get a an extra point if you win first inn.. so if if there is a draw one team still gets something out of it.. why is this ok at domestic level but not applied to international level or varition of that method
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
sorry other games that end in a draw.. no wait thats not really going to settle the debate.. becauase the diffence between cricket and other sports is that a draw in cricket is a excepted result.. rugby leaue recently introduced extra time if there is a drawn match.. and in dmestic cricket level you get a an extra point if you win first inn.. so if if there is a draw one team still gets something out of it.. why is this ok at domestic level but not applied to international level or varition of that method

Football (or soccer as foreigners sometimes call it), rugby, hockey, there's loads of them. I once watched Chris Eubank and Nigel Benn knock seven bells out of each other for 12 Rounds of boxing and even that was a draw.
 

slugger

State Vice-Captain
mark taylor on draws:

Was it also part of your strategy to play for a win each time you won the toss?
That's going back to what I was saying earlier: sometimes people take the game too seriously. Why would you want to play for five days and have a draw? I can't work that out. You should be setting out to win. That's what the Australian side does today, and all sides should do it. Five days is plenty of time to get a result. You should always be thinking of getting a result because it's good for the game,good for the viewers, and you'll find that it's good for you as a person as well: when you're playing in games that always go on to get a result, it will make you a good player.
 

archie mac

International Coach
mark taylor on draws:

Was it also part of your strategy to play for a win each time you won the toss?
That's going back to what I was saying earlier: sometimes people take the game too seriously. Why would you want to play for five days and have a draw? I can't work that out. You should be setting out to win. That's what the Australian side does today, and all sides should do it. Five days is plenty of time to get a result. You should always be thinking of getting a result because it's good for the game,good for the viewers, and you'll find that it's good for you as a person as well: when you're playing in games that always go on to get a result, it will make you a good player.
Why are you quoting this?

I would hope that all teams start out playing for a win, still does not mean that every draw is boring or bad for the game

I read a lot about a game in the 60s where MCC came out with a broken arm to save the match for England where, with one over left all four results were still a chance:)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Honestly, "positive play" happens \ is encouraged far too damn often as it is, without some silly arbitary rule trying to stop draws.

A draw, if it happens "naturally" rather than through the weather, is rarely aught but a fine thing. Yeah, there's the odd hopelessly boring game (like this) but they're very rare and completely down to abysmal pitch preparation rather than lack of "positive play".

If you want to minimise draws from Tests, I suggest you look at stopping the loss of overs 50 times before even considering some silly rule about arbitary "positive play".
 

Top