-
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.
Replace the toss with the bid?
- Thread starter cover drive man
- Start date
slugger
State Vice-Captain
valid point however off the top of my head the condition of a field (play area) of "every other sport" doesnt have a drastic effect to the outcome of the actual result of a coin toss as it does in cricket.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
How much cricket skill is really involved in a bowl-out is rather debatable, though. I can't immediately think of anything else, and I would indeed prefer a bowl-out to a toss, but neither are exactly desireable.
slugger
State Vice-Captain
a bowl-out .. might be more beneficial in alot more ways rather than just deciding who gets to make first choice.
umpires/players are given an opportunity to take mental notes on the effect of overhead condtions/pitch/ball.. bounce/ turn etc.. this in turn aids both teams whether you win the bowl out or not.
a couple of sports that dont use a coin toss..
darts (closers to the ballseye).
f1 fastest lap(s)
bowls (closers to the jack)
Rallies for first points.
Tennis
Volley Ball
Table Tennis
Im not dure about snooker and 8 ball/pool table.. but I have noticed most games begin with the cue ball hit to the back cushion ?
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
The bounce and\or turn (and unevenness), yeah, true. And I'd actually be in favour of something being done to allow that to be found-out, rather than merely guessed at.
You can find-out if the overhead conditions are going to help swing without use of the match pitch though.
slugger
State Vice-Captain
Indeed...The bounce and\or turn (and unevenness), yeah, true. And I'd actually be in favour of something being done to allow that to be found-out, rather than merely guessed at.
You can find-out if the overhead conditions are going to help swing without use of the match pitch though.
A suggestion was raised a few years ago to let the visiting side elect whether to bat or field first. The other side to this was that the home side could prepare whatever pitch they wanted without the other side moaning about it. The advantages would include:
1) Removes those instances where the result of the game is determined (supposedly) by the toss;
2) Remove allegations/suspicions of pitch tampering or fixing (because it obviously has been)
The second of these is the most appealing because not only does it return one of the glories of test cricket (ie - the different conditions/pitches in different venues) but it also goes someway towrds redressing the balance between bat and ball.
The reason for this is that all sides will have a strong incentive to prepare a sporting pitch (maybe slightly favouring the home side); no-one is going to prepare a flat track belter when they know that the opposition is going to simply bat first and be 0/1000 after 3 days, likewise they are unlikely to prepare a massively seaming green-top/raging turner knowing that they are going to have to bat 1st/last on it.
To date I have not heard any compelling argument against this method but no one seems to have seriously considered it. Could be worthy of a new thread if there is sufficient interest.
You can leave the toss in one-dayers and 20/20 if you like as pitch conditions play a far lesser part (plus they're not as important)
1) Removes those instances where the result of the game is determined (supposedly) by the toss;
2) Remove allegations/suspicions of pitch tampering or fixing (because it obviously has been)
The second of these is the most appealing because not only does it return one of the glories of test cricket (ie - the different conditions/pitches in different venues) but it also goes someway towrds redressing the balance between bat and ball.
The reason for this is that all sides will have a strong incentive to prepare a sporting pitch (maybe slightly favouring the home side); no-one is going to prepare a flat track belter when they know that the opposition is going to simply bat first and be 0/1000 after 3 days, likewise they are unlikely to prepare a massively seaming green-top/raging turner knowing that they are going to have to bat 1st/last on it.
To date I have not heard any compelling argument against this method but no one seems to have seriously considered it. Could be worthy of a new thread if there is sufficient interest.
You can leave the toss in one-dayers and 20/20 if you like as pitch conditions play a far lesser part (plus they're not as important)
slugger
State Vice-Captain
ive always liked that idea... ^^^ beats me why its not in favor...its strange something like that wasnt introduced decades back.. it would seem a logical step in producing and aiding fair pitches and also it wouldd have not been such a step learning curb for countries gaining test status when they begin to travel etc.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Has been discussed TBH, possibly a few times. I don't like the idea because it goes some way to negating home advantage - the whole point IMO in home games is that the home side is supposed to be able to give themselves as much advantage as they can. I don't like the idea of something which is done, essentially, to favour the touring team.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
What is the problem with the toss though. It is not a test of cricketing skill, but where is the issue in that. Luck is a part of cricket just as it is a part of life.
slugger
State Vice-Captain
it all evens its self out.. and in this suggested format there is no room for debate its clearly 50/50 ie in one series your team has home advantage (crowd support) but losers first choice option/advantage and visa versa when your team is the touring team in a series.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I think the less luck involved in cricket, the more enjoyable the game, TBH. I'd like to take the luck of the toss out of the game and replace it with something cricket-skill related, and have done ever since I thought the matter through.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Basically, it does a good deal to mitigate home-advantage. Which I don't like. I think home-advantage as we have it is quite fair enough now, and I think it'd be better still if we replaced the toss with something related to cricket skills.
Heck, TBH I'd prefer have the home team get automatic choice than the touring one.
I can understand where you're coming from Richard but I think you'll find that the advantage will still lie with the home side in that at the end of the day they are the one's who are more familiar with the conditions. Furthermore nothing is going to stop them from preparing a pitch which is more likely to favour them, just not overly so...
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Trouble is, who's to say what "overly" is? I can't really see where you draw the line. For me, the home side can prepare whatever they want, I don't have any problem with anything.
I mean, obviously matches which are over in two-and-a-half days aren't really ideal for anyone, and recently there's been much of a push to make sure games last five days. But if the home authority are happy to sacrifice revenue for victory, that's up to them.
I mean, obviously matches which are over in two-and-a-half days aren't really ideal for anyone, and recently there's been much of a push to make sure games last five days. But if the home authority are happy to sacrifice revenue for victory, that's up to them.
