Balance between bat and ball

[slowfinger]

Try 300 there mate

Whoops, my bad

 

[LA ICE-E]

really though, the #1 mission for the batsmen is to score runs, the bowlers #1 mission is to get wickets.

Economy is 2nd, in ODI it's more important than it is in test, because you can have to lowest economy but without wickets its not taking your team anywhere.

For t20 what i would like to see is the balance between bat and ball by which i mean is- ok t20 isn't about letting the ball go and blocking right? It's about sixes well the only thing i want with that is the bowling side of it, it shouldn't about being economical but about getting wickets. So basically by the balance between bat and ball in t20 should mean the balance between sixes and wickets.

I mean I see a lot of wicket fall but those are games where one side is just doing bad but the other side doesn't really lose much of their wickets.

I fine with shorter boundaries in t20 but longer ones in odi's. But I was thinking what is helping the batsman in od cricket that doesn't help them in test, well 1st the free hits, hmm ok im fine with that no ball should be punished and should try to get rid of that. To counter that, we shouldn't award just mad slogging and miss hits, things like that so (this -the idea- i got from a cricinfo quote) why don't we punish the batsman for things like that. Well how about free ball as in say it's a swing and a miss (the definition of swing and a miss would be -when a batsman attempts to hit the ball but unintentionally is unable to make contact with the ball. It will be up to the umpires to decide if it is a swing and a miss.) then the next ball the batsmen can not score a boundary, they can run manually up to 4 runs at max. This may encourage the bowlers to be more aggressive knowing that they can't be be hit for a boundary. It will also discourage just swinging at the ball wildly instead of playing real shots. This could be applied to ODI's too but i think it's needed more in T20's

Also another that od cricket has that test doesn't is powerplays, countering that could be dangerplays where the fielding team's being allowed to tamper with the ball. (I know it's drastic but bare with me, it would help with like inswingers etc bowlers could be more creative) So lets say for 10 overs you can temper with the ball but the umpires will have a checker which will limit how much the ball can be tampered say like the ball has to go through a circular thing so the ball is still circular and and how long lose end can be so it isn't like lather just sticking out the ball and hitting the bat- no; after the dangerplay is over the ball is replaced with a new used ball. And you can't take dangerplays in the 1st 10 overs but you can take it any other time and break it up in 5s. In t20 it would be like 6 overs where you can tamper with the ball or say take a used ball- you can temper with the ball for all 6 or 3 then take a used ball or vice versa. 'Cause in t20 you don't really get a used ball, cause in 20 overs it's not that different so you can ask for a 30 over used ball etc. during dangerplay. In t20 would be after the 6 overs of powerplay.

 

[Richard]

really though, the #1 mission for the batsmen is to score runs, the bowlers #1 mission is to get wickets.

Economy is 2nd, in ODI it's more important than it is in test, because you can have to lowest economy but without wickets its not taking your team anywhere.

In the one-day (be it 60-, 50- or 45-over) game, economy is more important than taking wickets.

Only in the First-Class game do wickets matter more than economy, and in any case the principal thing that you gain a good economy-rate through - accuracy - also improves your chances of taking wickets.

 

[LA ICE-E]

In the one-day (be it 60-, 50- or 45-over) game, economy is more important than taking wickets.

Only in the First-Class game do wickets matter more than economy, and in any case the principal thing that you gain a good economy-rate through - accuracy - also improves your chances of taking wickets.

yeah that's what i was saying in odi it matters more but in t20 it should be about sixes and wickets now it's just sixes.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I fine with shorter

Also another that od cricket has that test doesn't is powerplays, countering that could be dangerplays where the fielding team's being allowed to tamper with the ball. (I know it's drastic but bare with me) So lets say for 10 overs you can temper with the ball but the umpires will have a checker which will limit how much the ball can be tampered say like the ball has to go through a circular thing so the ball is still circular and and how long lose end can be so it isn't like lather just sticking out the ball and hitting the bat- no; after the dangerplay is over the ball is replaced with a new used ball. And you can't take dangerplays in the 1st 10 overs but you can take it any other time and break it up in 5s. In t20 it would be like 6 overs where you can tamper with the ball or say take a used ball- you can temper with the ball for all 6 or 3 then take a used ball or vice versa. 'Cause in t20 you don't really get a used ball, cause in 20 overs it's not that different so you can ask for a 30 over used ball etc. during dangerplay in t20 would be after the 6 overs of powerplay.

 

[LA ICE-E]

why is that so funny? you're probably the kind of people that just laughs of something redical change or something like when the ppl that laughed that the world wasn't flat but round.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

why is that so funny? you're probably the kind of people that just laughs of something redical change or something like when the ppl that laughed that the world wasn't flat but round.

There's a difference between being radical and blind stupidity.

 

[LA ICE-E]

There's a difference between being radical and blind stupidity.

umm im pretty sure when something that radical and out of the way ppl thought, im sure they thought saying the world was round was stupid too. Through out history this has happened, someone comes up with something drastically different that the way things were, people were just like you are being.

Anyways, why is it stupid in your opinion?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

umm im pretty sure when something that radical and out of the way ppl thought, im sure they thought saying the world was round was stupid too. Through out history this has happened, someone comes up with something drastically different that the way things were, people were just like you are being.

Anyways, why is it stupid in your opinion?

I take it all back, it's the greatest idea ever. In fact it would be even better if the Dangerplays allowed the bowlers to bowl three deliveries with exploding oranges.

 

[LA ICE-E]

I take it all back, it's the greatest idea ever. In fact it would be even better if the Dangerplays allowed the bowlers to bowl three deliveries with exploding oranges.

Um you being sarcastic doesn't really make it funny. I'm not saying it's the greatest idea ever but it is an idea which you not coming up with any. I'm not saying any of the ideas are the solution but it can be part of it, just try to expand on it or think of something else. But what does powerplay do? Encourages the batsman to go over the top and get boundaries, well dangerplay doesn't even have to be what i'm saying but just something for the bowler. But if the bowler were allowed to mess with the ball a bit during the dangerplay they could do inswingers etc and get creative with the ball, get it do things the batsman aren't expecting and get wickets - be aggressive. I'm not saying get the ball totally deformed there's gonna be a limit but come one so many things are working for the batsmen these days- example the bats. Bowlers don't get to bring their own ball. well now the bowlers can mold the ball to a certain extend to work for them just like batters get bats which still has a regulation it has to pass.

 

[slugger]

Isnt it all relative to the format.. if you condensed test match down to 50 overs and 50 overs into 20 overs whats going to occur you are going to see the the game under a microscope all its glory and all its not so glory parts.. this bad and good mechanism through out all formats is just spread further apart.. its interesting each format requires the batsmen to be more aggresive, thus each format there avg drop and there st.rates go up.
thus for the bowler the w.st. rate goes down (betters) and there eco goes up. (worse)... its all relative and you accept that as the game by numberss .. you can identify good players etsc

 

[dave.a7x]

this might be random, but theres no real award for bowlers in IPL is there? it seems to favour batsmen entirely (not saying theres anything wrong with that though)

 

[LA ICE-E]

the thing that makes me mad is all these players - symonds, laxman whinning because of the pitch at kolkata because it's doesn't help the batsman and ****...wth...batsmen are just getting to spoiled ...people don't come just to watch sixes and runs as laxman/symonds were applying but to watch a good match be it favoring ball or bat...i think there needs to be more pitches like that with the mix of flat tracks too...

 

[Richard]

Not really, Twenty20 doesn't need variety - the more runs, the better, it's pretty simple.

It's cricket that needs variety.