Over Rates: Is there an answer ?

[Jungle Jumbo]

I would suggest having both batsmen on strike at the same time. For example, tomorrow morning Australia could have Lee and Clark bowling a ball from opposite ends at the same time - it would lead to some really impressive catches, as fielders caught a ball in each hand. It would also lead to more attacking team selection, as four bowlers would never be enough.

This may be 'in jest', but I've played indoor matches (not competitive, just training games), where there are two, sometimes three bowlers from the same end. Completely eliminates a run-up and thus speeds up play.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I would suggest having both batsmen on strike at the same time. For example, tomorrow morning Australia could have Lee and Clark bowling a ball from opposite ends at the same time - it would lead to some really impressive catches, as fielders caught a ball in each hand. It would also lead to more attacking team selection, as four bowlers would never be enough.

That would be pretty good to watch, in say a 20-20 game.

 

[Precambrian]

Over rates have surely become a problem, esp with captains running from cover/mid on to the bowler after every delivery, well mostly. And it seems that the extra half hour policy, is exploited by every captain, and even after using that they fail to dock in the 90 overs minimum. The only teams that have gone beyond the 90 overs a day have been New Zealand and Bangladesh, owing to obvious reasons, abundance of spinners' overs. Sri Lanka, too has done a commendable job.

Over rates are important in the current age when cricket is trying to become "faster", and test version cannot remain insulated. Spectators who spent 6 or more hours a day to watch test cricket should be given their due.

I think the ICC should bring in a rule that discourages captains to utilise the extra half hour regularly and take it for granted. If a team continously (say 3 matches at a stretch) fail to bowl the 90 overs in stipulated 6 hours, then the captain may be punished severally, ie a ban. And if the team fails to bowl the 90 overs even after the extra half hour, it should be treated as a graver offense, and the captain may be fined heavily the first instance and earn a ban in the next.

 

[andruid]

Don't see why we can't just start earlier and extend sessions to make people get 90 in the day. If the fielding team are stuck with a 3 hour last session because they couldn't be bothered to get on with it, then it's their loss.

Because getting in 90 overs in a day's should be alot easier than International captains are making it seem. Its not an issue in any First Class Competition I've heard of Domestic or otherwise so why is the 90 overs a day thing so hard to achieve in Test cricket?

 

[GIMH]

This may be 'in jest', but I've played indoor matches (not competitive, just training games), where there are two, sometimes three bowlers from the same end. Completely eliminates a run-up and thus speeds up play.

How dare you!

 

[NUFAN]

Anyone bored during a day should get out a timer and see how long the fielding team is held up by Third Umpires, sightscreen malfunctions, drinks for the batsmen, bees etc..

Fielding teams can be slow for sure, but it's not always only the fielding team at fault.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, I agree with this, I often wonder how much gets factored in that's not their fault

I always reckon that if you're getting carted for a lot of boundaries it must slow you down...does this count for anything?

 

[Midwinter]

There can be many reasons for delays but the intent by the fielding side is reduce the number of overs faced by the batsmen to the minimum to reduce the possibility of scoring runs. This has become so ingrained that people think it is the nature of the game.

If cricket is an entertainment ala 20/20 or ODIs, the crowd is guanteed a specific amount of action why is not the same reasoning applied to test matches ?

While I hate to alter the traditions of the game by applying run penalties it would be worth a try, say at 6 runs an over after the six hours play.( as well as continuing to bowl the required overs, ie a double penalty)

The problem with extending the hours of play to fit he overs in, is TV runs to time schedules and the need for extra pay to ground staff at test venues and it doesn't speed up the over rate, it was tried in the past that is now why there is only an extra 1/2 hour allowed. At one stage play would continue until the required overs were bowled and it was taking up to 1 1/2 hours extra.

As pointed out, it was able to be done in the past and is done at lower levels of the game so it is blight which needs to be removed.

I lkie watching cricket so I thinlk the minmum should be 100 overs . Has all the improvements in the game only made it worse, by slowing it down ?

Thanks for all the responses ( including those from people not interested in the topic but wanted to post anyway )

 

[Johnners]

Don't see why we can't just start earlier and extend sessions to make people get 90 in the day. If the fielding team are stuck with a 3 hour last session because they couldn't be bothered to get on with it, then it's their loss.

AWTA, don't see why they can't just play the whole day until 90 overs have been bowled.

 

[howardj]

Over rates are unacceptable.

In Shield cricket 100 overs are bowled per day. Yet, in Tests, they can't even get through 90 in one full day + 30mins.

It's a joke, and suspension of the captain is the only answer.

Millionairres don't care about fines.

 

[Burgey]

More result oriented pitches would help, especially ones that help spinners more.

Look at this current series, neither side has often got to 90 overs in the day. With flat pitches and nothing in it for the spinners, captains will rely more on their quicks to bowl a dry line.

It's by no means the only reason, but it is a, perhaps small, factor in this blight.

And tbf to both captains in this series, I think they've tried their best to get through the over. Certainly Ponting has bowled part time spinners because he's conscious of it.

Lastly, a wicket falls and 15 blokes from the fiedling team's support staff run on the field. WTF? In the Windies earlier this year, a wicket fell in the 1st over, and the Aussie 12th man ran on with drinks. It was a complete and utter joke.

What about being in position ready to bowl to the next victim instead of chugging on a Gatorade to replace the energy of having bowled three balls?

 

[Jnr.]

This will never happen in today's TV coverage orientated world, but I would not allow them to have lunch or tea until they finish 30 overs in the previous session. If they run overtime, lunch/tea gets cut by the same amount. Tough love.

Surely the prospect of no lunch would make all players go a bit faster.

 

[G.I.Joe]

More result oriented pitches would help, especially ones that help spinners more.

Look at this current series, neither side has often got to 90 overs in the day. With flat pitches and nothing in it for the spinners, captains will rely more on their quicks to bowl a dry line.

It's by no means the only reason, but it is a, perhaps small, factor in this blight.

And tbf to both captains in this series, I think they've tried their best to get through the over. Certainly Ponting has bowled part time spinners because he's conscious of it.

Lastly, a wicket falls and 15 blokes from the fiedling team's support staff run on the field. WTF? In the Windies earlier this year, a wicket fell in the 1st over, and the Aussie 12th man ran on with drinks. It was a complete and utter joke.

What about being in position ready to bowl to the next victim instead of chugging on a Gatorade to replace the energy of having bowled three balls?

Strap on the bottles to the bowlers thighs tbh. An extra long straw would be neat too.

 

[Precambrian]

Strap on the bottles to the bowlers thighs tbh. An extra long straw would be neat too.

Imagine Lee bowling with a strap on!!

 

[Matt79]

Imagine Lee bowling with a strap on!!

Don't get too excited - he's already more than enough man for you

 

[Uppercut]

I'd prefer captains to bowl their better bowlers and not quite get through all the overs. Part-time spinners with defensive fields just to get through them isn't cricket.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'd prefer captains to bowl their better bowlers and not quite get through all the overs. Part-time spinners with defensive fields just to get through them isn't cricket.

Yeah, I agree. If we're in a situation where captains regularly have to bowl bowlers they wouldn't otherwise bowl to get through the overs, we're going the wrong way about it.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, I agree. If we're in a situation where captains regularly have to bowl bowlers they wouldn't otherwise bowl to get through the overs, we're going the wrong way about it.

I also don't know anyone who has ever watched a day of test cricket and came out saying "Nah, was ****. They only bowled 85 overs instead of 90. I feel so short-changed..."

 

[Midwinter]

Just think how much more of the game you would see if they bowled an extra 5 overs a day.

What's next, 80 overs in a day or 70 ?

 

[Matt79]

I also don't know anyone who has ever watched a day of test cricket and came out saying "Nah, was ****. They only bowled 85 overs instead of 90. I feel so short-changed..."

I've come back and had a good whinge about the amount of time the players spent frickin' around drinking, standing around in a circle chat, discussing field settings three times an over, and generally ****ing around rather than getting on with it.