Haa...damn very surprised at the reactions so far.
Well given that T20 isn't proper cricket & basically is the format that will be used to generate future income for the sport - and potentially attract other nations to the game. The substitute rule woule be perfect for this format.
Also, although i can see with those who believe the beauty of cricket is that its a "balanced team sport". Im quite sure if the rule wasn't so poorly structured by the ICC in the first place many people wouldn't have a problem today. Its not going into test cricket so no issue...
Don't really like the idea of bringing it back in. I'm a real fan of watching all-rounders, and this rule would mean you don't even have to play one.
Why isn't T20 proper cricket? Not like it's that 25 over thing they had in New Zealand.
Sir Alexander Chapman Ferguson = Greatest Ever Manager
"One from ten leaves zero." - Eric Williams, former T&T PM
Member of Cricket Web Green
Member of Northside Power
R.I.P Fardin Qayyumi
The only way to stop it using all-rounders would be to name 12, toss, then name 11. That'd be the fairest way.
In any case, something that decreases the use of bits-and-pieces players and increases specialists is all good by me, and it's the only reason I was remotely in favour of the idea of subs. However, I'm perfectly happy without.
Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourthcricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
Ind33df, I am imm3ns3
I'm in favor of replacing an injured player during a game, but not the rule that the ICC introduced.
RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.
By far the worst rule in cricket ever.
Rest In Peace Craigos
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)