Reintroduction of the Substitute rule

[andruid]

Originally Posted by Richard

I like to keep things the same - I'm conservative (lower-case c!)

The only thing that is constant in this world is is the likelibitity of change. Deal with it.

[Matt79]

Would hate substitutes in any form to be brought in.

[aussie]

Originally Posted by andruid

yes and the bowler is not smart enought to evolve his bowling (or outrightly refuses to)to find a way tp cope it will largely be his problem not the games.

It has to be a problem with the format.

Bowling @ death is an advanced form of defensive bowling. If you dont have yorker MAINLY, along with clever variations such a the slower deliveries, slower bumper - you will get smashed.

Alot of great bowlers in tests didn't have these pre-requistes thus would struggle in this format.

Any cricket match where a bowler is going @ 6 rpo constitute a fair balance between bat & ball.

Originally Posted by andruid

I am faily certain a good swing bowler will know when to maximise his ability, or even alter his strategy to reamin dangerous as a wicket taker (See James Anderson, your generic swing bowler in the ear;y stages against the likes of India). If a bowler insists, for whatever reason to aid a bastman trying to score quickly (because that's his natural style and he is too inlexible to learn a new way to take wickets), that's his problem, henace he is unable to test the batsman mentally,

A swing bowlers chances of being successful in a T20 are extremely slim. Given his main source of getting wicket is to pitch up a swing it both way to test a batsman's technique.

In a T20 game given the way batsman go crazy in the first 6 overs. The threat of swing 9/10 times is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by andruid

Just as a test spinner cannot expect to run through any decent battiong lineup on a regular basis, his stock delivery alone. that would make him predicatble and a easy to neutralise, irre4spective of the game format.

Thats true. But i am not talking about variation really, a quality spinner's chances of taking wickets in a T20 is doubled by the fact that, they not only get wicket through variation &. But given the batsmen are in a ultra-agressive mode, they would get out caught in the deep alot - thus given a quality spinner alot of cheap wickets.

Look at Anil Kumble, throughout 2008 in test macthes he clearly had lost his zip. But he went straight into the IPL as was superb why?. Because he still had solid variation & guile.

Originally Posted by andruid

Just as a pooor attack in T20 cricket would get carted for 10 RPO as opposed to a more reasonably chaseable 7-8.5 rpo

.

Haa...thats the entire problem right here. Since when is cricket can 7-8.5 rpo be considered acceptable??? my word..

Originally Posted by andruid

just because the same lack of skill and bowling intelligence manifest iself deiiferently in different formats of the game does not make one more 'proper' than the other.

Disagree. Since the kind of skill & bowling intelligence needed to be a good T20 bowler is pretty predicatable.

For the quicks if you couldn't bowl @ the death in a 50 over game you will be a poor T20 bowler.

For the spinners if you dont have guile & depend on darting the ball around i.e England's Snape & Schofield 07 WC, you will turn into a satellite.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by andruid

The only thing that is constant in this world is is the likelibitity of change. Deal with it.

Likely =| good.