cricket betting betway blog banner small
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 174

Thread: Should the ICC drop the two bouncer law?

  1. #1
    International Coach stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    10,414

    Should the ICC drop the two bouncer law?

    I have been thinking recently that one thing that could be done in test matches to tilt the balance back towards the bowlers is to drop the two bouncer rule per over. I mean the law was brought in back in the very early days of helmets and protective gear. Surely now the reason for it being introduced are long past.

    What do people think, should bowlers be able to bowl 6 bouncers an over? Why or why not?

  2. #2
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    46,619
    Yes, IMHO. With the proviso that umpires can step in if the short-pitched stuff is overdone or intimidatory towards a bloke who can't defend himself against it. As game a bloke as he is, no-one would want to see twelve balls straight aimed at Chris Martin's throat. Although one couldn't honestly say the same about his namesake from Coldplay.

    "And it was all yellow..." THUD.
    Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "Brexit is the Tory party's baby; it's been a long and painful labour and, at the very last minute, they've sh@t all over it.'" - Frankie Boyle

  3. #3
    International Coach wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,062
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Yes, IMHO. With the proviso that umpires can step in if the short-pitched stuff is overdone or intimidatory towards a bloke who can't defend himself against it. As game a bloke as he is, no-one would want to see twelve balls straight aimed at Chris Martin's throat. Although one couldn't honestly say the same about his namesake from Coldplay.

    "And it was all yellow..." THUD.


    outrageous but fair

  4. #4
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Shri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    CSK
    Posts
    22,140
    Look like a conspiracy to make Raina retire from tests without letting him play a single game.


  5. #5
    Cricket, Lovely Cricket Pratters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    29,927
    Yes Stephen.

  6. #6
    International Coach stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    10,414
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Yes, IMHO. With the proviso that umpires can step in if the short-pitched stuff is overdone or intimidatory towards a bloke who can't defend himself against it. As game a bloke as he is, no-one would want to see twelve balls straight aimed at Chris Martin's throat. Although one couldn't honestly say the same about his namesake from Coldplay.

    "And it was all yellow..." THUD.
    What's wrong with a little intimidation? Batsmen have helmets, armguards, shoulderguards, chest guards, thigh pads, gloves and pads to protect themselves with these days. I saw a clip recently of Lillee bouncing Viv 5 times and then bowling him on the final ball of the over with a very good yorker. You can't do that these days, which makes me somewhat sad.

  7. #7
    Cricketer Of The Year
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    9,012
    Stupid rule in the first place. Only necessary because the umpires didn't impliment the then existing rules on intimidation. Most class batsman would love to be fed the diet of long hops that currently masquerade as bouncers. No one wanted to see Holding, Marshall and Croft etc bowling 4 or 5 bouncers an over and if the umpires had done their job they wouldn't have got away with it.

  8. #8
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    46,619
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    What's wrong with a little intimidation? Batsmen have helmets, armguards, shoulderguards, chest guards, thigh pads, gloves and pads to protect themselves with these days. I saw a clip recently of Lillee bouncing Viv 5 times and then bowling him on the final ball of the over with a very good yorker. You can't do that these days, which makes me somewhat sad.
    Sure Chris Martin would be made up to be bracketed with Sir Viv in a batting context.

    No, I've nothing against softening up proper batsmen or even half-decent lower order players, but bowlers banging in bouncer after bouncer at rank #11s who just aren't good enough to deal with them (especially those like Martin who're brave enough not to edge halfway to square leg during the bowler's appraoch) is a recipe for someone getting hurt.

  9. #9
    Hall of Fame Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Europe, on the outside looking in
    Posts
    19,628
    Agreed - Leaving aside the one-day game I'd nominate it as not only the daftest but also the most unnecessary law ever

  10. #10
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Yes, IMHO. With the proviso that umpires can step in if the short-pitched stuff is overdone or intimidatory towards a bloke who can't defend himself against it. As game a bloke as he is, no-one would want to see twelve balls straight aimed at Chris Martin's throat. Although one couldn't honestly say the same about his namesake from Coldplay.
    Would agree with this. I believe that the strict enforcement of the 'over head high wide rule' means that bowlers cannot be lazy and keep bowling short pitched deliveries to simultaneously dry up runs and intimidate the opposition batsmen. With the two bouncer law and this strict enforcement of the wide rule, we have two stones killing one bird, it is unecessary, imo.

    I believe that it is clear enough when a tailender is being unfairly bombarded with short pitched bowling and cannot defend himself. However, I see no reason why a batsman of low quality (ie, who can barely defend himself) should be protected by the umpires as there is the option to back away outside leg stump, etc. If a bowler continues to attack the batsman by following him, then perhaps one could step in - but it is all common sense, imo.
    The speed at which a fielding team gets through the innings is overrated.

  11. #11
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    29,108
    I don't honestly think it would make that much difference. Bouncers rarely work when they're expected. Would bowling three in an over really be especially effective? Only in very rare circumstances. Particularly considering they're only counted as bouncers if they're head height. Bowlers rarely even use the two they're allowed at the moment. Bryce McGain a notable exception.

  12. #12
    Cricket, Lovely Cricket Pratters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    29,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    I don't honestly think it would make that much difference. Bouncers rarely work when they're expected. Would bowling three in an over really be especially effective? Only in very rare circumstances. Particularly considering they're only counted as bouncers if they're head height. Bowlers rarely even use the two they're allowed at the moment. Bryce McGain a notable exception.
    It would make a fair amount of difference. Batsmen would be reluctant to go forward and attack as the bowler can always bounce him. So it will make batsmen more cautious and give backing to the bowlers.

  13. #13
    State Regular jondavluc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Westside of that big light blub thingy
    Posts
    943
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post

    "And it was all yellow..." THUD.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post
    What's wrong with a little intimidation? Batsmen have helmets, armguards, shoulderguards, chest guards, thigh pads, gloves and pads to protect themselves with these days. I saw a clip recently of Lillee bouncing Viv 5 times and then bowling him on the final ball of the over with a very good yorker. You can't do that these days, which makes me somewhat sad.
    Of course you can. Short-pitched delivery and "Bouncer" (which is defined as a ball that passes over head-height) aren't one and the same.

    The current rule requires good-quality short-pitched bowling and debars bowlers from just banging it in any old where non-stop, which any fool can do. A really short delivery is a near-guaranteed dot-ball; allowing unlimited numbers of them encourages negative cricket, because it makes things too easy for bowlers to bowl economically but doesn't encourage them to try and take wickets (short deliveries almost never get decent batsmen out).

    Personally I'm more than happy with the no-more-than-two-per-over-over-head-height rule. It makes bowlers who want to bowl consistently short - and there are times when to do so is a useful tactic - have to have a good amount of accuracy in length otherwise they'll be no-balled\wided. It also means that bowlers who want to be really economical have to hit good areas rather than just bowl short all the time.

    As for helmets and protective gear they're fairly irrelevant. No-one wanted to see batsmen injured by short-pitched deliveries before the rule was brought in - and it rarely happened - and no-one wants to see such now - and it rarely happens. The main use of the rule is to stop bowling negatively being too easy, same as the rule about deliberately bowling consistently down the leg-side.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  15. #15
    Hall of Fame Member duffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    what is the meaning of this?
    Posts
    15,787
    What Pratters said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    True, a Duffer "heh" is like 50 likes.

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. ICC drop "Super"-Sub
    By sirjeremy11 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 17-02-2006, 04:44 AM
  2. A bouncer from Tommo
    By BoyBrumby in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 27-04-2005, 03:53 PM
  3. Worst drop in history
    By Loony BoB in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 07-02-2005, 08:00 AM
  4. Drop Shewag and Yuvraj ?
    By thirdumpire in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 17-10-2004, 02:59 PM
  5. Should Australia Drop Brett Lee?
    By Top_Cat in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 15-10-2002, 05:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •