Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"The PFA does not represent players when they have broken the law and been convicted on non-football matters."
- Gordon Taylor in 2009 following Marlon King's release after a prison sentence for sexual assault & ABH
I thought the capital 'C' would give it away, to be honest. But full marks to the man from the Fens.
Fascist Dictator of the Heath Davis Appreciation Society
Supporting Petone's Finest since the very start - Iain O'Brien
Adam Wheater - Another batsman off the Essex production line
Also Supporting the All Time #1 Batsman of All Time Ever - Jacques Kallis and the much maligned Peter Siddle.
Vimes tells it how it is:
We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
A cricket supporter forever
Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.
Check out this awesome e-fed:
I see that the ICC are further limiting the options available to the poor bowler by no balling them for accidentally hitting the non-striker's stumps.
For shame. Batsmen are overhyped, over protected, over paid and over here.
It's time to revisit my opening gambit to this thread. Each bowler to have their own set of balls.
Holy **** what a thread
The Cricket Web Podcast - episode 1 out now
We're on iTunes - why not give us a review?
And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW
Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta
I have e-mailed my thoughts in the opening post of this thread to Dave Richardson at the ICC. Initially, I sent the e-mail in error to former New Zealand opener Mark Richardson and then deceased thespian Sir Ralph Richardson. Eventually, I got it to the right address though, and I await his reply with immense anticipation.
Update: I never received a reply from the ICC, much to my disappointment. I am restructuring my argument to be a bit more cogent and a bit less ranty or bat**** crazy. My revised proposal starts in ODIs where 'innovation' appears rampant. Each bowler will be permitted to start the game with a ball of their choosing, aged by appropriate process to a stage of wear that they are happy with. They could choose Duke, Kookaburra or whatever other manufacturers they choose. If they choose a four piece, so be it. If they choose a two piece, okay. The only proviso is that the ball cannot be replaced. If it gets hit out of the ground. Tough. If your $5 special from the Warehouse (affectionately known as 'The Brick' falls apart, so be it. In order to provide marketing opportunities for the ball manufacturer or any other sponsor, at the start of each over ESPN will be required to broadcast a zoomed in high definition of the bowler's balls. Mark Nicholas will be required to wax lyrical about cement or cars or whatever the sponsor's product is during the whole run up of the first ball of each over. Danny Morrison will be on hand to lent moral support.
New balls will be limited to two per match so you can't just have 5 seamers all with new balls.
Pros: enhanced upselling (this actually means nothing, but should appeal to the ICC), more entertainment, more jobs (created by the new industry required to rigorously and consistently age cricket balls for this purpose), more competition (lower barriers to entry as bowlers will be able to individually negotiate ball deals like batsmen can at the moment)
Cons: forced equity (the cryptofacsists and capitalismus will not like this, so just remind them of the enhanced upselling and perhaps they won't notice)
Conclusion: I think this new argument will appeal to the odd bods at the ICC much more than the original, yet the general premise still holds.
Question: will the ICC deign to reply this time?
Disappointing. This is appeasment
batsman get to aim their shots literally anywhere on the field, bowlers only get one set of stumps to aim at. Why shouldn't we allow bowlers to aim their deliveries at either set of stumps as they please?
Exit pursuing a beerOriginally Posted by Jimmy Neesham
I personally want to let bowlers have the freedom to bowl with whichever hand they want without having to announce it first.
Even better would be to get the non-striker out of the way and let the bowler bowl from over or around without announcing it either.
Or even better allow the bowler to tackle the non striker to the ground in his delivery stride.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)