Popularity of Batsman a Triumph of Rampant Consumerism

[Howe_zat]

Holy **** what a thread

Solidarity brother!

 

[smash84]

Of course it's original!

Now, stick this on your balls and watch them swing.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

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.

 

[Dan]

Heef WAFG.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

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?

 

[Howe_zat]

Disappointing. This is appeasment

 

[wellAlbidarned]

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?

 

[cnerd123]

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.

 

[indiaholic]

Or even better allow the bowler to tackle the non striker to the ground in his delivery stride.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I want four bases like in baseball so we can have four batsmen on the field at a time.

Run outs and Mankading would reach new heights of hilarity.

 

[Victor Ian]

deleted - not relevant

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

John Bracewell was talking about ways to "even up" the game of cricket since the advent of thick, softer, springier bats. I was very tempted to e-mail him a link to this thread, until I saw that the link to the photo of Peter Beardsley has gone dead. If some mod (@Prince EWS, you need something productive to do) could reinstate that dead link, then I'll e-mail this thread to ""Bracers"" forthwith, given the short shrift I received from both Dave and Mark Richardson previously.

 

[honestbharani]

springier bats.

Does he not know we Indian fans have already worked out how Jayasuriya smacked us using one in 1996?

 

[cricketsavant]

If Shaheen AFridi is nurtured correctly, he could be one of the biggest stars in the sport, much like Akram in the late 80s and 90s, or any number of Pakistani fast bowlers for that matter.

It's just that cricket media is largely centred around England and India these days and they don't exactly have quick bowlers that make you tune in. Kohli and Root are the biggest stars for that reason.

 

[The Sean]

If Shaheen AFridi is nurtured correctly, he could be one of the biggest stars in the sport, much like Akram in the late 80s and 90s, or any number of Pakistani fast bowlers for that matter.

It's just that cricket media is largely centred around England and India these days and they don't exactly have quick bowlers that make you tune in. Kohli and Root are the biggest stars for that reason.

You're kidding about India's quicks, aren't you?

 

[ankitj]

cricketsavant is here on a mission to cleanse us of our terrible cricketing notions.