Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48

Thread: Proposed Changes to the Laws

  1. #16
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,441
    Not overly concerned with 2 & 3 but 1 is a must
    Quote Originally Posted by DingDong View Post
    gimh has now surpassed richard as the greatest cw member ever imo

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  2. #17
    International Debutant Cruxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,446
    If 3 had been enforced 11 years ago Tendulkar would have been not out and that game wouldn't have ended in an empty stadium.

  3. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    4,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Cruxdude View Post
    If 3 had been enforced 11 years ago Tendulkar would have been not out and that game wouldn't have ended in an empty stadium.
    That was then also a wrong call. Sachin had grounded his bat, and then was involuntarily forced out due to colliding with Aktar. That should've been considered as 'leaving the crease subsequently to avoid injury' and Given not out. Whoever the third umpire was screwed up in that.

  4. #19
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,117
    Meh @ 2. I mean there's no downside to closing off the loophole but I reckon there's bigger fish to fry than closing off a loophole for something which still happens so rarely. Strikes me as over-officious, rather than ridding the game of an insidious cancer.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp


  5. #20
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    Would've loved to rectify that. It should be not out when the batsman is stumped trying to overbalance, provided he had his leg in the crease at the point of ball passing by the stumps and the subsequent leaving the crease was involuntary and not an attempt to take a run.
    Disagree with this. If you've overbalanced, you've messed up, and if that ends up with you leaving your crease and getting stumped, tough luck.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

  6. #21
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    All 3 seem either reasonable, or like 1, begs the question "why has this not been done already?"
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  7. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    4,793
    Quote Originally Posted by andyc View Post
    Disagree with this. If you've overbalanced, you've messed up, and if that ends up with you leaving your crease and getting stumped, tough luck.
    I just found it a bit against spirit of cricket tbh. The batsman is attempting to play the ball. He is not leaving the crease till the ball gets into the gloves of the keeper, and after that he's not moving out of the crease for a run. Most of these stumpings happen of wide deliveries wherein batsmen are rendered helpless because they committed themselves to playing the ball on the front foot. Getting stumped off a wide makes sense when the batsman has left the crease to narrow down the angles and hence a way to reward the bowler for still beating him, but I can't have the same sentiments about earning a wicket by bowling a non legit delivery to a batsman who tried to play it well within the crease and had to leave it for a fraction only because of involuntary body action. These days we can find the keeper waiting for the batsman to overbalance and then make the stumping which for me is not exactly reflects the sporting nature of cricket.

    That said, there is merit in what you said also, as it could make the existing laws more complex, and that the batsman could've made better judgement etc. Fair enough.

  8. #23
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Don't get where you're coming from at all, in the slightest bit, here Alex. Completing the stroke while retaining enough balance not to fall out of your crease is a basic requirement of successful batsmanship. If you make a mistake and fail in this respect, you deserve to lose your wicket.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  9. #24
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    Would've loved to rectify that. It should be not out when the batsman is stumped trying to overbalance, provided he had his leg in the crease at the point of ball passing by the stumps and the subsequent leaving the crease was involuntary and not an attempt to take a run.
    Speaking as a wicketkeeper, I can't think of anything more ridiculous. Batting is all about balance and if you can't keep some part of yourself grounded in this massive four-foot wide block, that's your own damn fault for being rubbish and you can get out.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  10. #25
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,391
    I thought they might change the rules (or perhaps they're playing conditions) to the ball itself having to cross the rope, rather than have all these replays to see if the fielder's big toe crossed the line as he slid to collect the pill.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

  11. #26
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    I thought they might change the rules (or perhaps they're playing conditions) to the ball itself having to cross the rope, rather than have all these replays to see if the fielder's big toe crossed the line as he slid to collect the pill.
    Would make it far too hard to judge on boundary catches similar to those being legislated by the second new change, surely.

  12. #27
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    ^^ Would be in favour of that myself actually.

  13. #28
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    Meh @ 2. I mean there's no downside to closing off the loophole but I reckon there's bigger fish to fry than closing off a loophole for something which still happens so rarely. Strikes me as over-officious, rather than ridding the game of an insidious cancer.
    I don't think they're going to introduce a change to the very rules of the game itself simply to stop the career of Stuart Broad mate....

  14. #29
    Hall of Fame Member honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    15,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    I don't think they're going to introduce a change to the very rules of the game itself simply to stop the career of Stuart Broad mate....
    I would accept that rule, if it were to happen over all the others mentioned n the OP.
    We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.
    A cricket supporter forever

    Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.


    Check out this awesome e-fed:

    PWE Efed

  15. #30
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Alex View Post
    I just found it a bit against spirit of cricket tbh. The batsman is attempting to play the ball. He is not leaving the crease till the ball gets into the gloves of the keeper, and after that he's not moving out of the crease for a run. Most of these stumpings happen of wide deliveries wherein batsmen are rendered helpless because they committed themselves to playing the ball on the front foot. Getting stumped off a wide makes sense when the batsman has left the crease to narrow down the angles and hence a way to reward the bowler for still beating him, but I can't have the same sentiments about earning a wicket by bowling a non legit delivery to a batsman who tried to play it well within the crease and had to leave it for a fraction only because of involuntary body action. These days we can find the keeper waiting for the batsman to overbalance and then make the stumping which for me is not exactly reflects the sporting nature of cricket.

    That said, there is merit in what you said also, as it could make the existing laws more complex, and that the batsman could've made better judgement etc. Fair enough.
    so basically you're saying you think that the keeper waiting for the batsmen to make a mistake (which is essentially what they're doing by overbalancing) is against the spirit of cricket? Isn't that part of what cricket is about, drawing mistakes from the opposition in a tactical battle?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Mitch Johnson is ****ing awesome for cricket.
    Quote Originally Posted by pasag View Post
    Ponting's ability to ton up in the first innings of a series should not be understated. So much pressure, so important. What a great!

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. New proposed Format for ODI
    By waqararif in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 03:04 AM
  2. Potential changes to the laws of cricket
    By James90 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 09-01-2007, 05:24 PM
  3. Gun laws in the USA
    By Craig in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 05-10-2006, 07:47 AM
  4. New IR laws are in
    By Craig in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 29-03-2006, 02:15 AM
  5. Laws against stalking
    By Pratters in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 26-04-2005, 08:30 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
  •