Cricket Player Manager
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: Injuries sustained during a match

  1. #1
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99

    Injuries sustained during a match

    There's a thread on rule changes, but I thought this might be better as its own separate thread.

    When a player sustains an injury that prevents them from continuing a match it creates an unfair situation I'm sure we can all agree. I've thought on the matter a bit and wonder if there isn't a better way.

    I've been thinking on some sort of substitute system where players can only replace other players in a like for like fashion. For example a fast bowler can only be replaced by another fast bowler.

    Does anyone else have any views on this, and what are the pitfalls of a substitute system in cricket might be?

    All I know is that being forced to play with 10 men vs 11 through no fault of your own isn't a fair contest.

  2. #2
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    That Glorious Moustache
    Posts
    19,162
    I like the rule the way it is now, sure it gives one team an advantage, but that's just bad luck and needs to be accepted imo. Given that no 2 players have the exact same skill-set, it's arguable that the use of a replacement player could conceivably be more beneficial to the team than their original player in the first place, thus making it unfair on the opposition.
    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!

  3. #3
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    44,223
    Yeah, you'd get players faking injuries etc - or at worst suspicions of that happening - just to get others in due to the match situation. Players don't really have set role definitions either as much as we like to think they do.

    I think maintaining one's fitness over five days is just part of the package needed for a successful Test cricketer.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09

    Quote Originally Posted by John Singleton
    Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a manís right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of oneís own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain oneís life and to keep the results of oneís own efforts.


  4. #4
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99
    Luck should have as little to do with it as possible. Cricket already has a potentially significant luck factor outside the playing arena in the toss. Its supposed to be a test of how good your team is against another, everything else being equal.

    Fitness is one thing, but there will be times that something just goes wrong even if you've taken all the reasonable steps to warding against it.

    I don't see how you can be classed as a sporting contest in the event that you don't play under equal terms. It goes against the very idea of sport.
    Last edited by Shifter; 25-05-2010 at 12:44 AM.


  5. #5
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    That Glorious Moustache
    Posts
    19,162
    It's unequal terms as well if one team is able to draft in a fresh player during the middle of a match due to another players poor fitness levels.

  6. #6
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99
    If subs are an option for both teams (which it obviously will be) then its fair.

  7. #7
    International Regular Jayzamann's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    location, location
    Posts
    3,573
    If this were to be introduced, it would be used a lot more often than intended. People would stroll off for niggles and it would degenerate into what became of the 'super sub' a few summers back.

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    That Glorious Moustache
    Posts
    19,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifter View Post
    If subs are an option for both teams (which it obviously will be) then its fair.
    It's not though in the situation you were originally talking about. If the subs were only to happen in a situation where a player could not continue the game, it's not fair to the opposing team unless they also have a player succumb to an injury. Ironically though, it would all come down the factor you want to try and eliminate/minimize, luck.

  9. #9
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99
    How about not allowing subs for fitness related things. In a case where a player is injured/pretends to be injured have an independent doctor evaluate it and if it can be determined he were faking then that players team defaults and are declared losers.

    Furthermore, whats more unfair? A team getting a physically fresh player to even the numbers or a 10 v 11 situation.
    Last edited by Shifter; 25-05-2010 at 01:49 AM.

  10. #10
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Keep it as is. Fitness and conditioning should be factors in team selection and success.
    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.

  11. #11
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99
    That's why I said they won't allow subs for fitness related issues. Having your hand broken has got nothing to do with how well conditioned you are.

  12. #12
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    42,410
    We could use this to sub Michael Clarke out of any T20 where we're chasing >50.

    Bring it.
    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

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

  13. #13
    Hall of Fame Member Johnners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    That Glorious Moustache
    Posts
    19,162
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifter View Post
    How about not allowing subs for fitness related things. In a case where a player is injured/pretends to be injured have an independent doctor evaluate it and if it can be determined he were faking then that players team defaults and are declared losers.

    Furthermore, whats more unfair? A team getting a physically fresh player to even the numbers or a 10 v 11 situation.
    It's incredibly unfair on the team whose original 11 players are fit enough to play a full match. It's not just about the sub being fresh though, it's about the sub having a different skill-set to the player they are replacing. Eg. It's a test match, day 4, Bryce McGain breaks down during the oppositions final innings at bat, and can no longer play any further part in the match. Steven Smith is the "spin bowler" who is selected to replace McGain, and Australia have to chase 400 down in the 4th innings. Is that not just a wee bit unfair on the opposition, that Australia are able to bring in another spin bowler, who just so happens to be a far better batsmen than the one he's replacing, where it's possible having another capable batsmen down the order swings the balance of the match back in Australia's favour.

  14. #14
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    99
    I said in the very first post that one of the conditions would be a like for like replacement. It would have to be a medium pace bowling all rounder, with a similar batting record.
    Last edited by Shifter; 25-05-2010 at 04:30 AM.

  15. #15
    Hall of Fame Member Smudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Deep, deep south
    Posts
    16,696
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifter View Post
    I said in the very first post that one of the conditions would be a like for like replacement. It would have to be a medium pace bowling all rounder, with a similar batting record.
    In which case, you'd have to have a squad of about 17-19 for just one test. Overkill.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* Indian Premier League 2010
    By James in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 3838
    Last Post: 28-04-2010, 02:24 AM
  2. ACC Twenty20 Cup, UAE Nov 2009
    By laksh_01 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-12-2009, 03:27 PM
  3. Wickets per match - how important?
    By Days of Grace in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 12:10 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
  •