Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Reverse Follow on?

  1. #1
    Cricketer Of The Year Xuhaib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    9,506

    Reverse Follow on?

    Team A skittles out Team B then bats and get a lead of 200+ before getting bowled out. After being bowled out Team B gets the option of batting again or inviting the opposition back in.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Moving to Somalia
    Posts
    43,732
    Nah don't like it. The point of the follow on is to progress the game to its natural conclusion; this would probably just delay the inevitable and create a lull in the game.
    ~ Cribbertarian ~

    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009

  3. #3
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,835
    It could work. However. I reckon it would struggle to be accepted and captains would rarely use it, not just because of caution to using a new thing, but also like PEWS said, it would slow down the game and somewhat delay the inevitable.

    I fear it's main use would be a defensive one if a team only needs to draw a match to win a series.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    This English top three are cornflakes. They're not the most exciting thing out but they're pretty effective. Then the middle order are the sugar. Would be too much on their own but added to the cornflakes they add some much needed interest

    When KP returns he will be the banana..

  4. #4
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity
    Posts
    32,121
    Would surely encourage negative play. Not a fan.


  5. #5
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,895
    Yea, invite them to bat and just bowl negatively to waste time. If the lead is just barely over 200 the batting team won't declare and the fielding team can drag it out.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  6. #6
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Burgess Hill
    Posts
    8,991
    At first sight I like the tactical "reward" being given to the batting team, and the symmetry with the reward given to the successful bowling team under the current follow on rules.

    I don't know how it would play out in practice. My immediate objection would be the risk of monotony: one team bats for bloody ages and then just bats again, which could be dull. That said it could certainly be tactically useful for the batting team in that the bowling team could get absolutely exhausted and demoralised, and there could be some slaying.

  7. #7
    Hall of Fame Member Howe_zat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Top floor, bottom buzzer
    Posts
    16,466
    Would be in favour if you called it the "Carry on".

  8. #8
    Cricketer Of The Year Cabinet96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    9,835
    Would be really useful in the Sub Continent tbh.

  9. #9
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,673
    Misbah would use 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

  10. #10
    U19 12th Man unam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Universe
    Posts
    204
    Not a good idea, as said by Sledger it would encourage negative play.

  11. #11
    International Captain watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,115
    If team B sent itself back in to bat again then wouldn't the inclination be to throw the bat in order to advance the 200 run lead quickly?

    This is because team B needs to give itself enough time to bowl out team A in the 4th innings. Especially if its late on day 4 of the Test Match. On the other hand, teams curently batting 3rd, and more than 200 runs behind, seem to bat cautiously to preserve wickets and restrict time in order to draw the test.

    I like the idea as the 3rd innings naturally becomes more attacking; unless team B starts to lose wickets quickly in which case team A is back in the game!
    Sunil Gavaskar – Len Hutton – Don Bradman – Garry Sobers – Viv Richards – Keith Miller – Imran Khan – Jock Cameron – Richie Benaud – Malcolm Marshall – Bill O’Reilly

  12. #12
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    55,200
    I think its fair enough. A team who performs so dominantly in the first 2 innings should have the option to avoid batting in the 4th innings if they really don't want to.

  13. #13
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,916
    Well said Jono. I agree. Come on ICC, let's do this ****.
    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.

  14. #14
    Cricketer Of The Year Xuhaib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    9,506
    A lot of the sides don't enforce the follow on these days thus I can see this option being used quite frequently by the teams who get themselves in such a dominating position.

  15. #15
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,916
    Also I agree that it would often lead to more attacking innings. Generally when a captain hasn't enforced the follow on, weve seen that side go for batting runs rather quickly. The side batting 2nd in Xuhaib's example is in the exact same position as a captain who doesn't follow on.

    Edit - beaten to it, basically
    Last edited by GIMH; 18-04-2012 at 11:49 PM.

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. How many Languages you speak or can follow
    By Xuhaib in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 13-09-2007, 02:16 AM
  2. Why didn't Ponting enforce the follow on?
    By sqwerty in forum Ashes 2006/07
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 01-12-2006, 07:20 AM
  3. Do you follow?
    By Go_India in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-09-2005, 05:34 AM
  4. Replies: 50
    Last Post: 26-04-2005, 02:41 PM
  5. Reverse Swing
    By rabbit in forum ICC Champions Trophy 2004
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 15-09-2004, 09:49 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
  •