*Richie Benaud voice*
Bring back the old no ball law... Marvelous.
It's less confusing in one respect, but in another bowlers can get away with murder if they can drag.
CATCHES WIN MATCHES
A TOLL IS A TOLL AND A ROLL IS A ROLL,
AND IF WE DON'T GET NO TOLLS, THEN WE DON'T EAT NO ROLLS
Favourite player currently: Ellyse Perry
I would also take one Law that is about to come in, 'The Steven Finn Rule', tear it up and put it on the fire.
The subject has come up quite a lot this summer in conversation with players and umpires and not one thinks it's other than a stupid idea.
Penalties for slow over rates need to be kept to fines, if not abolished all together.
I'll mark the boundary line at the scg if it gets me a five day ticket to the test.
Seems to me that's the only option. It certainly can't be left as a legal ball, it's completely unfair on the batsman. A dead-ball would be ok but that could lead to serious issues, what if the batsman hits in for four and then it gets called a dead ball?
I suppose the only other option would be to make it sort of like a "free hit" in T20s, it's still a legal ball but the batsman can't get out to it.
Otherwise a No-ball is the only option.
The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.
From personal experience when playing (supported by every batsman who spoke on the matter - some of whom are now in their 70s but played very good Club cricket when younger) the batsman is not put off at all when this happens. The chances of them hearing it are very small - and there will likely be other louder noises that won't put them off - and the batsman will be so focused on the ball that they wouldn't see it.
That is the view of some hugely experienced players.
I wouldn't be surprised if within a couple of years there will be so many complaints from all levels of the game about thi ludicrous Law that in will be reversed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)