Rules That Need To Be Modified, Added or Trashed

[marc71178]

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?

If a batsman hits it to the boundary, I fail to see how he's been distracted, which shows how silly a rule change it was IMO.

 

[Furball]

Increase the number of bouncers allowed per over.

The game has become too batsman dominated off late IMO,and some balance needs to restored.Virtually every new rule you come across seems to favor the batsman,which needs to change.

The new 2 balls rule in ODIs for eg, is rubbish. The old rule was fine.

Moans about game being batsman dominated.

Rubbishes a rule that favours bowlers.

 

[Furball]

I agree with this. I think it either needs to go one way or the other. Either no leg byes or leg byes regardless if you were trying to evade or not or whatever.

It bothers me in tight LO chaces when the bowler gets the batsman to swing and miss, the ball ricochets off his pads/arse/body in the complete opposite direction to where he was aiming and far enough away from any fielder to run a single. That's complete rubbish.

 

[fredfertang]

It bothers me in tight LO chaces when the bowler gets the batsman to swing and miss, the ball ricochets off his pads/arse/body in the complete opposite direction to where he was aiming and far enough away from any fielder to run a single. That's complete rubbish.

The idea of the game is to hit the ball with the bat, something I regret to have to admit I never really got the hang of, and byes and leg byes are diffficult to justify, in fact with leg byes impossible - with byes I suppose its a reflection on the skills of bowler and 'keeper, but leg byes certainly ought to go

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah the leg bye rule us ridiculous. Who cares if you meant to hit it or not.... You weren't good enough to hit it and you have no right to be running. It's a stupid rule and needs to gagf.

 

[Riggins]

Increase the number of bouncers allowed per over.

The game has become too batsman dominated off late IMO,and some balance needs to restored.Virtually every new rule you come across seems to favor the batsman,which needs to change.

The new 2 balls rule in ODIs for eg, is rubbish. The old rule was fine.

I agree. Anything over the batsman's head should be a wide. Below the top of the head bowl as many as you want. Good players will put them away anyway.

 

[Lokomotiv]

Yeah the leg bye rule us ridiculous. Who cares if you meant to hit it or not.... You weren't good enough to hit it and you have no right to be running. It's a stupid rule and needs to gagf.

I agree. Leg bye must be abolished. There should be an opinion poll by players, umpires, and core fans.

 

[TheJediBrah]

If a batsman hits it to the boundary, I fail to see how he's been distracted, which shows how silly a rule change it was IMO.

Now that's just a ridiculous argument. It's not going to be the same every time for every batsmen, some batsmen will be more susceptible than others, and sometimes they will notice and get distracted and sometimes they won't.

The exact same argument can be used for front foot no-balls. If a batsman can hit a front-foot no-ball for 4 then clearly it should be a legal delivery and not a no-ball? Stupid argument.

 

[Riggins]

@Burgey - what about catches where the fielder is touching the boundary?

 

[Burgey]

Out I reckon, unless he has a foot over the rope. If the ball has crossed the rope then it's six.

Alternatively, they could keep the rule as it is for catches. The Burgey Imperative would actually more likely be a playing condition at international/ FC level rather than a rule change itself. The instances of catches where a filder is touching the rope is a lot less common than the instance of a sliding stop on the boundary.

 

[wiff]

Moans about game being batsman dominated.

Rubbishes a rule that favours bowlers.

too funny but tbf it doesn't favour spin bowlers all that much

 

[Daemon]

ODIs should be all powerplay except the last 10 overs

 

[Flem274*]

Appeals must be made with some variation of "howzat" not just "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH". If an illegal appeal is made, the decision is automatically not out.

 

[BeeGee]

I also see logic in saying that when the stumps are broken by an act of fielding (hit by the ball or by a hand or hands (or arm of the hand) holding the ball) the ball becomes dead. Although batsmen tend not to run in such a situation if the ball crosses the boundary it has penalised good fielding.

If the batsman at the other end hasn't completed the run when the stumps are broken does the run count?

 

[BeeGee]

Legalise ball tampering.

Seriously? Batting would become impossible. The bowler could be bowling with a flap of leather with a nail through it. At what point do the umpires change the ball? When it has shards of glass sticking out of the seam?

 

[Daemon]

No foreign objects ofc.

 

[Hurricane]

A tampered ball is too hard to bat against.

 

[Burgey]

A tampered ball is too hard to bat against.

I do it most mornings and sometimes of an evening too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No foreign objects ofc.

 

[uvelocity]

No foreign objects ofc.

spot the trade unionist