• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Rules That Need To Be Modified, Added or Trashed

Should The DRS (Decision Review System) Be A Part Of Cricket?


  • Total voters
    18

tshep

Cricket Spectator
What rules don't have a place in our game and should be trashed or at least modified.

Do you have an awesome rule that would make a good addition to the game of cricket. Any rule that might get narrow minded kids to think about joining cricket :happy:

Give me some (and complete the poll above at the same time if u can)...

Cheers
Tshep
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The ball has to touch/ go over the rope to be four. Save all the replays when blokes dive to stop the ball. Shouldn't matter if the fielder touches the rope but the ball doesn't
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Agree with the boundary thing. Current law is stupid.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The ball has to touch/ go over the rope to be four. Save all the replays when blokes dive to stop the ball. Shouldn't matter if the fielder touches the rope but the ball doesn't
This.

As for DRS I think it's fine the way it is, as long as the umpiring is competent. People were complaining during the Ashes that there were DRS errors, but completely ignore the fact that those decisions would still be wrong without DRS and we would have had exponentially more bad umpiring decisions if we didn't have DRS.

Anything that leads to more correct decisions is a good rule in my book.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
I don't really understand why you can get an LBW if the ball pitches outside off, but not if it pitches outside leg. It's completely illogical to me, and penalizes a leg spinner but not an offspinner.

If the ball pitches outside leg, but hits in line and is going to hit the stumps, why shouldn't it be LBW?
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
I don't really understand why you can get an LBW if the ball pitches outside off, but not if it pitches outside leg. It's completely illogical to me, and penalizes a leg spinner but not an offspinner.

If the ball pitches outside leg, but hits in line and is going to hit the stumps, why shouldn't it be LBW?
because your legs are on the leg side of your body, while the bat is on the other side. It's always harder to get some bat on something going down the leg side than it is the off side - hence less leniency for leg side wides in short format cricket.
 

Maximas

Cricketer Of The Year
Imagine if you had to play a shot at every Shane Warne ball he bowled into the footmarks from round the wicket, he would've had 1000 test wickets.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't really understand why you can get an LBW if the ball pitches outside off, but not if it pitches outside leg. It's completely illogical to me, and penalizes a leg spinner but not an offspinner.

If the ball pitches outside leg, but hits in line and is going to hit the stumps, why shouldn't it be LBW?
No that is a very important rule. It's hard to play balls that pitch outside your legs, especially from spinners. If you pay LBWs that pitch outside leg then playing leg-spin will become exceedingly difficult.

EDIT: ^They both said it first
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
because your legs are on the leg side of your body, while the bat is on the other side. It's always harder to get some bat on something going down the leg side than it is the off side - hence less leniency for leg side wides in short format cricket.
Yeh, I guess so. I guess Murali bowling to a LH is the same as Warne bowling to a RH.
 

Biryani Pillow

U19 Vice-Captain
An amendment to an existing Law I would bring in is that the wicket is deemed 'broken' at the point of contact which causes the bail to leave the stumps.

This would have no effect in Club and most FC cricket but in a televised game it would take out the problem "had the bail left the groove before the batsman made his ground" which is often hard to see as it is between frames.

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.

I would scrap the Law relating to above waist high full tosses where an automatic warning system currently has to be enforced. Keep it as a no ball and revert to the old way - if the umpires believe there was intent the bowler is immediately removed from the attack and can't bowl again.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
An amendment to an existing Law I would bring in is that the wicket is deemed 'broken' at the point of contact which causes the bail to leave the stumps.

This would have no effect in Club and most FC cricket but in a televised game it would take out the problem "had the bail left the groove before the batsman made his ground" which is often hard to see as it is between frames.

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.

I would scrap the Law relating to above waist high full tosses where an automatic warning system currently has to be enforced. Keep it as a no ball and revert to the old way - if the umpires believe there was intent the bowler is immediately removed from the attack and can't bowl again.

I agree with all of these things. Especially the bail being removed thing. I'd much prefer that as soon as the ball hits the stumps is the point in which the batsman must be home to save his wicket.
 

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The ball has to touch/ go over the rope to be four. Save all the replays when blokes dive to stop the ball. Shouldn't matter if the fielder touches the rope but the ball doesn't
Yeah agreed. However, it might seem a bit unfair if the fielder dives and pushes the rope further back before stopping it, by which point the ball has already rolled over where the rope would have been initially.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
  • There should be a ditch, approximately 2 metres deep, between boundary and fence. Ball goes down there and fireworks immediately shoot up.
  • Legalise corking of bats so more dingers are socked.
  • Intentional four ball rule that I've heard about (but not seen).
  • 67th over stretch.
  • Replacing the cricket ball with a golf ball so it would ping off more easily.
  • Players fileding outside the circle are allowed the assistance of Segways.
  • One player from the batting team is allowed to field in order to run interference. They too are allowed a segway but it must be a different colour to the fielding team's segway.
 

The Battlers Prince

International Vice-Captain
  • There should be a ditch, approximately 2 metres deep, between boundary and fence. Ball goes down there and fireworks immediately shoot up.
  • Legalise corking of bats so more dingers are socked.
  • Intentional four ball rule that I've heard about (but not seen).
  • 67th over stretch.
  • Replacing the cricket ball with a golf ball so it would ping off more easily.
  • Players fileding outside the circle are allowed the assistance of Segways.
  • One player from the batting team is allowed to field in order to run interference. They too are allowed a segway but it must be a different colour to the fielding team's segway.
Haha love it. Should Umpires be alcoholics a la Burgey
 

Top