I feel like the only person who likes the new ODI format...

[wellAlbidarned]

I love the power game. However, it should be the batsmen that generate the power, not the bats. As someone mentioned in another thread, I think we need to ensure we play at least the international game with minimum boundary distance of 80 metres to all sides. If some grounds are aren't able to accomodate those distances then they need to be put on hold and until they are fit for purpose. Bats need to be regulated. They should all be made with normal wood, without any artifical alements blended in to increase thier power, and of course, thickness needs to be regulated to ensure the sweet spot is focussed in the middle. I don't know but I personally don't rate Glenn Maxwell at all. I think he will be found out soon. He benefits from these modern bats so much.

I really don't have time for guys who bowl at 80-83MPH. Its nice to see countries like New Zeland focussing on producing bowlers at 90MPH.

so all cricket is to be played exculsively at the mcg, good plan

 

[Flem274*]

Boundary size can be such a non issue too in the right area. Eden park for example, because it hoops and bounces.

five or even six men out would be the only change I would make.

 

[Debris]

Good post.

Allowing bowlers more than 10 overs would just mean teams packing in the extra batsman.

As opposed to packing the side with all-rounders? You end up with players who are moderately good at both rather than exceptional at one. Can't complain though. Australia's continued dominance is based mostly around having a number of competent all-rounders.

 

[cnerd123]

Yeah I had a good chuckle when Maxwell was listed there. Worst example.

I do feel Maxwell benefits with wider bats and thicker edges, as it gives him more margin of error with his shots.

One feels if he was playing with a bat from the 80s he'd find the top and inside edges a lot more.

He definitely isn't about the power game tho. He's a very sweet timer of the ball as well.

 

[Antihippy]

As weird as maxwell is he finds the middle of the bat a shocking number of times. Though I won't deny that some of the top edges he gets definitely has him benefiting from modern bats. He gets out a fair bit from those too to be fair.

I think during his knock against afghanistan it showed that he had control for 90% of his innings. That is just freakish considering the way he played, which included a reverse sweep off shapoor zadran's yorker for 6.

 

[Cric123]

I never really understood why teams don't keep a first slip (positioned slightly wider than a regular first slip) in one dayers for the entire innings, considering the number of edges that go slightly wide of the keeper. It might provide opportunity to take wickets occasionally but even more so the opportunity to save plenty of runs of edges that race away to the boundary.The same could be said for the straight drive. How many times do you see a simple straight drive going for a boundary? I always thought there should be a fielder just behind the bowler's run up (doesn't have to be absolutely in line, 5 yards either way is fine). I can't stand those mere pushes going for fours. It will cut down 80% of those straight fours. Whichever way you look at it we do need to need to get back to five (ideally six) fielders outside the ring. Run scoring has become too easy. Yes you will get more singles because of more space inside the circle but it will reward power hitters who can score boundaries and sixes irrespective of where fielders are. Most importantly, it will give the fielding side greater opportunity to catch batsmen out in the deep. Regarding bats, I have no problem how heavy they are, just need reduction in thickness. Some of the bats look truly awful.Google David Warner's to see an example. It looks more like a club than a bat.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Actually it'd be better if they were heavier. The whole problem with the new bats is that their thicker and the ball travels further, yet the weight of the bat is pretty much the same when you lift it in your wind up. So there's no trade off.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I do feel Maxwell benefits with wider bats and thicker edges, as it gives him more margin of error with his shots.

One feels if he was playing with a bat from the 80s he'd find the top and inside edges a lot more.

He definitely isn't about the power game tho. He's a very sweet timer of the ball as well.

The bats aren't "wider".

 

[Flem274*]

In a world first, I agree with something Ian Chappell wrote. Most of it anyway.

Ian Chappell: Gimmicks don't win you ODIs, wickets do | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I don't agree with his stance of regulations. The regulations, although imperfect, have directly led to wicket taking cricket being profitable.

 

[Cric123]

Wouldn't making 80m minimum for all sides get rid of nearly every cricket ground around the world?

Don't even think the MCG fits this criteria.

The MCG can remove couple rows of seats nearest to the playing area to make the outfield larger. It will reduce capacity somewhat, but it's the best thing to do, or it maybe possible to retain the same capacity by extending the stands vertically. As for other grounds, some of them should look to build new grounds with a playing area at leat 90 meters to all sides (for future proofing) or put in a 5 year plan with a redevelopment plan, to remove several rows of seats closest to the playing area. I have always hated Lords, with its extremely short side boundaries, rectangular shape, mismatched stands. Just tear it down and build a large single stand stadium with a capacity of around 75k, ideally with a retractable roof so the game can be played in the winter as well, and then reduce entry fee so you get bigger crowds. If boundary distances are not looked into, what's going to happen otherwise is the pretty much a six every third or fourth ball in a few years time in the shorter formats of the game. It's paramount bat thickness is reduced as well. In the decades gone by bats were around 15mm thick but now many players use bats around 40-45mm. The ICC simply needs to adopt a rule ensuring bats cannot exceed 20mm in thickness on any part. Cricket bats and players are getting stronger but the grounds are getting smaller. It's a dangerous combination that will shift the game in favour of the bat to such an extent that bowlers will become like a bowling machine, set at 80mph.

But in saying that, this article is sort of contrary. It's hinting that sixes are no longer with modern bats than the older ones but just that players are far more aggressive than they used to be, and a larger sweet spot which is resulting in more sixes and the longer distances is because of those combinations, rather than the bats themselves.

Debate on bat size needs to move on - just like the game of cricket has | Russell Jackson | Sport | The Guardian

The only good thing to come out of this I suppose is that teams now see the best way to counter it is to produce bowlers with express pace. If it means extinction of the medium pacer, it can't be all bad.

 

[Daemon]

15mm thick bats..wut

 

[vic_orthdox]

Players will end up hitting more sixes not because of bigger bats necessarily, but because guys coming through have better techniques when letting their bat flow than when defending.

If Maxwell had to face 30 balls defending, there is going to be days where he'd get out more than when having to slog 30 balls.

 

[marc71178]

The MCG can remove couple rows of seats nearest to the playing area to make the outfield larger. It will reduce capacity somewhat, but it's the best thing to do, or it maybe possible to retain the same capacity by extending the stands vertically. As for other grounds, some of them should look to build new grounds with a playing area at leat 90 meters to all sides (for future proofing) or put in a 5 year plan with a redevelopment plan, to remove several rows of seats closest to the playing area. I have always hated Lords, with its extremely short side boundaries, rectangular shape, mismatched stands. Just tear it down and build a large single stand stadium with a capacity of around 75k, ideally with a retractable roof so the game can be played in the winter as well, and then reduce entry fee so you get bigger crowds.

Dear God, so much fail there.

 

[Top_Cat]

Quite amazing how much times have changed really; the most often cited reason for getting rid of a new ball from each end 20(?) years ago was because it was perceived to give bowlers too much of an advantage.

 

[Daemon]

Nothing to do with the pitches?