Let the toss go for a toss , says Gavaskar.

[Deja moo]

Now Gavaskar says there will be a toss after all ....http://www.hindu.com/2004/07/15/stories/2004071510332000.htm

 

[Richard]

It would have been a good idea a few years ago, but increasingly we are seeing pitches doctored not to the advantage of the local team but to the advantage of the television broadcaster. I don't see this trend reversing, so I'd say leave it the way it is.

Don't use the phrase "doctored" - that basically means tampered with in some way.
To "doctor" a pitch implies illicit action.
There is nothing illicit about preparing a pitch to suit yourself - it's called home advantage.
Though it is totally true that most pitches nowadays are being prepared to give reliable TV scheduling, ie 5 days expected, 5 days achieved.
Personally I'd long have scrapped the toss and replaced it with a bowl-out - that replaces luck with skill, though it would mean teams would have to be declared before the decision took place.

 

[Craig]

Don't use the phrase "doctored" - that basically means tampered with in some way.
To "doctor" a pitch implies illicit action.
There is nothing illicit about preparing a pitch to suit yourself - it's called home advantage.
Though it is totally true that most pitches nowadays are being prepared to give reliable TV scheduling, ie 5 days expected, 5 days achieved.
Personally I'd long have scrapped the toss and replaced it with a bowl-out - that replaces luck with skill, though it would mean teams would have to be declared before the decision took place.

More information for your plan.

 

[Deja moo]

, though it would mean teams would have to be declared before the decision took place.

Arent teams already being declared before the toss takes place ? The captains exchange team sheets before the toss is done .

 

[Richard]

I'm not entirely sure when they're declared but they're only made known to the public at the spin of the coin.

 

[Arjun]

It does not matter who wins the toss- the pitch should be a lot less biased.

 

[Richard]

Then why not just play all cricket on the same ground?
The whole point is that different grounds = different conditions, and home teams play to their strengths.

 

[meatspx]

The problem is that visiting teams' selection will be influenced by this idea. And it would be unfair to the home team, and more unfair than them getting the advantage of prepared pitches. But there can be a clear advantage to the team who wins the toss - and this advantage is earned through no skill of their own - just pure luck.

That's why I think there should be a short bowling wicket competition at the start of the match - it will only take 3-5 mintues.

1 bowler from each team gets 6 balls to bowl at a wicket, or a set of wickets. The bowler who hits the wicket/wickets the most earns his team the right to choose whether to bowl or bat first. If the scores between the bowlers are tied then they can go down to a knock-out format each ball (like in soccer).

You could spice it up if you want to; and have 6 bowlers from each team - and impose a time limit on each of them. ie. no concentrating really hard - just go up and bowl the ball like a usual delivery. The umpire can be in place and call no-balls, meaning a waster delivery.

I think this would be good for the fans, efficient, and much more fairer.

 

[Richard]

I couldn't have put it better myself.