Potential changes to the laws of cricket

[Slow Love™]

Haha FFS guys, leave BLE alone.

Is it him? I thought it might be a genuinely new one. But a few people (Clapo, I'm looking at you ) really need their troll detector repaired.

 

[Johnners]

Is it him? I thought it might be a genuinely new one. But a few people (Clapo, I'm looking at you ) really need their troll detector repaired.

nah, don't recking it was him though (trying to save face here )

 

[Josh]

Okay, keep the LBW rule as it is, but batsmen should be allowed to leave no more than 3 balls in each over. If they fail to conclusively get bat on ball on at least 3 occasions, then they are subjected to a 1 run penalty per miss, rising to a maximum of 3 per over.

Sounds like something for Twenty20 rather than in all forms of cricket, surely.

 

[Stumped]

the ashes go to the winning nation, in this case australia

 

[Johnners]

I'd like to see a slight change in regards to "over-stepping" no-balls. Whilst the umpires are more often than not spot on the money with their no-ball calls, imo it can also be a hinderance when trying to judge all other aspects of that delivery. The reason being that they have so little time to look at where the bowlers foot lands, then to look up judge where the ball has landed, if they batsmen knicked it/whether they were plumb lbw etc.

If the "overstepping" rule was somehow releived from the umpires standing out in the middle i beleive it could be 1 way of improving the standards of umpiring as it's releving them of what i consider to be a burden.

How to go about changing though... i've not an idea

 

[Slow Love™]

I'd like to see a slight change in regards to "over-stepping" no-balls. Whilst the umpires are more often than not spot on the money with their no-ball calls, imo it can also be a hinderance when trying to judge all other aspects of that delivery. The reason being that they have so little time to look at where the bowlers foot lands, then to look up judge where the ball has landed, if they batsmen knicked it/whether they were plumb lbw etc.

If the "overstepping" rule was somehow releived from the umpires standing out in the middle i beleive it could be 1 way of improving the standards of umpiring as it's releving them of what i consider to be a burden.

How to go about changing though... i've not an idea

Yeah, it's a solid point that often gets mentioned - I think the two resolutions commonly proposed are a) going back to the back foot no-ball call (it does allow for more time) or b) handing over no-ball calls to the third umpire.

 

[Johnners]

The 3rd Umpire ruling would be the most practical imo. If they had a permanent creaseline camera i'm sure it couldn't be to difficult for them to relay a no-ball call to the on field umpires. You'd have to wonder though with such a system would we see an increase in the number of no-balls called

 

[LA ICE-E]

double bouncers (delivery that bounces twice) should be ruled a no-ball

 

[GIMH]

The fact that you are getting hammered by Australia and have had at least 1 horrible innings in every test makes it a quite accurate comment. England need to improve their batting. I think the only guy averaging over 50 is KP.

Look at the context, he's basically implying England have the only batsmen incapable of dominating a game. Our batting has been poor in Australia, but our batsmen certainly dominated large portions of the summer just passed.

 

[James90]

The 3rd Umpire ruling would be the most practical imo. If they had a permanent creaseline camera i'm sure it couldn't be to difficult for them to relay a no-ball call to the on field umpires. You'd have to wonder though with such a system would we see an increase in the number of no-balls called

Na it's easy. The third umpires watch it in real time like the on-field umpires do at the moment. The third umps are connected to the umpires earpiece so they can call it straight away. I think this was trialled in the Champions Trophy a few years ago.

 

[James90]

double bouncers (delivery that bounces twice) should be ruled a no-ball

Definitely, what retards are playing the game at the moment who are going to bounce the ball three times before the popping crease. The only reason I can think of it being included in international cricket is if some uncovered pitches were so poor that the ball just lost all momentum when it hit the pitch. Even that is hard to fathom. If a wide is called for a ball being above a batsman's standing height then why should a double bouncer go unpunished (well it probably will go for six).

 

[Johnners]

A change in laws which guaruntee's that there are 90 overs bowled in a day weather permitting. To often do the bowling teams skimp out of anywhere between 5-10 overs during a days play due to what can only described as a lack of urgency to get on with the game.

I honestly don't beleive there was 90 overs of play in any day this ashes series where the english team was doing the majority of the bowling. Whether this is due to a lack of urgency, or simply the fact that they had at least 1 medium/fast bowler operating 95% of the time, it shouldn't be excusable.

I was under the opinion that captains that let such things happen were subject to 1st a fine, then a 1/2 match ban, but it seems in the last 2/3 years this rule has gone out the window.

Whatever the case, we want 90 overs of cricket in the day, not 83-84

 

[Goughy]

A change in laws which guaruntee's that there are 90 overs bowled in a day weather permitting. To often do the bowling teams skimp out of anywhere between 5-10 overs during a days play due to what can only described as a lack of urgency to get on with the game.

I honestly don't beleive there was 90 overs of play in any day this ashes series where the english team was doing the majority of the bowling. Whether this is due to a lack of urgency, or simply the fact that they had at least 1 medium/fast bowler operating 95% of the time, it shouldn't be excusable.

I was under the opinion that captains that let such things happen were subject to 1st a fine, then a 1/2 match ban, but it seems in the last 2/3 years this rule has gone out the window.

Whatever the case, we want 90 overs of cricket in the day, not 83-84

Ive always been a big Boycott fan and this was one of his big issues. However, I always disagreed with his proposed solution. This was to penalize a slow over rate with run penalties. IE The award of a set number of penalty runs to the score of the batting team for every over the bowling team did not bowl below the target.

I see the logic, but it is far too contrived and takes away from the purity of the game. To me runs should be scored by the batting team rather than awarded to them.

However, overrates are still an issue that need addressing. Though the current situation is no where near as bad as when the great WIs quicks and their captains took the game to pitful levels of gamesmanship.

 

[Johnners]

Yeah, thankfully it isn't as bad as it was in the 70's & 80's, but it's still an issue imo. Add 20/30 runs onto the total Australia had to chase at adelaide, and then the 10 or so overs that may have been wasted earlier in the match could've definetly come into play, and been the difference bewteen a win & a draw.

 

[James90]

Yeah, thankfully it isn't as bad as it was in the 70's & 80's, but it's still an issue imo. Add 20/30 runs onto the total Australia had to chase at adelaide, and then the 10 or so overs that may have been wasted earlier in the match could've definetly come into play, and been the difference bewteen a win & a draw.

What? Another ten overs and they would have won even more comfortably.

 

[superkingdave]

What? Another ten overs and they would have won even more comfortably.

no he means that if they had to chase a few more, they might miss the 10 overs lost earlier in the game

 

[James90]

Poor example IMO. Would rather a game that was drawn when one or two wickets were required.

 

[Johnners]

yeah was a poor example, i admit, but you get my point

 

[James90]

I do and I agree that something needs to be done.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Use the advertising hoardings as the boundarys. I'm fed up with bully-boy big hitters being able to click their wrists and the ball going for six.