• 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.

Lokomotiv's Proposed Changes to Cricket

wellAlbidarned

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Picking the seam isn't allowed because it increases the chance of the ball splitting at the seam. It'd be cool to see but I reckon balls just wouldn't last 80 overs anymore if teams could do whatever the **** they wanted.
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
GingerFurball said:
It's already legal to do so by shining it; this is apparently ok as it's preserving the shine on the ball (yet preserving the seam by picking it is illegal).

As far as I'm concerned, as long as you're not introducing foreign objects to the ball such as razor blades or bottle tops, the fielding side should be able to do what they want to the ball.
Click to expand...
I know what the rule says ya daft jock ****. Needless say, we agree.

wellAlbidarned said:
Picking the seam isn't allowed because it increases the chance of the ball splitting at the seam. It'd be cool to see but I reckon balls just wouldn't last 80 overs anymore if teams could do whatever the **** they wanted.
Click to expand...
Yeah and herein lies the failure of my dastarly plan. Instinctively I'd say that if a fielding side starts playing with the condition of the ball, they only get one which will only be replaceable if it starts falling to bits. So if they balls-up the swing they were getting, too bad. Problem is, the only logical solution is to literally tear the ball to pieces so it has to be replaced with a new one anyway.
 
uvelocity

uvelocity

International Coach
Haha I can see vb coming out with a beer that has a bottle top which squirts out French polish. Limited run boutique beer mind you
 
Lokomotiv

Lokomotiv

U19 Cricketer
BackFootPunch said:
But if cricket balls are soft why would fielders need baseball-style gloves to catch?
Click to expand...
To catch a soft-ball is technically difficult. According to my friend Tennis-ball Cricket is more difficult for fielders.
And in gum-ball baseball, fielders use gloves.

And I have not understood why Bowlers must not bend the arm. Could you tell me the reason?
 
wellAlbidarned

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Why aren't soccer players allowed to pick up the ball? Why can't rugby players throw it forward? It's just one of the defining points of the game.
 
benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Loko (am I allowed to call you Loko?),

What are you thoughts one designated 'multi-ball' over where multiple balls (up to 25) are delivered to the batsman at the one time. He can not be dismissed during this time frame but he has the opportunity to hit as many as he wants. He must complete as many runs as he can before the last ball is retrieved and thrown back to the wicket keeper.
 
Last edited:
Lokomotiv

Lokomotiv

U19 Cricketer
benchmark00 said:
Loko (am I allowed to call you Loko?),

What are you thoughts one designated 'multi-ball' over where multiple balls (up to 25) are delivered to the batsman at the one time. He can not be dismissed during this time frame but he has the opportunity to hit as many as he wants. He must complete as many runs as he can before the last ball is retrieved and thrown back to the wicket keeper?
Click to expand...
Yes, "Loko" is OK.
However, I do not understand what you mean by "multi-ball" over.
 
Hurricane

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
Lokomotiv said:
In other words, Cricket can be played without this law?
Click to expand...
when I was 8 I had the ability to get massive spin when I threw it and I convinced my friends to allow throwing for spin deliveries in back yard cricket.

I think if you allowed people to take a run up and throw it the speeds would be in excess of 100 mph at elite levels and while this might be exciting I think it could get dangerous if a bowler threw a wild pitch.

I am not sure why I am giving a serious answer I guess I had a bit of down time,
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
How about we:

  1. Remove the stumps all together; the umpires can judge if the ball would have hit them
  2. Not allow bowlers to bounce the ball, but let them throw it
  3. Only let batsmen swing through the 'V' from square cover to square midwicket
  4. Tell them that if they miss 3 good balls, they're out
  5. Remove all dismissals other than bowled, caught and run out?

What do you think Loko?
 
watson

watson

Banned
Baseball games go for about 3-4 hours and end up with ridiculous scores like 5-1. In other words, the ball is too hard to hit when 'pitched' and therefore the spectacle becomes fundamentally boring.

By prohibiting the bowler from bending his arm the laws of cricket even up the contest between bat and ball. That way we get to watch batters like Chris Gayle belt 175 runs off 66 deliveries. Not so boring.
 
Satyanash89

Satyanash89

Banned
watson said:
By prohibiting the bowler from bending his arm the laws of cricket even up the contest between bat and ball. That way we get to watch batters like Chris Gayle belt 175 runs off 66 deliveries.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but Gayle's 175 wasn't exactly an even constest between bat and ball, was it? :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top