A six should actually be an eight

[CricAddict]

The game should be played on much larger grounds with no boundaries and all scores by batsmen achieved by running.

This is by far the best suggestion in this thread.

 

[Howe_zat]

Get some of these in too

 

[h_hurricane]

It should be a dead ball imo. Any one who hits a six is a hack.

 

[ataraxia]

Make sixes worth eight but if there's a catch in a crowd you're out.

 

[ataraxia]

Also, one hand, one bounce should be the only method of catching by a fielder in international cricket (safety reasons)

 

[Bijed]

Tbf, whilst I don't agree that sixes only being sixes are what's holding back cricket's popularity, if the rules were being written today they probably would be worth more runs and if a six was a seven or an eight instead I don't think it would make the sport any worse. Don't think it would really make it any better either, but it's not a suggestion that deserves mockery in and of itself.

I'd actually be happy enough to see them play around with things like this in future iterations of The Hundred. The more die-hard purists have already decided that they're not going to like it, so it seems the ideal format to experiment a bit more in

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Should be -1 so comms can call it a minimum.

 

[harsh.ag]

8 if the shot goes over 90 mtrs

 

[Spark]

The game should be played on much larger grounds with no boundaries and all scores by batsmen achieved by running.

isn't the "record" for most runs scored off one ball like thirty-something because it got hit into a patch of long grass and the batsmen just kept running while the fielders literally couldn't find the ball

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Honestly that kind of stuff needs to happen more. What I'm saying is let loose a bunch of venomous animals on the field.

 

[TheJediBrah]

The game should be played on much larger grounds with no boundaries and all scores by batsmen achieved by running.

Who pays for all the land required? Not great for spectators either. But other than all the obvious reasons why it makes no sense, it makes sense IMO.

 

[GIMH]

What I'm saying is let loose a bunch of venomous animals on the field.

Australia have been playing for over a century yo

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Quick singles in Tests should also be worth 8 to make the risk/reward better balanced.

 

[Line and Length]

isn't the "record" for most runs scored off one ball like thirty-something because it got hit into a patch of long grass and the batsmen just kept running while the fielders literally couldn't find the ball

I recall a similar story where the ball was caught in a branch that was overhanging the boudary. The umpire ruled the ball was still in play and the fielding side was throwing items at it to dislodge it and to make the catch. They dropped it.

 

[Jack1]

Who pays for all the land required? Not great for spectators either. But other than all the obvious reasons why it makes no sense, it makes sense IMO.

It was too obvious to reply to regarding first part. You also have to maintain a much bigger area of land too or risk the ball getting “lost” whilst still in play which happened in some super early days of cricket where they didn’t use boundaries. You’d get stupid stuff like all run 10 where they couldn’t find the ball. I can’t remember the exact figures but this is the general idea. I think there was an all run 16 or something in long grass once. This is ignoring the ridiculous story of the all run 286 or whatever it was

 

[Bijed]

I recall a similar story where the ball was caught in a branch that was overhanging the boudary. The umpire ruled the ball was still in play and the fielding side was throwing items at it to dislodge it and to make the catch. They dropped it.

@Prince EWS ?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Honestly that kind of stuff needs to happen more. What I'm saying is let loose a bunch of venomous animals on the field.

David Warner still plays

 

[Bijed]

Quick singles in Tests should also be worth 8 to make the risk/reward better balanced.

I know this is in jest but I'll piggyback it anyway to make a point I intended to make in my other post - only that whilst a 6 being and 8 would probably be fine, I don't think balancing risk/reward perfectly needs to be a priority. Even if you think it's very important, there's too many other factors that would affect it on a match-by-match or ball-by-ball basis to be able to have it always be right.

 

[Line and Length]

On the 'reward for risk' theme - batsmen finding themselves both at one end and then one scampering to safety deserves a bonus run.

 

[The Sean]

It's not even as though such a change is without precedent. What we now consider to be six runs - a hit over the boundary - only used to be worth five, and the batsman had to hit it fully out of the ground to be awarded six.