Do you like the new style or old style cricket?

[Starfighter]

The one which pisses me off in in test matches is the 'fence in a fence', having the electronic signboards about 1 1/2-2 metres from the actual fence. Yet for some reason when the AFL's on the electronic boards are secured directly to the actual fence. It creates an illusion of the rope being less generous than it is, and there's no legit reason I can think of.

FYI if you take 5 metres off a 70 metre boundary that'd take about 7% off the length (increased ease of scoring boundaries) and 13% off the area (reduced risk of being caught).

And yes, the two non-swinging Kookaburras must be an influence. No movement at the start of an innings and no reverse at the end.

 

[Shady Slim]

The one which pisses me off in in test matches is the 'fence in a fence', having the electronic signboards about 1 1/2-2 metres from the actual fence. Yet for some reason when the AFL's on the electronic boards are secured directly to the actual fence.

FYI if you take 5 metres off a 70 metre boundary that'd take about 7% off the length (increased ease of scoring boundaries) and 13% off the area (reduced risk of being caught).

And yes, the two non-swinging Kookaburras must be an influence. No movement at the start of an innings and no reverse at the end.

wowee look at mister poindexter over here get a load of this guy

i jest, i jest, it's clownery of the highest order to bring the boundaries in and you're entirely right, what seems even like a small change is really egregious if you work out the numbers behind it. double trouble with the lack of swing from the balls which you point out - it doesn't just cheapen the value of a huge total but it genuinely takes away from the thrill and energy of watching it when you're potting sixes at 55 metres on a ground that isn't called eden park

 

[TheJediBrah]

Agree with you guys totally. Boundaries and sixes have more "*** appeal" than all-run 4s I guess. Though I hazard if they took a poll of people who actually go to Test matches what they'd prefer I bet they would want the boundaries back where they should be.

 

[Starfighter]

wowee look at mister poindexter over here get a load of this guy

i jest, i jest, it's clownery of the highest order to bring the boundaries in and you're entirely right, what seems even like a small change is really egregious if you work out the numbers behind it. double trouble with the lack of swing from the balls which you point out - it doesn't just cheapen the value of a huge total but it genuinely takes away from the thrill and energy of watching it when you're potting sixes at 55 metres on a ground that isn't called eden park

An interesting point is that Charles Davis attributes the increase in the ratio of fours to threes in Australia around 1900 to the installation of cycling tracks at the major grounds in the 1890s, though I'm not sure it explains the how long to it took to decline again. There was then a quantum leap around 2000 coinciding with the introduction of bigger bats and boundary ropes. It hasn't changed much since.

I think it makes a bigger difference than people realise. One other aspect he also mentions in that with the very thick bats (which give more room for error) batsmen don't have to go as hard at the ball to get six, which means they can use more controlled shots (increasing the chance of success) and can access a greater part of the ground.

 

[Shady Slim]

Agree with you guys totally. Boundaries and sixes have more "*** appeal" than all-run 4s I guess. Though I hazard if they took a poll of people who actually go to Test matches what they'd prefer I bet they would want the boundaries back where they should be.

one of the great tragedies of modern cricket is that the boundaries thing has killed the run five, and for this above all else we must act immediately

 

[Starfighter]

Agree with you guys totally. Boundaries and sixes have more "*** appeal" than all-run 4s I guess. Though I hazard if they took a poll of people who actually go to Test matches what they'd prefer I bet they would want the boundaries back where they should be.

The interesting thing is that while high scoring matches are deathly boring on telly they're significantly more interesting at the ground. I was at Manuka when SL were absolutely pasted last year and it was actually quite good to watch. But I don't think it would have been different had the boundary been the fence.

Manuka is a good case in point too. It used to be the largest international ground in Australia but it was redeveloped about five years ago and two extra rows of seats were added on the inside, reducing the boundary maybe three metres. Especially combined with the fence-in-the-fence it no longer feels big. Being a very flat pitch it needs the biggest boundary it can get.

 

[Starfighter]

And in case anyone's asking, I prefer the old style, although not to the extent that I consider Border bowling the last over of the first innings acceptable (this did happen).

 

[NotMcKenzie]

one of the great tragedies of modern cricket is the redevelopment of Adelaide Oval

Fixed. (and in b4 the pro- types object. They're the sorts who'd go to the ground and spend all the time not watching the test but drinking out the back, anyway)

At least, it would certainly be much harder these days without the deep corners

 

[TheJediBrah]

one of the great tragedies of modern cricket is that the boundaries thing has killed the run five, and for this above all else we must act immediately

Used to love the Adelaide Oval test as a kid, so many all-run fives down the ground before they brought the boundary in

And in case anyone's asking, I prefer the old style, although not to the extent that I consider Border bowling the last over of the first innings acceptable (this did happen).

Now we get Aaron Finch bowling the last over in a Big Bash chase

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Or opening the bowling, for that matter.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Personally I'd like more runs to be assigned to a batsman the bigger they hit it. For instance, a six would be clearing the boundary, an eight is middle tier, a ten is top tier and a twelve is out the ground. Just think it would add an extra dynamic to the game - imagine twelve to win off the last ball and the batsman is capable of achieving this!

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Would certainly add an extra incentive for doping

 

[honestbharani]

I think some level of standardization of boundaries always being 70-75 metres might help, maybe we can start off with just LO cricket and then see if it can work for tests too.

 

[Starfighter]

There should be no standardisation aside from 'as large as possible for the ground'.

 

[stephen]

Yeah standardizing is a horrible idea outside t20 cricket.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I think some level of standardization of boundaries always being 70-75 metres

The end of cricket in NZ, no big loss

 

[honestbharani]

There should be no standardisation aside from 'as large as possible for the ground'.

For LO cricket, it will be a good thing.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Why?

 

[Starfighter]

For LO cricket, it will be a good thing.

You may as well ask them to level out the Lord's slope by that logic.

Baseball grounds aren't standardised, absolutely no reason for cricket grounds to be.