Should the Ball Tampering Law be Scrapped ?

[SJS]

Its true that the game needs to undo the imbalance currently in favour of the batsmen, a bit. But changes of this type may by themselves be only partly effective.

A big reason for the bowling standards declining the world over is also the 'habits' picked up in the shorter version of the game. The tighter rules for the wide ball and the focus on checking runs rather than getting the batsmen out has affected how a whole generation of bowlers view their craft.

As the extent of the one day game at all levels has increasd, the standards of bowling have dropped and thats true for all types of bowling.

This problem is a tough one.

 

[deeps]

Although the one day game may make a difference, I believe that the biggest problem is the pitches.

It seems whenever a pitch with some movement is produced, there's complaints about it. It's pathetic. I remember vaguely a pitch recently caused a tonne of controversy, but the actual contest was one of the best for a while.

I like cricket when it's a contest between batsman and bowlers. Not a contest between opposition batsman.

It seems that bowlers are just there to give batsman balls to hit around the park, and the team with the batsman that can do this the most effecitvely, wins.

Classic example is panesar vs giles. Fletcher wans giles because he can bat, but Panesar is so much the better bowler it's not even funny. It's because batting is the be all and end all of the game now. It's more often than not, the batsman that wins you games, and becoming more and more rare that a bowler wins u games.

 

[SJS]

Although the one day game may make a difference, I believe that the biggest problem is the pitches.

It seems whenever a pitch with some movement is produced, there's complaints about it. It's pathetic. I remember vaguely a pitch recently caused a tonne of controversy, but the actual contest was one of the best for a while.

I like cricket when it's a contest between batsman and bowlers. Not a contest between opposition batsman.

It seems that bowlers are just there to give batsman balls to hit around the park, and the team with the batsman that can do this the most effecitvely, wins.

Classic example is panesar vs giles. Fletcher wans giles because he can bat, but Panesar is so much the better bowler it's not even funny. It's because batting is the be all and end all of the game now. It's more often than not, the batsman that wins you games, and becoming more and more rare that a bowler wins u games.

The art of 'swing' (movement in the air) and the art of flighting the ball do not depend at all on the conditions of the pitch. Yet these arts are in danger of joing the extinct species.

And when you lose the swing or the tempting but deceptive loop of a cleverly flighted delivery AND THEN when you are faced by a dead track you chose the line and length which is restrictive rather than pitch up inviting a drive which would be a bigger risk and require greater skills from the batsmen.

Today, 'driving on the rise' is so common and so successful not just because the wickets are dead (thats a requirement anyway) but because their is no danger of last minute sideways movement or a dip in flight finding the bat is not exactly in the right place at the right time.

Swing and flight come in most handy on the truest of wickets. Thats why the great bowlers have been those who have been a handful even on true wickets because they had movement in the air or a great control over flight.

 

[Perry Mason]

Where's the 'Bob Woolmer is an ***' option ?