You have been elected to the International Cricket Council

[Langeveldt]

1) Remove the ICC 10 year plan of drudging long tours, back to back uninspiring international game after game waste of time cricket

 

[Jono]

Would that necessarily be a bad thing?

That was kind of my point. I guess I worded it poorly making it look like it wasn't enjoyable. However I thought it was obvious I was making it out to be a good thing judging by the whole idea of including more bowler friendly conditions.

 

[Swervy]

1) Remove the ICC 10 year plan of drudging long tours, back to back uninspiring international game after game waste of time cricket

surely a proper structure to the test game is better than what it used to be like

 

[Langeveldt]

surely a proper structure to the test game is better than what it used to be like

Im not opposed to a proper cricket structure, in fact, I find it great that there is a proper League for tests and ODI's.. I hate the way that continuous year around cricket is dumbing the game down.. Personally I get tired of too much international cricket..

 

[Swervy]

Im not opposed to a proper cricket structure, in fact, I find it great that there is a proper League for tests and ODI's.. I hate the way that continuous year around cricket is dumbing the game down.. Personally I get tired of too much international cricket..

I agree with you with regards to ODI's....90% of those are just worthless.
I personally dont have a problem with the number of tests being played though

 

[marc71178]

That was kind of my point. I guess I worded it poorly making it look like it wasn't enjoyable. However I thought it was obvious I was making it out to be a good thing judging by the whole idea of including more bowler friendly conditions.

I thought it was your point, but needed to clarify - for me I'd much rather see those sorts of players being successful - shows it's been a true contest.

 

[age_master]

Tests: 2 teir competition, to promote more of the lesser teams into playing each other more often. at the moment i would split it top 8 and the next 8, but if cricket grew this would obviously have to change. for statistical purposes there would be some pretty lop sided games no doubt so maybe only count as FC and LIst A games.


ODI: Increase fielding restrictions, 2 outside the circle for the first 15, 3 for the next 10 than 4 from overs 25 - 50. this would obviously advantage batting teams, taking on the new ball after 30 overs might even it out abit... or playing 12 players with 11 batting and 11 bowling so you can play an extra bowler... dunno

 

[Triple Crown]

* Allow LBW on balls pitched outside leg. It is a disgrace to see batsmen padding up to balls that would have smashed the stumps.

* Allow the 12th man to bat or field, however once this happens one of the main 11 has to become a "fielding-only" 12th man for the rest of the match.

* Reduce ODI to 35 overs and revamp fielding restrictions & new ball at 25 overs.

* Penalise bowling teams at 6 runs per over for slow over rates. Time batsmen as well to make sure they are not slowing things down on purpose by asking for the sightscreen to be moved unecessarily.

* Day-night tests.

* Play in the rain. Football does it, why not cricket? if it means that players have to wear better spikes on their shoes let them change them when it starts to rain. They are paid professionals.

* No bad light rule if the stadium has floodlights. Stupid to see players leaving over bad light with millions of dollars worth of stadium lighting sitting idle.

 

[Triple Crown]

One more:

* Less test cricket! Allow players to compete in the majority of their domestic competitions. 1st class cricket is "rotting on the vine" financially and the public sees the teams as a bunch of fill ins. Imagine a 1st class chanpionship filled with the test stars. That would be great & would actually give the championship some real meaning to the public again. No one seems to really care about Aust state cricket anymore and I fear that as a consequence the national team is becoming overexposed.

 

[Dasa]

Wow this is an absolutely brilliant topic. Although hate to be picky but its 'allowed' not 'aloud' in regards to how you used the word. Anyway...

ODI Idea

New Ball after 30 overs

Well, immediately when I read this topic, my idea for ODI cricket was a new ball after 30 overs. I just read Mister Wright's idea, and though I think a new ball at the 40th over would be great, it wouldn't solve the whole 'boring' aspect of the overs from the 15th-40th which people often complain about (me personally I don't have too much of a problem with it, but it is a problem). By offering the new ball after 30 overs, you will limit the amount of part-time/bits-and-pieces garbage going on in the middle stage, and will possibly allow for the opening bowlers to return much sooner than usual. The new ball can be rejected at the 30th over and taken up later if wished by the captain, just like the test cricket rule after 80 overs. Personally I think this would be great, because you'd be often seeing 2-4 slips at the 30th over. Something I've always thought would be great.

Test Idea

More Seaming Wickets/Dustbowls

Simple really. I just want more assistance for the bowlers. Now not necessarily to the degree of the Mumbai pitch in India for the fourth test or the New Zealand wickets back in 2002/03, but I want some tough hard-yakka pitches which cause the batsman to struggle, and really dig in to score. Now these do pop up now and again, but not often enough.

I personally enjoy test matches which have scorelines such as:

Team A 1st Innings: 345 all out
Team B 1st Innings: 288 all out
Team A 2nd Innings: 215 all out
Team B 2nd Innings: 8/273

Winner: Team B

If we were to see scores like that more often, with awesome last day chases, Test cricket would prosper more IMO. Yeah we'd see the Chanderpaul, Dravid, Hussain and other innings more rather than your Haydens and Gilchrists, but IMO it would be balanced. You'd still have your 400-500 run wickets, as well as your 200-350s.

I agree with all that, but for ODIs, I'd have it so your bowlers can bowl 12 overs maximum, rather than the 10 it is now.

 

[Son Of Coco]

* Allow LBW on balls pitched outside leg. It is a disgrace to see batsmen padding up to balls that would have smashed the stumps.

* Allow the 12th man to bat or field, however once this happens one of the main 11 has to become a "fielding-only" 12th man for the rest of the match.

* Reduce ODI to 35 overs and revamp fielding restrictions & new ball at 25 overs.

* Penalise bowling teams at 6 runs per over for slow over rates. Time batsmen as well to make sure they are not slowing things down on purpose by asking for the sightscreen to be moved unecessarily.

* Day-night tests.

* Play in the rain. Football does it, why not cricket? if it means that players have to wear better spikes on their shoes let them change them when it starts to rain. They are paid professionals.

* No bad light rule if the stadium has floodlights. Stupid to see players leaving over bad light with millions of dollars worth of stadium lighting sitting idle.

Just a few points in reply to some of these:

1. If you allow LBW on balls pitched outside leg then it'll result in some extremely low scores...the reason for the rule being the way it is now is that it's traditionally more difficult to play a ball pitched outside leg (when facing a leg-spinner) than it is otherwise (I read that it's something to do with a blind spot etc, but I'm not sure). Against a spinner like Warne it'd simply be a matter of having bat pad in and away you'd go.

2. If you introduce a new ball at the 25 over mark of a 35 over one-day game aren't you going to see less runs?

3. With day-night tests are you going to swap to a white ball and coloured clothing when the lights come on? I think it would be fairly difficult to see a red ball in artificial light, but I may be wrong.

4. Playing in the rain would be worthless, it's not just about better spikes. No matter how good your spikes are it gets to a point where you slip when you run in, you also dig holes in the wicket where your foot lands making it difficult (and potentially dangerous) to bowl. The ball becomes slippery meaning it's hard to bowl, spinners cannot get purchase on the ball to turn it. It's also very hard to catch as a slippery cricket ball goes straight through the hands. Essentially, there'd be nothing to watch.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Would that necessarily be a bad thing?

Probably not if you don't have a player like Hayden or Gilchrist - i.e: belong to the 'at least our players aren't savage brutes' brigade!

 

[chaminda_00]

Tests: 2 teir competition, to promote more of the lesser teams into playing each other more often. at the moment i would split it top 8 and the next 8, but if cricket grew this would obviously have to change. for statistical purposes there would be some pretty lop sided games no doubt so maybe only count as FC and LIst A games.

My suggestion is pretty simliar to this but it is more to do with a 20Twenty Championship for the lesser teams, as i read somewher it would cost too much for the ICC to have a 2nd Tier Test Competition, as they wont get any money back. But 20Twenty Cricket can be self funded as u would get bigger crowds and it is easier to promote in new cricket countries then Test Cricket.

The format is this.
8 20Twenty Tournments host by each of the 8 countries. 4 teams take part in each tournment, so u can have 2 at the same time.

 

[tassietiger]

ODI Cricket:

No catches. Encourage the batsman to play his shots, and can still get out bowled, runout, etc. No runs can be made off a catch.

Positives: You will see the batsmen go for their sixes without holding back, which is exactly what the crowd likes to see.

Negatives: Obviously it is bad practise for batsmen.

Test Cricket

Eliminate the draw. When the 5 days are up, the result is decided by a Duckworth-Lewis-like system.

Positives:
No defensive teams batting for 2 or 3 days just to bury the opposition. Could also make games more interesting if a game has a couple of days washed out but a team can still win by scoring at a fast enough rate.

Negatives:
Teams could make 500+ and lose to a team that only made 200.

 

[Jono]

ODI Cricket:

No catches. Encourage the batsman to play his shots, and can still get out bowled, runout, etc. No runs can be made off a catch.

Positives: You will see the batsmen go for their sixes without holding back, which is exactly what the crowd likes to see.

Negatives: Obviously it is bad practise for batsmen.

Without being too critical of your suggestion, don't you think bowlers have a hard enough time as it is in ODI cricket with the flat tracks, shorter boundaries and restrictions on short deliveries and wides down leg side? We already have heaps of 300+ scores, if you take away the catching aspect of cricket we'd be seeing scores of 400, possibly 450.

I mean, there'd be no slips so bowling outside off stump on a good line and length would be removed from the game. May as well just have bowling machines.

 

[12th Man]

Test cricket: no change
One Day Cricket: new ball at 35 overs

 

[twctopcat]

3. With day-night tests are you going to swap to a white ball and coloured clothing when the lights come on? I think it would be fairly difficult to see a red ball in artificial light, but I may be wrong.

I think that is the case, the red ball is extremely hard to pick out under lights.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I think that is the case, the red ball is extremely hard to pick out under lights.

i believe they used yellow balls for day night sheffield shield games in the mid 1990s. cant tell you how successful that was (ball colour wise) but i don't think the day night format got much support from the fans, otherwise they'd probably still be doing it.

i would change the obscene number of ODIs played. tri-series or best of 3 only. and if i were asked to get really experimental to change the format of the one day match, i'd want each team to nominate a batsman who cannot go out for the innings, or at least to a certain point (e.g. 30 overs)

 

[age_master]

3. With day-night tests are you going to swap to a white ball and coloured clothing when the lights come on? I think it would be fairly difficult to see a red ball in artificial light, but I may be wrong.

yeah apparently turning on the lights towards the end of play is usually pretty useless in terms of extending, they played with a yellow ball i think out here when they tried a few day night FC games.

 

[roseboy64]

I say we let the 12th man be able to bat and/or bowl if someone gets injured.