Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Not really sure how I inaccurately reflected that.
-
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.
ICC announce ODI law changes
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
CBF having a debate over this.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
"Quite a few" doesn't actually express who cares though - simply the amount of people. To answer his question (which didn't intend to be answered), you'd have had to give a list of people and/or groups of people.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Good, TBH, 'cos neither can I.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
.... and that's where you are wrong.
Craig
World Traveller
Question, with the new changes regarding the relaxing of fielding restrictions during the Power Plays might make teams reconsider when they might take them or do the stock standard and get them out of the way straight away (which is something I don't like)?
As for the SuperSub rule, I liked it and thought it had potential, it just wasn't used right by the ICC.
As for the SuperSub rule, I liked it and thought it had potential, it just wasn't used right by the ICC.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I don't think it'll have an effect on that either way.Craig said:
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
As long as these things don't infect FC and Test cricket, it matters little to me. However, and perhaps I am in the minority, but I don't really see a need to punish the bowlers more than they already are for no-balls. Some bowlers have way too many no balls but I don't see the problem out of hand or anything. The fact that they have to bowl the delivery again and the batsman gets free runs if he manages to hit it seems a fair compromise.
I agree with loosening the fielding restrictions though.
I agree with loosening the fielding restrictions though.
Lostman
State Captain
drinks are taken in the 32nd over and the ball is going to be changed in the 35th over. I cant wait to see the 1st game where the 4th umpire is going to run out on the field and interrupt the game by changing the ball instead of giving the ball during the drinks break or moving the drinks break upto the 35th over. With the ICC it justs seems like something this must happen. In fact, i would be slightly dissappointed if it didnt happen like this.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Will the extra boundary sizes make any grounds obsolete?
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Eden Park possibly?
sohummisra
U19 Debutant
When the list of changes were doing the media rounds, I interpreted it as the boundary ropes will be moved out on those grounds where it is possible.
sohummisra
U19 Debutant
Looks like the ICC cannot really decide who to give an advantage. They obviously want to make it even more of a batsman's game but I guess they feel a little guilty so they give the fielding team an extra fielder.
Craig
World Traveller
Eden Park is a disgrace of a cricket ground. At least you get a better cricket ground from Jade Stadium or the Cake Tin, then Eden Park.
Magrat Garlick
Rather Mad Witch
Clontarf, Dublin
I've always thought they should go back to the 1992 WC rule where they had a new ball at each end. This would stop them getting dirty and eliminate the need gor the new 35 over ball change rule. Any idea why they got rid of that rule? I don't rmember a lot of early collapses in that WC (although I would say the bowling was better than it is now) and although 1992 had no Warne or Murali Mushtaq Ahmed was a key part of Pakistan winning the competiton so it didn't stop spin either.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I like that rule, but I can see it taking spinners out of the game a bit. They've been pretty much blacklisted from the last 15 overs due to their propensity to be hit for 6 (there are always exceptions though - those who bowl flat and can find the block-hole have been tried with moderate success) so to extend the period conducive to swing bowling beyond that of which is usually the PowerPlay period will probably encourage teams to pick players who bowl medium pace accurately and can bat a bit rather than their spinners (basically, we'd risk creating a world where Dwayne Smith is better than Daniel Vettori).
That said, I'd gladly sacrifice some of the balance between seam and spin bowling in ODI cricket to see a greater contest between bat and ball.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
At least it's better than not feeling guilty at all I suppose.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Tis ridiculous indeed, the shortest boundary there is less than 50m I think.