Ball tampering, does every team do it?

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Sweat mixed with suncream, like sugar-enhanced saliva, is in theory illegal, but in practice that is completely impossible to police. Thus anyone with a brain will do it and ensure they're not penalised.

Which is really what I'm getting at. The Law can't be considered a joke because it has a loophole. Every law has a loophole, and this one is grounded in a legitimate practice.

 

[Richard]

Not every law has a loophole at all, though yes, indeed many do. I'd be much happier myself with the ridiculous premises of the current law which make getting the ball into condition to swing properly often very difficult indeed being scrapped and replaced with much more relaxed ones. As long as stanley-knives, vaseline etc. aren't used on the ball I couldn't care less.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yes, perhaps it's an exaggeration to say "every law".

Anyway, the problem with allow bowlers and fielders to attack the seam and scratch the ball (with fingernails, toenails and teeth) is that the ball will eventually get into a condition where it needs to be changed. With regard to the seam, this condition is likely to come sooner than later. So it could be seen as a tactical thing to get the ball changed. I mean, we've seen (particularly in ODIs) how a ball can be swapped out for one of the same age, and the new ball does more than the old one.

So I do feel there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. All that said, I do wish bowlers had more support in this batsman's game. I mean, batsmen get to prepare their bats with relatively few restrictions leading into games.

 

[Richard]

I've said it before and yes it's largely a joke, but the best and fairest ruling would be that a bowler gets to choose his own ball, can do whatever he wishes to it provided it remains inside the laws, can change it whenever he wants, and no other player uses it. Just like a batsman can do with his bat.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The purists will say that's just not cricket. But I suppose that's because cricket is fundamentally a batsman's game.

 

[silentstriker]

Bah! No it isn't!

 

[Richard]

Well it's been becoming more so as the years have worn on. Relatively speaking it certainly wasn't a batsman's game in the 1870s.

 

[silentstriker]

Well, good bowling > good batting in terms of winning matches.

 

[Richard]

As I've said before, without good bowling matches aren't won or lost, they're drawn. Without good batting matches can either be won or lost.

 

[silentstriker]

Since the point is to win, Bowlers > Batsmen.

Meaning, if I had to choose a great batting lineup and a weak bowling lineup, or a great bowling lineup and a weak batting line up, I'd go for the latter almost every single time.

 

[social]

Sweat is not an artificial substance.

Name a fieldsman that stands out in the sun for 8 hours without suncsreen and I'll show you an idiot

Reality is that virtually EVERYBODY wears sunscreen and virtually EVERYBODY shines the ball - do the math

 

[Richard]

Since the point is to win, Bowlers > Batsmen.

Meaning, if I had to choose a great batting lineup and a weak bowling lineup, or a great bowling lineup and a weak batting line up, I'd go for the latter almost every single time.

Ind33d, but plenty of ignoramus spectators who don't really appreciate what cricket is just want runs runs and runs.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Bah! No it isn't!

Well bowling equipment is standardised. They have to start with a new ball, and that ball has to be changed after a certain number of overs. Batsmen roll up with (almost) whatever bat they want and get to bat with it until they decide not to.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Ind33d, but plenty of ignoramus spectators who don't really appreciate what cricket is just want runs runs and runs.

Could say the same about those waniting wickets and wickets too

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Name a fieldsman that stands out in the sun for 8 hours without suncsreen and I'll show you an idiot

Reality is that virtually EVERYBODY wears sunscreen and virtually EVERYBODY shines the ball - do the math

You didn't read my next post? I admit that post was ambiguous. But I stated my point clearly in the next one. That it's a legitimate loophole. And that's what most laws can't help but allow.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Since the point is to win, Bowlers > Batsmen.

Neither is more important than the other. They're both equally important in the context of winning the match. Yes, you want to take 20 wickets, but to win it you have to ensure your 20 wickets cost more than the opposition's. This is obvious, surely...

 

[silentstriker]

I would win more matches with four top class bowlers and a weak batting lineup than a great battinglineup and four weak bowlers. Obviously they are both important, but bowling wins you more matches (and you'd lose more too of course with no batting lineup).

 

[Richard]

Could say the same about those waniting wickets and wickets too

I wouldn't though; I'd say that those who appreciate ball dominating bat or at worst rough parity between bat and ball are the "real" cricket fans, the core which the game was designed to appeal to.

Some might take a different view but that's mine.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I wouldn't though; I'd say that those who appreciate ball dominating bat or at worst rough parity between bat and ball are the "real" cricket fans, the core which the game was designed to appeal to.

Some might take a different view but that's mine.

So anyone who doesn't share your viewpoint is an ignoramus?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I would win more matches with four top class bowlers and a weak batting lineup than a great battinglineup and four weak bowlers. Obviously they are both important, but bowling wins you more matches (and you'd lose more too of course with no batting lineup).

Adrian Griffith
Matt Horne
Floyd Reifer
Martin Guptill
Runako Morton
Dave Joseph
Denesh Ramdin (wk)
Shane Warne (c)
Curtly Ambrose
Glenn McGrath
Courtney Walsh

...would probably have a similar record to...

Matthew Hayden
Virender Sehwag
Ricky Ponting (c)
Sachin Tendulkar
Brian Lara
Jacques Kallis
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Ashley Giles
Nixon McLean
Daren Powell
Sajid Mahmood

...after 10 matches IMO. The key is balance of batting and bowling. Neither is more important than the other.