*Official* England Tour of West Indies 2019

[harsh.ag]

If the game is getting over in 3 days, it doesn't make sense to me to penalize a slow over rate.

An all pace attack also slows down the over rate but pacers generally have lower SRs than spinners, so wickets come quicker and that means the match gets over quicker. Should be some understanding of that as well.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Cricket- a batsman's game.

 

[Cow]

Joe Root isnt a leader of men.

 

[Andy1993]

Joe Root needs to go back into the ranks and score runs again, short term i'd give Jimmy the captaincy, no one else to give it to

 

[TestMatch]

Are the ICC rules unfair against teams that pick four genuine fast bowlers? It seems you're almost forced to send on your spinners to make up for lost time.

 

[Borges]

Even with only genuine fast bowlers bowling, it is not very hard to bowl the minimum number of overs that is expected.

 

[Pup Clarke]

If not a lot of wickets happen, then I fully understand penalising the captain if he is attempting to slow play. Surely they have to take into account the regularity of wickets?

 

[fredfertang]

Both sides have a role to play in over rates - it's ludicrous to use the blunt instrument of a mathematical formula to punish one man - there needs to be a degree of subjective judgment - if the batters are fannying around when the bowler is ready (as I would if Shannon Garbriel was about to come steaming in at me) then I can't see that Jason Holder has a case to answer

And is the fact that he seems to be the one captain in international cricket who uses his reviews well and therefore effectively gets more of them factored into this?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

If not a lot of wickets happen, then I fully understand penalising the captain if he is attempting to slow play. Surely they have to take into account the regularity of wickets?

They are taken into account anyway. I didn't check the over rate to be honest but you only get a ban for multiple transgressions.

 

[Bijed]

From the ICC playing conditions:

12.9 Minimum Over Rates

The minimum over rate to be achieved in Test Matches shall be 15 overs per hour. The actual over rate shall be calculated at the end of the match by the umpires and shall be the average rate which is achieved by the fielding team across both of the batting team’s innings. In calculating the actual over rate for the match, allowances will be given as follows:

12.9.1 The time lost as a result of treatment given to a player by an authorised medical personnel on the field of play;

12.9.2 The time lost as a result of a player being required to leave the field as a result of a serious injury;

12.9.3 The time taken for all third umpire referrals and consultations and any umpire or player reviews;

12.9.4 The time lost as a result of time wasting by the batting side; and

12.9.5 The time lost due to all other circumstances that are beyond the control of the fielding side.

12.9.6 2 minutes per wicket taken, provided that such wicket results in the subsequent batsmen immediately commencing his innings. For the avoidance of any doubt, no time allowance will be given for the final wicket of an innings or where a wicket falls immediately prior to any interval;

12.9.7 4 minutes per drinks break taken (one per session).

In the event of any time allowances being granted to the fielding team under clause 12.9.4 above (time wasting by batting team), then such time shall be deducted from the allowances granted to such batting team in the determination of its over rate.

If a batting team is bowled out in 3 ½ hours or less (taking into account all of the time allowances set out above) in any particular innings, and the fielding team was unable to maintain the minimum over requirement during that innings, no account will be taken of the actual over rate in that innings when calculating the actual over rate at the end of the match.

The current over rate of the fielding team (+/- overs compared to the minimum rate required), to be advised by the third umpire every 30 minutes as a minimum, shall be displayed on a scoreboard or replay screen.

So it seems like they factor in everything that would affect the over-rate.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Fast bowlers are, in essence, slow bowlers.

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity.

 

[Stefan9]

If the game is getting over in 3 days, it doesn't make sense to me to penalize a slow over rate.

An all pace attack also slows down the over rate but pacers generally have lower SRs than spinners, so wickets come quicker and that means the match gets over quicker. Should be some understanding of that as well.

Disagree . By bowling at a slow over rate you are stealing overs from paying customers from that day. The customer had paid a minimum of 90 overs. Most are not able to attend multiple days so its irrelevant to him/her that the game only lasted 3 days, he paid for 90 overs on day 1.

 

[Beamer]

Let's face it our overrate was shocking. We could easily improve it, Shannon Gabriel takes forever to complete an over, if he was even slightly more efficient we'd be ok.

 

[Top_Cat]

The logic is fine but has any spectator or fan really given a crap if they only saw 87 overs in a day or whatever it was? From my perspective, it's an issue only administrators and TV types care about.

I get he was probably warned and we don't want to return to the days when the WI quicks snapped their way through 70 overs a day in the 80s. But now the 3rd Test will be without the world's most in-form all-rounder. Want a way to ensure there will be fewer paying customers at the ground and viewers on the TV...

 

[OverratedSanity]

Haha yes I've never bought the "low overrates rob the paying public" angle. But clearly banning the most exciting player in the series won't hurt at all.

 

[Burgey]

Yep, over rates is the greatest red herring in cricket.

 

[Burgey]

Disagree . By bowling at a slow over rate you are stealing overs from paying customers from that day. The customer had paid a minimum of 90 overs. Most are not able to attend multiple days so its irrelevant to him/her that the game only lasted 3 days, he paid for 90 overs on day 1.

No one, and I mean no one, buys a ticket to a day's play and says "Gotta get my 90 overs in or there's no value." FMD when they used to bowl 100 overs in a day sides would be 3/190 or 200 at stumps. Do you reckon that's more entertaining than 300 getting scored in a day off 85 overs, or a side getting rolled in a day comprising 82 overs? Of course it isn't.

 

[stephen]

Yep, over rates is the greatest red herring in cricket.

They were talking about over rates on the ABC radio coverage of the Australian test yesterday and were following the party line on how slow over rates are a blight on the game etc... but I've never watched a game and thought "gee I really wish we'd seem another 3 overs of filthy part time spin just to make up the 90 overs".

 

[morgieb]

Yep, over rates is the greatest red herring in cricket.

Exactly. People saying that "oh they were bowling 110 overs back in the 50's" are missing the point in that cricket in the 1950's was a nadir in the game's history. Give me 80 quality overs over 110 boring ones.

I suppose rules are rules but so as long as the over-rate isn't too awful I don't really care either way.

 

[Daemon]

From the ICC playing conditions:



So it seems like they factor in everything that would affect the over-rate.

I've always felt that getting belted should account for something as well, especially in club cricket where we don't have ball boys and spectators to return the ball.