• 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.

*Official* Fifth Test (The Oval, London) 27-31 July

OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
RossTaylorsBox said:
A time clock for every ball would be a bad idea because the rate doesn't need to be constant throughout the entire day to get through the minimum number of overs. The complaints are about the total overs bowled in a day, nobody really gets mad that a particular ball or over took too long to bowl, it's cumulative.
Click to expand...
Yeah so they should have a cumulative clock for the entire day and punish teams if they don't get their overs in by scheduled end of day.


Oh.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Molehill said:
I think minus 2 as Aus finished their first innings at the end of the day. Aus effectively got less of a fine (despite their bowling rates being pretty much identical) because England scored faster.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, it's 240 out of 270.

Australia got bailed out by the last second rule change. If England had declared on day 4 with 9 wickets down, it wouldn't have constituted bowling out opposition twice in 160 overs, hence Aus too would have coped a huge penalty.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
OverratedSanity said:
No. If you don't want concussion delays, don't bowl bouncers. If you end up having to bowl them, tough titties.
Click to expand...
When match referee checks for slow over-rate, all delays like above are discounted obviously, including time taken for DRS reviews and time taken by new batsman to arrive etc. 30 minute overtime is there for such things
 
morgieb

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't really care about over-rates much but a lot of people do feel shortchanged about 90 overs not being bowled in 6 and a half hours so I get why the ICC are cracking down on it.

WTC penalties aren't bad in theory....but the problem is that WTC just isn't a significant enough series compared to say the Ashes or the Border-Gavaskar Trophy to really discourage sides from avoiding bad over-rates. Sometimes missing out of the final because of bad over-rates can burn (see 2021), but I just don't think sides will care too much about missing out on a bad over-rate if it gets them a key series win. And then the over-rate rule could make the WTC more of a joke.

I worry also that if Bazball wins and becomes the preferred style of playing Test cricket having to focus on over-rates will lead to it becoming too hard to bowl outside of spinning conditions. I guess the flipside is that you can bowl out a side quicker though.
 
Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
centurymaker said:
Oh yes, it's 240 out of 270.

Australia got bailed out by the last second rule change. If England had declared on day 4 with 9 wickets down, it wouldn't have constituted bowling out opposition twice in 160 overs, hence Aus too would have coped a huge penalty.
Click to expand...
Which again outlines the ridiculous stuff going on here - because if it was the last match of the cycle and it could impact a team qualifying for the Final.....

I wonder if England will complain or if they really don't care? I suspect it's the latter which means the ICC have ****ed up their competition.
 
Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
centurymaker said:
When match referee checks for slow over-rate, all delays like above are discounted obviously, including time taken for DRS reviews and time taken by new batsman to arrive etc. 30 minute overtime is there for such things
Click to expand...
But the one thing it doesn't take into account is the fact that bowling spin overs takes far less time than seam. So therefore, it's not a level playing field.

Or maybe we should be expecting 18 overs an hour in the sub continent now.....
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Molehill said:
Why not just allow an extra half hour in countries which bowl a higher percentage of pace bowlers?
Click to expand...
Should add 'another' 30 mins to get all the overs in. It's a simple solution. That way there won't be an incentive for any team to deliberately waste time because it won't achieve anything.

If we can have 6.5 hrs of playing time, why not just bump it up to 7 hrs. It won't hurt anyone.
 
Last edited:
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Molehill said:
Which again outlines the ridiculous stuff going on here - because if it was the last match of the cycle and it could impact a team qualifying for the Final.....

I wonder if England will complain or if they really don't care? I suspect it's the latter which means the ICC have ****ed up their competition.
Click to expand...
England don't care about WTC tbh. I have barely heard them talk about WTC in the last few yrs.

tbf they are the host of all wtc finals so they are happy to allow 'neutral finals' to keep everyone pleased lol.
 
Last edited:
Victor Ian

Victor Ian

International Coach
This overs **** is a ****ing joke. This has to be one of the most enjoyable and riveting series in a long long time. ICC, go **** yourselves. They are determined to kill test cricket. As a fan of test cricket, I am not after wham bam thankyou mam. That is for fans of the white ball. I LOVE the slowness of test cricket. And I think everyone who makes the claim... I paid for a ticket and demand 90 overs is a ****wit. No, you paid for your ticket so should demand entertainment. Rushing through overs is so ****ing boring. It's like that middle phase of ODI's that everyone uses to go take a **** and file your toenails.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
4 minutes per over is plenty for most pacers and teams are going to have a spinner to make up the difference in the vast majority of cases. In places like Centurion where spinners serve no purpose at all, the penalties wouldn't apply because matches finish in 3-4 days, rarely making it to the 5th.

The part timer argument is nonsensical and ass backwards. It's an entirely self inflicted and avoidable problem ffs. I think seaming wickets should be banned when SL tour anywhere because they're forced to bowl more of their shitty pacers instead of their excellent spinners. The world should bend over backwards to accommodate them. This just leads to worse quality cricket.

download (38).jpeg
 
Last edited:
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
trundler said:
I think seaming wickets should be banned when SL tour anywhere because they're forced to bowl more of their ****ty pacers instead of their excellent spinners. The world should bend over backwards to accommodate them. This just leads to worse quality cricket.
Click to expand...
This is not logical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top