• 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

Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
trundler said:
They should've tried harder instead of needlessly ****ing about as they did.

There's a reason we have time limits in tests. Needlessly ****ing about should be eliminated rather than legitimised.
Click to expand...
"Needlessly" is doing a lot of work for you here. It didn't seem very needless for those of us with a vested interest.

Anyway, enough of this. I just think it's a bit sad. The ICC have had a fantastic advert for Test Cricket and how do they respond, by all but nullifying the result in the WTC.
 
A

ashley bach

Cricketer Of The Year
trundler said:
Maybe they should learn to bowl their overs on time.
Click to expand...
trundler said:
Bowling your overs in time is very much part of a test match.
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong here, because I do agree coming up miles short of the allotted overs required to bowl is somewhat pathetic.
Having said that, is the game really about rushing through and pushing hard for 6.5 hours just so you make up the allocation?
There's nowhere in the rules that says you need to play a spinner or that you must bowl a donkey bowler just so you can catch up time.
Missing overs is all too common these days, but I'd like to think 90% or more of the time it's not because of milking it.
Even if played in very good spirits, with all the types of delays etc etc, it's just impossible to complete the quota a large % of the time.
No idea what the answer may be but certainly the issue has to be addressed in a big way as it's becoming a pain in the butt.
Now with these WTC points deductions it's become more than just a wee bit farcical. A real pain in the Salmon.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ashley bach said:
There's nowhere in the rules that says you need to play a spinner or that you must bowl a donkey bowler just so you can catch up time.
Click to expand...
How often do teams not have 1 spinner out of 4 or 5 bowlers though? The rules already have an allowance for the one big exception to this. I think it's fair enough that rules cater to what happens 90+% of the time. No team ever plays 2 express bowlers out of 4 as even in a 4 man pace attack there has to be someone to do the donkey work. Or a Hooper or Harper as the 5th bowler. A bowling attack simply doesn't function without someone to do the donkey work in matches that last all the way. I think it's certainly doable and there has to be strict action or it's not going to taken as a serious problem.
 
L

loterry1994

International Debutant
trundler said:
How often do teams not have 1 spinner out of 4 or 5 bowlers though? The rules already have an allowance for the one big exception to this. I think it's fair enough that rules cater to what happens 90+% of the time. No team ever plays 2 express bowlers out of 4 as even in a 4 man pace attack there has to be someone to do the donkey work. Or a Hooper or Harper as the 5th bowler. A bowling attack simply doesn't function without someone to do the donkey work in matches that last all the way. I think it's certainly doable and there has to be strict action or it's not going to taken as a serious problem.
Click to expand...
both Aus and England had spinners bowling like 10-20 overs a day mainly in tests 4 and 5
And they still couldn’t get close to bowling the overs even with the extra 30 minutes . There was so much time wasting in between people can say it’s apart of the game or pressure or whatever. But we certainly don’t need so many talks between bowlers and captains, drinks or bat changes as often , ball checks every 4-5 overs etc. Australia were obviously wasting time and playing for the draw test for example. England couldn’t bowl their overs I think it was day 2 or 3 in test 5 when marnus and uzzy were blocking everything for a session.

People that think there doesn’t need changing I disagree with. Imagine if England played the slower traditional way we probably would have had like 3 draws this series and everyone would be complaining about it that we didn’t get all the overs in . If umpires just let this stuff go on it’s going to be a lot worse in the future
 
Last edited:
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
There’s a happy middle ground here y’know
  • Bowling your overs in a day is possible without needing to resort to rushing through overs with spin
  • Over rate penalties favour conditions that require spinners
  • Harsh penalties are needed if we want to drive certain behaviour, and docking WTC points seems to be an impactful way to do it
  • Getting your overs in is important but not such a core part of cricket that would warrant excessively harsh penalties at the expense of our enjoyment of the game
  • Playing entertaining cricket is not an excuse for slow over rates and we cannot create rules around the assumption that all series will be as exciting as this
Really not sure why there’s such stubborn refusal to cede any of these

tldr - need penalties that sting but less harsh than the current ones
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Daemon said:
  • Harsh penalties are needed if we want to drive certain behaviour, and docking WTC points seems to be an impactful way to do it
Click to expand...
Do we really want to drive certain behaviour if the punishment required to do so hurts the game more than the "crime"?

If it's deliberate time-wasting then sure. But if teams just obliviously go about their day normally without thinking about the over-rate one way or the other and regularly end up short, maybe we need to adjust our expectations instead of putting them on a treadmill or forcing the captain to panic and change his bowling plans.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Prince EWS said:
Do we really want to drive certain behaviour if the punishment required to do so hurts the game more than the "crime"?

If it's deliberate time-wasting then sure. But if teams just obliviously go about their day normally without thinking about the over-rate one way or the other and regularly end up short, maybe we need to adjust our expectations instead of putting them on a treadmill or forcing the captain to panic and change his bowling plans.
Click to expand...
download (38).jpeg
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Prince EWS said:
"It's your fault" doesn't change the fact that it would have to happen sometimes.

I'd definitely rather just suck up the fault than the "solution".
Click to expand...
Teams should correct this by getting their frontline bowlers to bowl on time.
 
mackembhoy

mackembhoy

International Regular
Adders said:
Absolutely ****ing ridiculous. I'm just imagining the packed Oval crowd on day five sitting there pissed off at the over rate bellowing for Stuart Broad to be taken off so we can see Joe Root run through some overs to fill a quota. **** off.

These 2 sides have just put up a series for the ages and their getting spanked for it for essentially ripping off the punters. **** off once again.
Click to expand...
There's no reason why seamers can't bowl 90 in day. Nobody is suggesting that.

Unlikely as it is but we might have won at OT had 90 been bowled in days 1 and 2.

We also would have got more overs in day 3 if we did bowl at 11.3 over rate until we got forces to bring in the spinners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top