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

[RossTaylorsBox]

Exploiting the labour class to increase production without adequate compensation is not a good thing, so those in favour of further capitalist exploitation of workers need to put into the guillotine post-haste.

 

[Socerer 01]

Exploiting the labour class to increase production without adequate compensation is not a good thing, so those in favour of further capitalist exploitation of workers need to put into the guillotine post-haste.

in this case they’re paid for producing 90 overs of content and are regularly failing to do so in the 1st place

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

In the case of professional athletes it's arguable that the value of the product arises from entertainment as opposed to labour time, nevertheless the compensation remains the same for extra work, the profits of which are inevitably hoovered up by the bourgeoisie.

 

[Socerer 01]

In the case of professional athletes it's arguable that the value of the product arises from entertainment as opposed to labour time, nevertheless the compensation remains the same for extra work, the profits of which are inevitably hoovered up by the bourgeoisie.

tough to argue against such a based take

i tip my hat off to you sir

 

[Son Of Coco]

Probably none given they weren’t bowling at the time you ****ing moron

Real time, maybe not much. Moral time, hours and hours.

 

[honestbharani]

Surely, the thing to do is to average the points over the series and have them lose that? Given its always the percentage of total points available as far as the WTC is concerned?

 

[social]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687061613562773504

 

[Molehill]

Surely, the thing to do is to average the points over the series and have them lose that? Given its always the percentage of total points available as far as the WTC is concerned?

I suggested this too, but as we know, common sense can rarely be applied to anything ICC related. Given that the table is effectively measured by percentage points, that's how penalties should work too.

 

[trundler]

The 'common sense' measures proposed in this thread are horrendous. Flexible over rates dependent on how many pacers you play would be an atrocious system. I feel sick coming up at the thought one of team only bowling 80 overs a day because they played 4 seamers whilst the other team is forced to bowl 90 in the same match because they played a spinner. Awful idea and would be a lot worse in practice than everyone being held to the same standard.

 

[Molehill]

The 'common sense' measures proposed in this thread are horrendous. Flexible over rates dependent on how many pacers you play would be an atrocious system. I feel sick coming up at the thought one of team only bowling 80 overs a day because they played 4 seamers whilst the other team is forced to bowl 90 in the same match because they played a spinner. Awful idea and would be a lot worse in practice than everyone being held to the same standard.

I don't think you'd do it based on the team set up, it would be based on location. I mean if Sri Lanka want to come to England and play 3 spinners, good luck to them, doubt it ends well.

 

[trundler]

I don't think you'd do it based on the team set up, it would be based on location. I mean if Sri Lanka want to come to England and play 3 spinners, good luck to them, doubt it ends well.

Still a terrible idea. Green decks in SL are not uncommon. Plenty of grounds England offer enough to spinners. You want teams to bowl 80 overs on a dry late season Oval wicket and go off just because despite the fact they could easily have bowled more?

 

[Line and Length]

There are far more factors affecting over rates other than spinners v pace.
Right and left handed batting combinations are one factor where bowlers opt for over or around the wicket when sideboard adjustments are required.
Bowlers going off for a shower is a myth when it comes to affecting over rates. This occurs between overs and is less time consuming than a batsman calling for a change of bats when they try multiple bats.
While 90 overs in a day is ideal it may not always be achievable if there are time consuming referrals, injuries or ball changes. These need to be taken into full consideration before sanctions are issued.

 

[Chin Music]

England have been terrible with over rates for a significant amount of time and it goes beyond McCullum/Stokes being in charge. They seem to stand around debating tactics and fields between overs so often. I remember the last India away series when even Jack Leach seemed to take forever to start an over, and this happened on a frequent basis. They were poor at getting their overs in on that tour when they had a lot of spin bowling overs, markedly more than in this series.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Just make a pitch which spins around, then the fielders don't have to move between overs, bing bong so simple

 

[Molehill]

Still a terrible idea. Green decks in SL are not uncommon. Plenty of grounds England offer enough to spinners. You want teams to bowl 80 overs on a dry late season Oval wicket and go off just because despite the fact they could easily have bowled more?

Nope, I'd still want 90 overs. I'd just give them more time to do it. Can't remember the last time we played on a dry late season Oval wicket either.

WI vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Port of Spain, July 20 - 24, 2023

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, WI vs IND, India in West Indies 2023 at Queen's Park Oval, Port of Spain, Trinidad dated July 20 - 24, 2023.

www.espncricinfo.com

Interesting looking at the Windies v India 2nd Test. On Day 1, the W Indies bowled 84 overs of which a significant amount were bowled by Worrican. On Day 2 85 overs were bowled (note the innings change happened at Tea so no overs lost), again lots of spin overs bowled.

Both teams avoided penalties due to the 160 rule (a helpful Indian declaration surely making sure Windies dodge one).

So it seems that you can't even get 90 overs in with a healthy dose of spin, what hope for the seam dominated pitches?

 

[trundler]

Nope, I'd still want 90 overs. I'd just give them more time to do it. Can't remember the last time we played on a dry late season Oval wicket either.

Does nothing to fix slow over rates. Only allows sides to potentially run down the clock in hopes there's bad light. Creates more problems, solves none.

Nope, I'd still want 90 overs. I'd just give them more time to do it. Can't remember the last time we played on a dry late season Oval wicket either.

WI vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Port of Spain, July 20 - 24, 2023

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, WI vs IND, India in West Indies 2023 at Queen's Park Oval, Port of Spain, Trinidad dated July 20 - 24, 2023.

www.espncricinfo.com

Interesting looking at the Windies v India 2nd Test. On Day 1, the W Indies bowled 84 overs of which a significant amount were bowled by Worrican. On Day 2 85 overs were bowled (note the innings change happened at Tea so no overs lost), again lots of spin overs bowled.

Both teams avoided penalties due to the 160 rule (a helpful Indian declaration surely making sure Windies dodge one).

So it seems that you can't even get 90 overs in with a healthy dose of spin, what hope for the seam dominated pitches?

And on Pakistan's tour to NZ in 2021 both sides managed to get 90 overs in without spin being bowled much at all. As it stands, umpires do keep track of all disruptions and allow teams to bowl less than 90 without penalties in exceptional cases. Shannon Gabriel's fat ass huffing and puffing between each ball is not one of those. The fact that West Indies can't get their overs any time is an indictment on them and is a result of them carrying the bloke who takes the longest to bowl an over in the last 10+ years. Farcical.

 

[the big bambino]

WI vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Port of Spain, July 20 - 24, 2023

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, WI vs IND, India in West Indies 2023 at Queen's Park Oval, Port of Spain, Trinidad dated July 20 - 24, 2023.

www.espncricinfo.com

So it seems that you can't even get 90 overs in with a healthy dose of spin, what hope for the seam dominated pitches?

In the era before mandatory overs, sides that played spinners slowed down their over rates because they knew they were conceding an advantage to pace reliant sides like Aus, Eng and the WI. It hasn't been mentioned that non mandated over rates penalise sides that rely on spin. I don't sympathise with pace reliant sides whom may feel disadvantaged now. It is even arguable they are disadvantaged. Most sides pick an imbalance of pace to spin because they realise conditions usually face pace bowlers. But if they do feel hard done by they can only blame the cynicism of captains of the past who slowed the game down cynically to avoid defeat or change the rate of overs bowled depending on the conditions they encountered.

 

[Molehill]

And on Pakistan's tour to NZ in 2021 both sides managed to get 90 overs in without spin being bowled much at all. As it stands, umpires do keep track of all disruptions and allow teams to bowl less than 90 without penalties in exceptional cases. Shannon Gabriel's fat ass huffing and puffing between each ball is not one of those. The fact that West Indies can't get their overs any time is an indictment on them and is a result of them carrying the bloke who takes the longest to bowl an over in the last 10+ years. Farcical.

Not even true, in non rain impacted days I found this:
Day 1: First Test 87 overs (NZ 222-3, not like they were even belting it around).
Day 4: First Test 86 overs
Day 2: Second Test Test saw Pakistan bowl 85 overs.

So comparing that Windies Test with Manchester, both rain effected draws. W Indies no penalty largely because of India's 2nd innings declaration, England and Australia both penalised. The over rates are the same, W Indies arguably slower given how much spin they bowled too.

W Indies are currently ahead of England in the WTC Table off the back of that rain effected draw (England drew their series and won 2 Tests). Does that make any sense to you?

 

[Molehill]

In the era before mandatory overs, sides that played spinners slowed down their over rates because they knew they were conceding an advantage to pace reliant sides like Aus, Eng and the WI. It hasn't been mentioned that non mandated over rates penalise sides that rely on spin. I don't sympathise with pace reliant sides whom may feel disadvantaged now. It is even arguable they are disadvantaged. Most sides pick an imbalance of pace to spin because they realise conditions usually face pace bowlers. But if they do feel hard done by they can only blame the cynicism of captains of the past who slowed the game down cynically to avoid defeat or change the rate of overs bowled depending on the conditions they encountered.

Why are they conceding an advantage?

 

[the big bambino]

Because they bowled more overs so they reasoned they could also waste time by various methods when it suited.