England in New Zealand 28 Nov-18 Dec 2024 - 3 Tests

[centurymaker]

Why don't you get it?

Teams are deliberately cheating (in a way) with the use of this tactic.

The end result doesn't matter! If you are bowling only 83 overs in a day so that you can only concede certain number of runs that day and come back fresh the next day, you are deliberately & unfairly trying to pull the result in your favor. Doesn't matter if you still end up losing in 3.5 days. You are employing underhand tactics to hurt the opposition unfairly. Once again end result of the match is irrelevant in this as you are bloody cheating tbh.

 

[Silver Silva]

Because it is used as a tactic to slow the game down. To do damage control when opposition is on top. To break the batters' concentration. To allow certain bowlers to recover and come into the attack sooner again. To delay declarations so that you have fewer overs to face. To delay the game so that you have slightly more favourable conditions to bat or less favourable for the opposition and/or less time to bat before close of play etc. Weather impacted games are likewise subject to same slow over rate tactics to get a more favourable outcome for your side. Therefore slow over rates should absolutely be punished. In-game punishments obviously make more sense.

Yes spot on also someone alluded to this earlier..
In Test cricket you get a new ball after 80 overs,
so let's say on day 1 you bowl 82 overs ..

You've only used that second new ball for 2 overs on day 1, because of the slow overrate you can use that 2nd new ball for longer on day 2 morning session with fresh bowlers so it's another unfair tactical ploy like the other reasons stated. Not only do England intentionally slow the game down they also look for every reason to get the ball changed when they aren't picking up wickets , it worked a treat in the Ashes and the Sri Lankan series, but another form of punishment would be more appropriate yes.

 

[centurymaker]

It's like ball tampering to make the condition of the ball more favourable. Here you are tampering the resource (time and overs) to pull the result in your favor.

 

[GIMH]

It's like ball tampering to make the condition of the ball more favourable. Here you are tampering the resource (time and overs) to pull the result in your favor.

It really isn’t anything like ball tampering, let’s be honest

 

[mackembhoy]

They bowl 96 overs however long it takes. Why not just bowl 90 overs however long it takes? I actually think that would speed them up.



That is all very well, but a reminder that England have been involved in one draw during this WTC cycle, a rain affected one in which only Australia were punished for a slow over rate (and it didn't affect the result anyway).

It is utterly ridiculous to penalise teams for slow over rates for matches which finish in less than 4 days.

Well yes that is definitely a point I agree with and probably a better solution in all of this.

Why we have to have stick to stringent rules about close of play, especially when the weather is absolutely fine is utterly moronic

 

[centurymaker]

It really isn’t anything like ball tampering, let’s be honest

Check the long list of underhand advantages gained by this and you will realise why it is closer to ball tampering than we realise. There is a reason ICC is punishing teams with points (and fines) so that those teams find it much much harder to make the final. If it was no big deal, ICC wouldn't bother when games are finishing inside 3 or 4 days. And the fines hurt the reserves and the test specialists. Usman Khawaja was very vocal about it.

 

[Stefan9]

Even if it is a negative tactic (not convinced it is), should you decide a league table on that? Can a Premier League be decided upon by how long it takes for a throw in? England have now been deducted 22 points in matches that were either won or lost, and hardly any of which made it to Day 5.

Would you rather see 350-8 in 83 overs or 240-2 in 90?

It also penalises teams more who are based in seam friendly conditions. If you want 90 overs in Eng/Aus/NZ then you should demand 100 in Asia.

Teams have gone through to the next round of cup competitions based on who collected the fewest yellow/reds.

Given sides always seem to bowl at the over rate or above when they are chasing victory on day 5 I don't see why they can't manage it for other days of play.

 

[Stefan9]

Well yes that is definitely a point I agree with and probably a better solution in all of this.

Why we have to have stick to stringent rules about close of play, especially when the weather is absolutely fine is utterly moronic

Blame the TV broadcasters. We used to play till overs were done for the day provided light held.
They changed it to only 30 minutes due to broadcasters complaining they can't schedule properly.

 

[Yeoman]

Blame the TV broadcasters. We used to play till overs were done for the day provided light held.
They changed it to only 30 minutes due to broadcasters complaining they can't schedule properly.

I recall a match against the West Indies in 1988 which went on until around 7.30, before floodlights were available.

 

[Bahnz]

I don't care about over rates because it offers an unfair advantage to the team bowling slowly. I care about it because it's ****ing boring watching teams taking a 7th mini drinks break, or spending another couple of minutes debating field changes.

 

[Molehill]

Why don't you get it?

Teams are deliberately cheating (in a way) with the use of this tactic.

The end result doesn't matter! If you are bowling only 83 overs in a day so that you can only concede certain number of runs that day and come back fresh the next day, you are deliberately & unfairly trying to pull the result in your favor. Doesn't matter if you still end up losing in 3.5 days. You are employing underhand tactics to hurt the opposition unfairly. Once again end result of the match is irrelevant in this as you are bloody cheating tbh.

I think you're looking way too deeply into it. I don't think they do it deliberately at all, it's just the speed they go at to get seam dominated overs in during the day.

Funny how all of England's penalties have come in either England or NZ. The expectation to get 90 overs in during the day in different parts of the world is just daft.

Also, if the last NZ wicket partnership had lasted 7 overs instead of 12, there would have been no penalty, but England were still bowling their overs at the same rate. Does that make any sense to you?

I don't care about over rates because it offers an unfair advantage to the team bowling slowly. I care about it because it's ****ing boring watching teams taking a 7th mini drinks break, or spending another couple of minutes debating field changes.

This I absolutely agree with. And also, it is so often the batsmen holding things up too.....a change of gloves every 20 mins? Some spectator walking within the vague line of sight?

 

[Skyliner]

‘“In all honesty, the World Test Championship, it is a bit confusing, it’s one of those where, you know, we don’t really look at it, I don’t look at it,” Stokes told reporters.’

Being docked WTC points for slow over rates is not going to phase Stokes’ England, so theres no real incentive to change.

 

[CartyDurham]

Any early views of the pitch and potential weather forecasts?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Just add 5 penalty runs per over behind at the end of each day. Batting and bowling teams both usually need to hurry up. Also, improve DRS referrals. A million replays shouldn't be needed each time.

 

[SteveNZ]

But why does it need to change? If a match finished inside 4 days then what's the issue? Who decided 90 overs was the Holy Grail for over rates? If England had bowled NZ out in 5 less overs there would've been no fine.

What clearly needs to change is the daft rule. Over rate penalties should only be considered in draws, and then only where the weather hasn't had an impact......basically something which hardly exists anymore.

Because England have appointed themselves the messiahs of saving Test cricket yet they can't get through 90 overs, even when they're bowling spin.

I'm going to the first day of the Hamilton Test and I'll feel ripped off if I don't get 10 overs of the second new ball if the team bats the day. We're trying to ensure the relevancy of our favourite format and part of that is allowing the fans to see as much of the product as possible. It just doesn't sit right to be denied 6-7 overs of the product you paid for.

And teams should care, Australia missed a WTC final because of it. Or actually they should care because their job owes to the fans who follow the product

 

[SteveNZ]

Well yes that is definitely a point I agree with and probably a better solution in all of this.

Why we have to have stick to stringent rules about close of play, especially when the weather is absolutely fine is utterly moronic

TV, I'm guessing? They've dictated schedules since the dawn of time. Maybe the future growth of streaming services will negate this.

 

[SteveNZ]

He also looked in control and thinking the whole time when he took 3 wickets in the final over to win that recent T20 in SL

Yep, absolutely he bowled every inch like a world class spinner there.

It's time they opened their eyes to the fact he's a proper all rounder and allowed him to be. Not only does he have the skills but he also thrives off the involvement.

This continuing to bat him below a guy who averages 13 is beyond stupidity.

 

[LangleyburyCCPlayer]

But why does it need to change? If a match finished inside 4 days then what's the issue? Who decided 90 overs was the Holy Grail for over rates? If England had bowled NZ out in 5 less overs there would've been no fine.

What clearly needs to change is the daft rule. Over rate penalties should only be considered in draws, and then only where the weather hasn't had an impact......basically something which hardly exists anymore.

I think it’s strange that the penalties are applied to the WTC table rather than the game itself, teams are bowling as quickly or as slowly as they are because they want to achieve a positive result there and then, not because of the WTC table. Give a 5/10/however many run penalty within the match, let’s see if teams will continue to bowl slowly, you don’t see football clubs losing points in the league for disciplinary records or for wasting time, you see yellow and red cards within the game, and it’s up to the teams to navigate their way around the match accordingly

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I think the scoreboard at the ground said they were 16 or 14 overs short on Saturday. In the last hour, there was 2-3 minutes of pissing about each over. This is absolutely solvable with a crackdown on this sort of silliness. It’s just another way to give the bowler a bit more rest, like the old rolling fielding substitution methods deployed in the 2000s.

 

[Skyliner]

If the batting side has momentum, there’s every incentive for the fielding side to slow things down. The game does need to be played at a consistent pace over the 5 days to avoid the kind of gamesmanship that cheats spectators and the game itself.