Cricket Thread

waspish said:
There never ever will be a reserve day and the Aussies in Australia it very rare a test match is rained off and why it feels so relentless over there especially when you lose the first 2 test..
Click to expand...
There used to be a sixth day in test match cricket as recently as the 1970’s. Also, there was a one day break, usually on a Sunday during a test which generally started on a Thursday, finishing if necessary on a Tuesday. A provision for an extra day is surely the way to go but ffs, they have to stop these back to back tests, it’s not good for the game.
 
waspish said:
It’s crammed in because ecb have cornered of August for a game that no other country plays and will be kicked into touch after the contract has finished 2027!
Click to expand...
Yes, and the T20 was also crammed into the calendar with the final inbetween the test series, first time it’s been played in July, taken away the absolute joy of that competition. There’s a lot of Football fans who follow cricket, play the T20 finals day during the September International break, this year the 9th, it would get maximum exposure.
 
hammocity said:
There used to be a sixth day in test match cricket as recently as the 1970’s. Also, there was a one day break, usually on a Sunday during a test which generally started on a Thursday, finishing if necessary on a Tuesday. A provision for an extra day is surely the way to go but ffs, they have to stop these back to back tests, it’s not good for the game.
Click to expand...

The rest day going always seemed strange to me - I remember those, but not a 6th day. I don't recall any home tests starting on a day other than the the Thursday with the Sunday off.

As you say, it's the crammed schedule that makes it impossible now.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
The rest day going always seemed strange to me - I remember those, but not a 6th day. I don't recall any home tests starting on a day other than the the Thursday with the Sunday off.

As you say, it's the crammed schedule that makes it impossible now.
Click to expand...
I kind of remembered the provision of a sixth day going back to the 60’d but I googled it and there were a couple of 6 day tests in the 70’s, not involving England. Whilst looking that up I saw previously there were “timeless tests”, everyday’s a school day!
 
hammocity said:
I kind of remembered the provision of a sixth day going back to the 60’d but I googled it and there were a couple of 6 day tests in the 70’s, not involving England. Whilst looking that up I saw previously there were “timeless tests”, everyday’s a school day!
Click to expand...

Fair enough - the timeless tests are long distant. At least one had to be ended because the boat home was due to leave!
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Fair enough - the timeless tests are long distant. At least one had to be ended because the boat home was due to leave!
Click to expand...
That was England in South Africa, 1920s or 30s. They were only 40 odd runs away from victory at something like 630 for 5 but in those days winning wasn't everything I suppose. It was day 11 or 13 so might have taken them 2 sessions to get it anyway!

EDIT: https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...rica-vs-england-5th-test-62657/full-scorecard
 
hammocity said:
There used to be a sixth day in test match cricket as recently as the 1970’s. Also, there was a one day break, usually on a Sunday during a test which generally started on a Thursday, finishing if necessary on a Tuesday. A provision for an extra day is surely the way to go but ffs, they have to stop these back to back tests, it’s not good for the game.
Click to expand...

Yeah remember the Sunday day of rest but can’t remember the 6th day one
 
It's a 'test' of the team's abilities against the opposition and the conditions. For me there has to be the chance of a draw because we all remember great survivals - some of the greatest innings were when a player was being 'tested', can the batter survive, can the fielding team work out how to get him out when he's not playing shots. If we start bringing in methods to force results we're taking all that out of the game and essentially creating a two innings ODI. Yes a team can sometimes benefit in one match but that's why there needs to be 5 matches in a series to try and balance that out. Let's leave the forced results game to the limited overs formats.

The only change I would make is to handle the slow over rates we're seeing and timewasting from players. Maybe award penalty runs each session for each over short based on their run rate in that session.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
It's a 'test' of the team's abilities against the opposition and the conditions. For me there has to be the chance of a draw because we all remember great survivals - some of the greatest innings were when a player was being 'tested', can the batter survive, can the fielding team work out how to get him out when he's not playing shots. If we start bringing in methods to force results we're taking all that out of the game and essentially creating a two innings ODI. Yes a team can sometimes benefit in one match but that's why there needs to be 5 matches in a series to try and balance that out. Let's leave the forced results game to the limited overs formats.

The only change I would make is to handle the slow over rates we're seeing and timewasting from players. Maybe award penalty runs each session for each over short based on their run rate in that session.
Click to expand...

Total Agree in over rate they could start 30 mins earlier end at 7pm! Or like you said a penalty run awards! Make it every hour if they haven’t bowled 15 overs opposition get 20 runs so the first hour of play they short by 2 overs thats 40 runs so the batting team could be at least 70/80 runs after 1 hours play! Also batters can only ask for gloves drinks when the drinks brake is! If there is an injury you readjust the overs in that hour
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
It's a 'test' of the team's abilities against the opposition and the conditions. For me there has to be the chance of a draw because we all remember great survivals - some of the greatest innings were when a player was being 'tested', can the batter survive, can the fielding team work out how to get him out when he's not playing shots. If we start bringing in methods to force results we're taking all that out of the game and essentially creating a two innings ODI. Yes a team can sometimes benefit in one match but that's why there needs to be 5 matches in a series to try and balance that out. Let's leave the forced results game to the limited overs formats.

The only change I would make is to handle the slow over rates we're seeing and timewasting from players. Maybe award penalty runs each session for each over short based on their run rate in that session.
Click to expand...

I agree - an end to the heroic survival would be bad for the game. I'm thinking of that match at Cardiff late in the evening sun - Anderson and Panesar.
The England captain (Strauss, Wisden tells me) tried wasting time by sending some gloves out and the England batsmen told the carrier to clear off, they were fine as they were.
 
There may be a case to make for one reserve day, but personally i think it should be for exceptional circumstances. A draw can be a wonderful thing, but losing the majority of two whole days is pretty tough.

That being said, i think there are 2 things that need looking at urgently, which may even negate any need for a reserve day in the first place;
- the over rate. It's getting very poor/slow
- start times, meal times, the presence of breaks at all, finish times.

why aren't we starting at 10am? why are we having lunch breaks at all if play doesnt start until after midday? and so on.
 
waspish said:
Total Agree in over rate they could start 30 mins earlier end at 7pm! Or like you said a penalty run awards! Make it every hour if they haven’t bowled 15 overs opposition get 20 runs so the first hour of play they short by 2 overs thats 40 runs so the batting team could be at least 70/80 runs after 1 hours play! Also batters can only ask for gloves drinks when the drinks brake is! If there is an injury you readjust the overs in that hour
Click to expand...
The modern game is quite high intensity now and I'm not sure we can ask players to play for so long over potentially 5 days. Teams are also not playing as many spinners because there aren't enough of them of high enough quality. That's because the players are fitter and the bats are heavier and they can tonk too many balls out of reach of the boundary fielders if the conditions aren't quite right for the spinners. So with fewer spinners we get lower over rates, it's a quandary and I don't know the answer. I suppose if previously the authorities were happy with 15 overs per hour and technology has caused this to become difficult then we should be lengthening the game proportionally or teams have to accept they're going to concede more runs.

One thing that could help is substitutions for tactics and injuries. Teams may risk more spinners and slow bowlers OR keep them in reserve for when the wicket changes. Probably a bit too radical maybe.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
The modern game is quite high intensity now and I'm not sure we can ask players to play for so long over potentially 5 days. Teams are also not playing as many spinners because there aren't enough of them of high enough quality. That's because the players are fitter and the bats are heavier and they can tonk too many balls out of reach of the boundary fielders if the conditions aren't quite right for the spinners. So with fewer spinners we get lower over rates, it's a quandary and I don't know the answer. I suppose if previously the authorities were happy with 15 overs per hour and technology has caused this to become difficult then we should be lengthening the game proportionally or teams have to accept they're going to concede more runs.

One thing that could help is substitutions for tactics and injuries. Teams may risk more spinners and slow bowlers OR keep them in reserve for when the wicket changes. Probably a bit too radical maybe.
Click to expand...

I don't know why the over rate is now allowed to drop so far. Allowances are one thing, but there seems to be no will to do anything about it. There will always be some delays with reviews, head hits, etc, but that should be fairly obvious rather than reviewed after the match and without much public notice.

Subs I have some problems with as they have been abused by quite a lot of sides, hence the limitations now. Flintoff used to bowl 5 overs and then go off for a 20 minute massage - an absolutely deliberate abuse of the rules.

I do agree that the players won't be able to keep up longer days - just make it 90 overs again, by 6.30 in England.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
I don't know why the over rate is now allowed to drop so far. Allowances are one thing, but there seems to be no will to do anything about it. There will always be some delays with reviews, head hits, etc, but that should be fairly obvious rather than reviewed after the match and without much public notice.

Subs I have some problems with as they have been abused by quite a lot of sides, hence the limitations now. Flintoff used to bowl 5 overs and then go off for a 20 minute massage - an absolutely deliberate abuse of the rules.

I do agree that the players won't be able to keep up longer days - just make it 90 overs again, by 6.30 in England.
Click to expand...

Allocate the batting team 36 runs for every over under the allocated rate, they would soon get their arses into gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top