I don’t see how it’s that hard to understand. The basics are just that, basic to understand.I love Bill Bryson and I think if an intelligent man like him can't get it, there's little hope for the rest of America. Cricket is something you have to grow up with and have someone to explain all the nuances as they pop up in matches. If you try to write an explanation you think you can do it in a couple of sides of A4 but it'll probably end up measured in Volumes.
I don’t see how it’s that hard to understand. The basics are just that, basic to understand.
LBWs can be more technical, but once you understand the issues in play, they’re not that difficult either.
If you tried it in book form, it'd make War and Peace seem like a book you'd read in your lunch break!I love Bill Bryson and I think if an intelligent man like him can't get it, there's little hope for the rest of America. Cricket is something you have to grow up with and have someone to explain all the nuances as they pop up in matches. If you try to write an explanation you think you can do it in a couple of sides of A4 but it'll probably end up measured in Volumes.
The physics of swing bowling would be its own volume.If you tried it in book form, it'd make War and Peace seem like a book you'd read in your lunch break!
The main issue I have with LBWs is the whole "pitching outside the line" guff. If ball tracking is showing that the ball is going on to hit the stumps, then (in my opinion*), it shouldn't matter where the ball pitches. As for the element of doubt; well, ball tracking negates that, surely.I don’t see how it’s that hard to understand. The basics are just that, basic to understand.
LBWs can be more technical, but once you understand the issues in play, they’re not that difficult either.
And that's before reverse swing!The physics of swing bowling would be its own volume.
It makes sense if you remember why a leg side wide is given in ODIs, because they are hard to hit. So if you could bowl from very wide of the crease and pitch it outside the line of leg stump, fast bowlers would get lots of wickets without the rule.The main issue I have with LBWs is the whole "pitching outside the line" guff. If ball tracking is showing that the ball is going on to hit the stumps, then (in my opinion*), it shouldn't matter where the ball pitches. As for the element of doubt; well, ball tracking negates that, surely.
*other opinions are available. And will no doubt follow!
It also means the batsman would be limited in where they could hit the ball too, so you could have a hugely legside dominant field.It makes sense if you remember why a leg side wide is given in ODIs, because they are hard to hit. So if you could bowl from very wide of the crease and pitch it outside the line of leg stump, fast bowlers would get lots of wickets without the rule.