View Full Version : Supersubbing - the death of the allrounder?
TigerFan
8 Jul 2005, 16:42
just think - if you can substitute a player, you could play 7 special batsmen (one being a keeper/batsman) and 5 specialist bowlers.
evolution takes time, but one-day cricket may come full circle and become much like its test brother.
for example, a future Australian lineup may look like this
Hayden
Gilchrist
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke
Katich
Hussey
Hogg
Lee
Tait
Kasprowicz
McGrath
(yes, it has 12 men)
with McGrath not batting, and Martyn or Katich not fielding.
I'd also be very interested to see the use of the 'powerplays' if the batting team was 0/60 after 10 or 0/100 after 15.
I gotta hand it to the ICC, in between the new rules and Australia's fragility, I'm interested in one day cricket again.
ECHUCABOY
8 Jul 2005, 16:51
wont last, if it does ill post a picture of me on here nude..........stay tuned!
funkyfreo
8 Jul 2005, 16:53
But you still have all-rounder Hoggy in there?
I disagree anyway - 8 batters (inc keeper and an all rounder) and 4 specialist bowlers, with a leaning still towards 1 who can bat handily (a la hoggy). BUt more variation in team make up depending on the pitch
TigerFan
8 Jul 2005, 16:57
But you still have all-rounder Hoggy in there?
I disagree anyway - 8 batters (inc keeper and an all rounder) and 4 specialist bowlers, with a leaning still towards 1 who can bat handily (a la hoggy). BUt more variation in team make up depending on the pitch
I consider Hogg to be a spinner who can bat.
and I also disagree with your 4 bowlers routine - remember, the opposition may also be playing 7 specialist batsmen, and I wouldn't want to be left needing 10 overs out of part timers to get me there.
Won’t work at all that way because you have to pick your sub before the toss.
There will be more all-rounders not less.
funkyfreo
8 Jul 2005, 17:44
I consider Hogg to be a spinner who can bat.
and I also disagree with your 4 bowlers routine - remember, the opposition may also be playing 7 specialist batsmen, and I wouldn't want to be left needing 10 overs out of part timers to get me there.
Not a "part-timer" - an all-rounder.
It seems to me that with this rule, the toss becomes vital. Since you have to name your 11 for the first innings before the toss (and therefore before you know whether you are batting or bowling first), it is only the team that wins the toss that gets to take advantage of the 12th man subbing in.
If both teams have a bowler as the 12th, whoever wins the toss is always going to bat first so they can bring in the extra bowler in the second innings. The other team can only use their extra bowler by sacrificing a batsman.
Conversely, if they both have a batsman as 12th, the winner of the toss will bowl first.
And if one team has a batsman and the other a bowler, there's no need for the toss at all, as both teams will want the same result. Will we see teams collude on their team selection to ensure that both get to use their substitute?
To me, the only way this rule can work is to name your twelfth man after the toss.