Roads or Minefields?

[LukeParkerno1]

Hopefully the BCCI is monitoring this website and taking down notes for improving the game and at their next AGM all of our concerns get discussed and implemented

There's the optimist!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As long as he's drinking around straight blokes and women he's apparently a really good guy

I'm more shocked SOK didn't try for Boony's beer can record!

 

[Perth bloke]

I'm more shocked SOK didn't try for Boony's beer can record!

It's weird because looking at him he looks like an accountant. But apparently from what I've heard he becomes absolutely vicious after getting past the happy tipsy phase

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It's weird because looking at him he looks like an accountant. But apparently from what I've heard he becomes absolutely vicious after getting past the happy tipsy phase

Have heard that myself as well, but who knows. Probably the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[Topkent]

Are you saying that public beheading is too much of a penalty for a captain to bear for not meeting the 90 over quota? What a shocking thought! I wonder if someone has come up with that before?

In all seriousness, Warne needs to shut up. 25 runs for each over that isn't bowled in a day is waaaaay too much, which was my point. I'd say 5 runs per over would be acceptable, and 10 overs borderline but would fix the problem.

But the problem is that there is no desire within ICC circles to fix this problem. It's essentially bigfooty bants for how meaningful or significant it is.

I didn't realise it was 25 for each over, I thought it was just if you don't get 90 it's 25 runs.
Sure do 5 runs per over. Move the new ball from 80-90 to if you don't make the over rates. They dont have to do suspensions there's many ways to skin the cat.

 

[Gethelred]

I didn't realise it was 25 for each over, I thought it was just if you don't get 90 it's 25 runs.
Sure do 5 runs per over. Move the new ball from 80-90 to if you don't make the over rates. They dont have to do suspensions there's many ways to skin the cat.

I'd be cool with a blanket for different ranges - 25 for each set of 4 overs missed; if you're 4 overs behind your opponent gets 25 runs, if you're 6 it goes up to 50, and so on every increment of 4. But - as I said - the problem is that there's no wherewithall in the ICC to move on this. It's words on a forum in a dusty corner of the internet, and that's it.

Sure, you get fuddyduddies in the media who'll talk about it - usually from people like Trevor Chappell, who isn't on regular rotation on the main broadcast anymore; think, the equivalent of Robert Walls in a footy context, someone who's good for a quote and little else - but apart from that the establishment seems content with the status quo.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'd be cool with a blanket for different ranges - 25 for each set of 4 overs missed; if you're 4 overs behind your opponent gets 25 runs, if you're 6 it goes up to 50, and so on every increment of 4. But - as I said - the problem is that there's no wherewithall in the ICC to move on this. It's words on a forum in a dusty corner of the internet, and that's it.

Sure, you get fuddyduddies in the media who'll talk about it - usually from people like Trevor Chappell, who isn't on regular rotation on the main broadcast anymore; think, the equivalent of Robert Walls in a footy context, someone who's good for a quote and little else - but apart from that the establishment seems content with the status quo.

This is weird...we are agreeing too much!

Perfect idea actually.

 

[Perth bloke]

Have heard that myself as well, but who knows. Probably the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

I'll tell you what's not ambiguous. The fact that he provided every single young man and woman playing professional sport with the perfect template of how to stop your career in its tracks. It's an oldie but a goodie. Do.Not.Sh#t.Where.You.Eat

 

[PhatBoy]

I disagree, I like test cricket but you've got your head In the sand if you can't see it's dying all over the world because of T20 and kids attention spans shortening. I'm not asking for a drastic change, but cricket should never ever want to see a team declaring 3-500 and then the opposition making 400 with 6 century makers between them. All I'm saying is reduce it by a day, encourage wickets that do more more often so that wickets always 'feel' like they could happen. I ******* can't stand watching Australia bat when you know the only way wickets are falling is from false shots.

Hell you could even shorten it to 4 days, create far more extreme penalties for slow over rates and squeeze extra overs into the day.

This myth has been addressed more times than I can count and doesn't need explaining again.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'll tell you what's not ambiguous. The fact that he provided every single young man and woman playing professional sport with the perfect template of how to stop your career in its tracks. It's an oldie but a goodie. Do.Not.Sh#t.Where.You.Eat

Still would pick the schooner deep bloke if he was a good bowler!

 

[Perth bloke]

Still would pick the schooner deep bloke if he was a good bowler!

Just get the sense the Australian set up post sandpapergate has a no di#khead policy

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Just get the sense the Australian set up post sandpapergate has a no di#khead policy

But some of my best balls were after downing a few schooners lol

Lyon was in the side by sandpaper gate

 

[Redline]

I much prefer minefield, I think test Cricket on a road can get fairly boring and doesn't really test the skills of the batsman like it should.

Personally I am okay with a three or four day test.

 

[FRUMPY]

Pretty simple question, what do you prefer to watch?

Do you prefer a game where both sides make 400 odd and it goes into day 5? Multiple hundreds being scored and a RR ~4 an over
Or do you prefer the minefield? Scoring 300 basically wins the game and any loss in concentration can see a collapse, a 75 like Paine scored can be match winning and the games over inside 4 days.

Id far far prefer the minefield, in fact Id like to see all Test matches reduced to 4 days to encourage a little more spice in the pitch, even with the days saved you could play an extra test. But for mine if a team scores 500 its ******* boring and the games generally over, with the minefield it means the games generally always alive because the scores never get away from each other.

I like an even contest. Something for the bowlers in the first session and a half, day 1. Flattens out a little but still not a road the next 2.5 days and then bowlers get the better of the going day 4 and 5.

First innings of 300-400 and then tough to make 200+.

If they were to make pitches tough to bat on (250 a good score and 300+ great score) then I wouldn't mind 4 day tests.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[FRUMPY]

Centuries should be celebrated because only one or two a match should be scored. These days blokes score them for fun.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[FRUMPY]

Yeah but that doesn't happen, majority of tests that go into a 5th day is a team unable to chase down more than 200 to 250 because of the wicket.
I would rather there not be a day where bowling almost becomes irrelevant just so it can get to a 5th day. Keep spice in the wicket and you'll have plenty of epic 4 day games that can be won by either side

But cricket associations want 5 day games and that's why we get roads

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[big_e]

Centuries should be celebrated because only one or two a match should be scored. These days blokes score them for fun.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

Was it ever NOT fun to score a hundred?

 

[FRUMPY]

Was it ever NOT fun to score a hundred?

But they should be hard work, these days even shit blokes score a heap of centuries.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[LukeParkerno1]

But they should be hard work, these days even sh*t blokes score a heap of centuries.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

It's boring when it's 500+ scores as a regularity.

 

[Borisdog]

The problem with penalising sides for slow over rates is you can open it up to manipulation by the batting side.

How many times do we see a batsman not ready to face the ball when the bowler is at the top of his mark?

Or 20 changes of gloves in a session?

It isn’t all the fault of the bowling side, but a very large amount of it could be cured by giving umpires the tools to ensure the game moves on. For instance reporting serial offenders who are very obvious time wasters, with suspensions ultimately, from both sides ie batting and bowling. A pet hate of mine, as an old bowler, is watching the quick stand halfway down the deck as the ball has been deflected to fine leg. Get back to your mark mate! Move it along.

5 days of 90 overs is how it should remain, but it needs to have those bowled in the time scheduled.
If you’re good enough to hang around until the quicks are tired then you’re entitled to cash in. And this slow over rate shit sure does help the quicks.

Surely the goal of curators is to produce 5 day pitches, it doesn’t always happen though through various reasons. The Adelaide pitch looked like it would’ve but poor batting application from both sides combined with probably the best 2 bowling sides in the world made that not eventuate. There is no way on Earth you could’ve called Adelaide a minefield.

For me, I prefer to watch minefield games ( That’s just the old bowler in me ) but the game itself needs an even contest for its longterm survival at Test level.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The problem with penalising sides for slow over rates is you can open it up to manipulation by the batting side.

How may times do we see a batsman not ready to face the ball when the bowler is at the top of his mark?

Or 20 changes of gloves in a session?

It isn’t all the fault of the bowling side, but a very large amount of it could be cured by giving umpires the tools to ensure the game moves on. For instance reporting serial offenders who are very obvious time wasters, with suspensions ultimately, from both sides ie batting and bowling. A pet hate of mine, as an old bowler, is watching the quick stand halfway down the deck as the ball has been deflected to fine leg. Get back to your mark mate! Move it along.

5 days of 90 overs is how it should remain, but it needs to have those bowled in the time scheduled.
If you’re good enough to hang around until the quicks are tired then you’re entitled to cash in. And this slow over rate sh*t sure does help the quicks.

Surely the goal of curators is to produce 5 day pitches, it doesn’t always happen though through various reasons. The Adelaide pitch looked like it would’ve but poor batting application from both sides combined with probably the best 2 bowling sides in the world made that not eventuate. There is no way on Earth you could’ve called Adelaide a minefield.

For me, I prefer to watch minefield games ( That’s just the old bowler in me ) but the game itself needs an even contest for its longterm survival at Test level.

For the curators to prepare a pitch that the game will go into the 5th day means a road will be prepared, declarations will be required and maybe the spinners have a chance o the final day.

The OP gave a us a choice of minefield or batting paradise, I have not seen a minefield in cricket for decades. The first test it was a brilliant pitch. No problems scoring runs if you are good enough, and if you bowl well you can get wickets. A great contest between bat and ball. The vast majority of batsman failed of course which is to be expected because they always bat on roads and have no idea against the ball moving a little. The way India batted in the second innings one would think it was unplayable yet it was doing just enough and really not difficult batting conditions at all.

 

[Partridge]

Umps are already running in fear of players overturning their decisions; their authority is already compromised. Who's going to risk their career by suspending Virat Kohli or Joe Root by enforcing the 90 overs a day?

Won't happen.

Ian Chappell has been saying the same thing for at least thirty years.

Umpires need to be backed by administrators.

 

[Borisdog]

Ian Chappell has been saying the same thing for at least thirty years.

Umpires need to be backed by administrators.

Precisely. It’s the Captain’s job to make sure his side moves it along. I’d suggest that the Captain gets a holiday when there’s been ”whatever” number of reports for time wasting against his players. The players themselves get holidays when they reach whatever predetermined number of demerits.

Have a tribunal system similar to AFL or NRL or whichever professional sporting body you think does it best. But this time wasting shit has gotta go.

 

[Leeda]

Yeah I'm good thanks. No more derailment.

Sporting pitches are fun.

sure about that? Pickles are good in hamburgers even when others say they are toxic..

 

[Leeda]

I'm sorry, but I really do not agree. I'm going to rephrase your post to reflect my opinion:

I spoke to someone on the periphery of the Australian coaching setup prior to the infamous Homeworkgate series, and he was talking about how the preparation for the Australians was about as normal. He went to the coaches and asked, "Anyone doing extra sweeping drills, want any footwork, spin specific batting coaching?"

Answer he got was it's up to individuals. If they want it, they get it, but most of them didn't want it.

The fact that the majority of the Aust first class setup are so average to awful playing spin is a travesty. Some of that is because - due to the synthetic decks of junior cricket - the modus operandi for Australian bats is to belt the spinner for 20 off their first over to knock them off their line, and to continue belting up on them until the captain takes them off. The spinner becomes a two edged sword in that circumstance; a risk, who should only bowl in short spells, unless they're excellent defensively.

You can't play that way on the subcontinent. You either need to meet the ball outside the crease - either on the sweep, with a big stride forward, or on the charge - or you need to play the shorter ball deeeep in the crease to mitigate/read the spin, and Indian spinners don't often drop it short. We've sent blokes whose default against spin is to sit on the back foot, and to wait until they make a mistake, only to get skittled LBW/bowled by balls that don't turn.

Instead of blaming India for pitch tampering - as though we didn't deliberately start every series we played against them in Brisbane, a ground we haven't lost at since the 80's, which takes the fullest advantage of our tall quick bowlers and barely if ever gets any swing - perhaps we could attempt actually taking the way cricket is played over there a little more seriously.

We got it right last series, with how we worked IIRC with Pakistani coaches in a camp prior to the series, which allowed O'Keefe and Lyon to run riot if they played us on a spinning deck. What we need is for our bats to get dramatically better against spin, in very specific ways; we need to get better with clever deflection on the off side of the wicket, and we need to get better at meeting the ball before it bounces without premeditating the charge.

you are such a delightful wordsmith... enjoy your work friend...