What's your opinion on the 2 potential new "radical" bowling changes being made in ODI's..?
The ICC is "concerned" that ODI's are becoming a dying form of the game, despite the fact that at the moment in South Africa the series against England is being played to near full stadiums. What they are really worried about is that ODI's aren't making enough money, so the "brains" at the ICC are making it even more Gimmicky..... The 2 rule changes the ICC suggest could be implemented: * The bowling side starts with 2 new balls. It gives the batsmen more of an advantage because they will play against a harder ball for longer. This takes out the ball change at the 34th over. It also means there is no chance that reverse swing will occur. * Two bowlers are to be allowed to bowl 12 overs each and two to bowl ten, leaving the fifth bowler an allocation of just six. The intention is to encourage captains and selectors to pick more 'specialists' and marginalise the need for bits-and-pieces cricketers. So what do you think about these changes? Are they going to help breathe some life into ODI's, or is it going to make a confusing game, even more confusing.
Cricket - 18 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
There is no harm in trying out these 'Gimmicks' as you put it. if it works, well and good, they can keep it: otherwise they can always throw it out as they did with the substitution 'gimmickry'.
2 :
Batting friendly games are being made more batting friendly and the main bowlers might get to bowl bit more but that the extent, to which these changes are going to benefit bowlers, as 2 balls will ensure no reverse swing & all the more for batters, to attack the hapless bowlers & make merry.
3 :
Two bowlers are to be allowed to bowl 12 overs each and two to bowl ten, leaving the fifth bowler an allocation of just six. The intention is to encourage captains and selectors to pick more 'specialists' and marginalise the need for bits-and-pieces cricketers. this suggestion i liked the most as this will gave captains to have their peak bowlers to bowl in death overs, imagine brett lee giving nightmares to batsman with his yorkers from 40th -50th over, the death overs.
4 :
* The bowling side starts with 2 new balls. It gives the batsmen more of an advantage because they will play against a harder ball for longer. This takes out the ball change at the 34th over. It also means there is no chance that reverse swing will occur. This is boring. The ball should be replaced in the 30th over rather with a new one. * Two bowlers are to be allowed to bowl 12 overs each and two to bowl ten, leaving the fifth bowler an allocation of just six. The intention is to encourage captains and selectors to pick more 'specialists' and marginalise the need for bits-and-pieces cricketers. I think the supersub rule should rather be reintroduced, without the captain having to name the substitute before the toss. It will give teams like India the benefit of an all-rounder.
5 :
Interesting ! But I dont like this change "* The bowling side starts with 2 new balls. It gives the batsmen more of an advantage because they will play against a harder ball for longer. This takes out the ball change at the 34th over. It also means there is no chance that reverse swing will occur" This will take out all the fun from the match. I like this change "* Two bowlers are to be allowed to bowl 12 overs each and two to bowl ten, leaving the fifth bowler an allocation of just six. The intention is to encourage captains and selectors to pick more 'specialists' and marginalise the need for bits-and-pieces cricketers." This will allow bowlers like Johnson, Zaheer to bowl more overs and also we will get rid of Jadeja type player who likes to be responsible for home team's defeat. Hahaha
6 :
there is no confusion, the confusion is in your mind, the stadias fill on test or ODI cricket if the team is not incompetent like england.
7 :
All these changes are again proving that the game is killing the bowlers
8 :
Starting with 2 new balls is better than having one later in the game Great Shane Bond Bowls 12 only need part timer 2 bowl 6
9 :
This is one of the reasons cricket is not my favourite sport, at least FIFA doesnt propose wholesale changes to the laws of the game as they please. Both rule changes are rubbish to be precise. If these rules are implemented in the future, how will we differentiate and compare ODI stats for bowlers who have different quotas on their overs? Start off with 2 new balls? Seems to be the idea of a ball-less individual.
10 :
What a load of rubbish. Why do they feel they need to continually tinker with ODI cricket? The format works, and is probably the strongest of the three at present. Aaarrrggghhhh......
11 :
The ODI,s are already framed to favour the batsman,by feild restrictions.,free hits,by giving wides when the ball is bowled even slightly outside the leg stump,having shorter boundry lines.Are these rules not enough for batsmen to score quickly and heavily?If not then further weaken the bowling to make the batsamn score more runs.This can be done if is made compulsory for 5 bowlers to bowl 8 overs each and one bowler can bowl 10 overs,over all 6 bowlers should be made compulsory..Hence the batsmen will have a chance to target more weak bowlers and make big totals.I donot agree with the ICC new rules ,which will not help in anyway.On the other hand i agree with Sachin's suggestion that the ODI be divided into 2 innings of 25 overs each.When the match will nearly have the same excitement as a combined 2 seperate matches of 20-20 games.
12 :
I don't like the 'start with two new balls rule'. but I like the ' 2 bowlers bowl 12 overs rule' P.S: check the full article at cricinfo.com: http://www.cricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/438501.html
13 :
1: The idea of needing a "new ball" in ODIs is quite useless anyway. This is just a variation on a gimmick. 2: I like this idea, as it would give bowlers a chance to get into a spell a bit more than is the case at the moment. Just to save the maths becoming complicated I would prefer that four bowlers can bowl up to 11 overs each, rather than 12x2 and 10x2 (which looks like somebody was trying a bit too hard to be clever). What they should of course just do is replace the redundant 50-over format with a 40-over one, and save everybody from the tedium of the modern ODI...
14 :
Wow! The trolls are out in force,look at all those TDs. I suppose anything is worth a try, but as someone else said why keep changing things? However, I would be interested to see if it works,but I still think T20 is the main problem & should be kicked to the kerb. ODI was doing fine till the newer form of cricket came on the scene.
15 :
That day is near when ICC will announce that , Fast bowler is restricted to ball straight (no swing) with speed limit ( maximum ) 60 MPH, spinner restricted to not to turn the ball. 2nd point could favors the good bowler of the particular match.
16 :
ODIs have been a fluid thing right from the get go. bringing in the 30 metre fielding circle and fielding restrictions, then the powerplay, the batting powerplay, the free hit on the following ball of a noball, the noball for a full toss above the waist or bouncer over shoulder, the altered notion of wide (widing anything down legside) none of these rules were in effect when ODI first started and the format has survived the changes. There is no harm in trying the varioations, if they don't work they can always dump it, like they did with the supersub rule of a couple of years ago. Personally I like the 12 over/6 over rule as in the current form if a bowler is difficult to play the batsmen simply see him off and then plunder the other 4 bowlers 40 overs, this way if a bowler gets on top he can get a little reward and gie the batsmen less overs to play with, it also keeps them guessing as in the current laws a bowler bowls 10 overs you know he's finished, with the new rule he might pop back for another 2 overs later on. The new ball rule can go both ways. A new ball comes off the bat faster but is usually also does more in the air so a good bowler can take advantage of that, you might see something like the opening bowlers having 6 overs each with the new ball, the spinners and medium pace restricting bowlers coming on to bowl out the old ball and then the strike bowlers coming back for another 6 overs each with the second new ball. this might make things really interesting.
17 :
I think its trash, ICC is making too many changes, Super sub, Batting and bowling power plays etc. They should leave the game as it is
18 :
1. "The bowling side starts with 2 new balls" Rubbish rule. Not just reverse swing will be difficult but also the spinners will have to bowl with the "new" ball. Normally the spinners are introduced at the time of 17th or 18th over when the ball is a little more scuffed. Now with 2 new balls it will mean they can't find that kind of ball before 35 overs! And that's too late for bringing your spinner into the game. But there's an other prospective that it will make the batting on zippy pitches, like in the New Zealand, a bit more difficult. In those kind of conditions the batsmen have to see through the new ball and be cautious at the start. So 2 new balls will make life more harder for batsmen on particular pitches. I'm not gonna vote in favor of this change. 2. "Two bowlers are to be allowed to bowl 12 overs each and two to bowl ten, leaving the fifth bowler an allocation of just six." So you're telling me that the ICC wants to ensure that teams play with 4 bowlers! That means the young bowlers' opportunities to get into the national team reduce even more. There are cricketers who only get their chance as the 5th bowler when the team has a good attack. This will shut their chances. Discouraging. The good thing is that the teams can have their 2 best bowlers bowl upto 24 overs. Batting teams often plan to play the 2 best bowlers with caution till their overs finish and attack against the others. This rule will make them think about that approach. @ Y factor: The bowlers used to bowl more than 10 overs a match in earlier days also, when you had 60 over ODIs. So comparing or differentiating between stats isn't a big issue. To conclude, I think these changes are not really necessary. If they need to change anything about the format then just make a team play 2 inns of 25 overs, so that the toss doesn't make a big impact. That's the only change I want.
19 :
I think this changes will only help the batsmen. The ODIs will be more interesting from now on.
