Lemming

I think you raise a really important issue. It is not often that the 90 overs is completed on time. The new ICC rule has also made it more difficult to carry overs into subsequent days (I can't remember the exact rule). All of this means the fans get to see less cricket. At a time when there are more sports than ever competing for attention, cricket needs to give spectators the best possible experience.

I think the idea of punishments for over rates is a good one. You can give out fines and bans, but I reckon it would be more effective to give immediate penalties in runs. These could be added on to the batting team's total as extras. I'm sure we wouldn't see West Indies bowling 11.5 over per hour if it meant another 50 runs to chase! Although seeing some of their bowling recently, another 50 might seem neither here nor there to them.

What is certain is that the game's authorities need to crack down on the time that is wasted by fielding teams. We want to see cricket being played, not guys standing round doing nothing! I'm glad England won that test in Karachi in 2000-1, because Pakistan's antics were a disgrace. At one point it took 25 minutes to complete an over - I was getting bored listening to it on the radio.

If the batsman could still make out the ball in those conditions, then I'm sure the players can cope with a slight dimming of the light at 5.30 in the afternoon.

The main issue with bad light is safety. When it gets slightly dimmer, bring on the spinners and dibbly-dobbly bowlers. Give us a full day's cricket!

__________________
Just what is going off out there?