cricket changes

[R W S]

The toss.

There can be a significant advantage gained from a lucky toin coss. I'd like to find a way of evening the playing field in this area. I don't know if tossing once is the solution or another type of lot being drawn. In the seemingly even three test series coming up a three zip toss call in your sides favour represents a major advantage. Maybe there should be no tossing. The home side gets first pick in the first match and then it alternates after that. I suppose this could lead to pitch tailoring or other foulplay. Anyway = I'd like to remove lady luck to the pavillion showers.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Haven't they already experimented with having catches referred to the third umpire? I seem to recall that it didn't work and they abandoned the idea.

OF

I really don't know about this, I've been following televised England Matches and some County games for around 20 odd years and I can never remember any formalised instance of 'catches' being referred back to the third umpire. I can recall the odd time when the the umpire wasn't sure if a ball had carried and asked the third umpire to confirm it.

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

I'd be happy with LBWs being open to assistance, but I'm not sure I like the idea of the third umpire being used as a "Court of Appeal" - i.e. I don't want captains to be able to seek review of the field umpires' calls. I would say:

1. Let the field umpires call for help by all means if they feel they need it.

I think this is really where the biggest bone of contention currently lies. The biggest problem of all this is that the standing field umpires simply do not refer LBW decisions back to the 3rd Umpire, even though they currently have the ability to do so. They will continue to make their decisions based on what they've seen - this as we all know does NOT always give the correct decision. How many times have you seen a batsmen look at the umpire in utter shock at the decision he's just made, even if they know full well they got an inside edge on a ball which then hits the pads, they have to walk and accept the decision the umpire has made at being out LBW. This is why I said, I feel field Captains and batsmen should have the right to have a decision referred to the third umpire if they're pretty sure in their mind he's made a mistake.

The right decision is more important in my mind than field Umpires decisions not being questioned.

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

I am not sure I like the "beep" for no balls either. I understand the idea, Scott, but we already have more electronic noise than anyone should have to suffer - mobile phones bleeping, warbling, advertising Nokia and occasionally ringing are the worst offenders - and I'd really like to be able to hear the gentle and unpolluted sound of leather on willow occasionally! "Beeps" in tennis courts are really intrusive to my sensitive ears, and it would be no less so on the cricket pitch.

Well the idea in my mind was more that the umpire would have an ear plug, that the beep would sound in and not have the beep so everyone else could hear. I think this would be really useful for umpires, as it means they do not have to look down at the bowler line to check for foot faults and then look up again as the ball reaches the batsman.

Scott

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by R W S

The toss.

There can be a significant advantage gained from a lucky toin coss. I'd like to find a way of evening the playing field in this area. I don't know if tossing once is the solution or another type of lot being drawn. I'd like to remove lady luck to the pavillion.

Three heart attacks at lords already after seeing your post(The toss)

The game has been tampered with enough,

With respect tossing a coin is tradition,and after all Cricket is a tradition.

I agree there can be significant advantage gained from a lucky coin toss,but it is the same for both sides,and if you changed the rules,one team would still have an advantage over the other,if there was cloud cover the one batting first would be at a disadvantage.Tossing a coin or drawing lots would only give the same results.

[Occasional Fan]

Scott - I think you are probably right about the catches: the third umpire has been called in the past to determine carry, not bat contact, hasn't he? And I think they decided that it was not working all that well. However, I'm going to bow to your knowledge here - I don't have a TV and haven't seen a cricket match on the box in about as long as you've been watching.

I'm surprised to hear that LBWs are already referrable. I really didn't know that. If that's the case, I don't know why they are not referred more often, because there is no doubt that these are the most contentious calls in most matches. I'm still against the "Court of Appeal" approach to the third umpire, but maybe the match referees should be a bit more forthright in their (admittedly post-match) reports on umpiring if there are clear injustices. I really don't want to see captains questioning the field umpires at all, even where decisions are flatly wrong, and neither would I like to see referees over-ruling umpires during matches. But there's no objection from me to having a referee file a report on an umpire which says that the umpire made insufficient use of available technology and should be more aware of it in future. Sanctions may be appropriate against the umpire should he ignore such advice, but his word, IMO, still has to be law during the match.

As to the "beeps", better for the umpires to hear it than the crowd. Good idea in fact, if it is workable - the only objection which I can see would be having to wear an earpiece for six hours at a stretch, but then I guess they would only have to wear it every second over, so it may be fine. There is also a small risk that the beeping might actually wake some umpires up, but that's a chance we would have to take!

[cantplaycantalk]

Originally Posted by R W S

The toss.

There can be a significant advantage gained from a lucky toin coss. I'd like to find a way of evening the playing field in this area. I don't know if tossing once is the solution or another type of lot being drawn. In the seemingly even three test series coming up a three zip toss call in your sides favour represents a major advantage. Maybe there should be no tossing. The home side gets first pick in the first match and then it alternates after that. I suppose this could lead to pitch tailoring or other foulplay. Anyway = I'd like to remove lady luck to the pavillion.

I would like to see the toss awarded automatically to the away side, the home side gets to "influence" the way the pitch is prepared and this would even things up a bit.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by cantplaycantalk

I would like to see the toss awarded automatically to the away side, the home side gets to "influence" the way the pitch is prepared and this would even things up a bit.

It then would cease to be a toss.

What you are saying would just mean the away side could pick wheather the batted 1st or not.

You could turn this on its head and say,let the away team have the pitch prepared the way they want.

I cant see how there is a fairer wat than tossing a coin

[debbotheiron]

Hi,

I realise that I'm a bit late on this, but only online during the day. Although I think that an electronic eye like that used at Tennis tournaments is a reasonable idea, I can't see it being at all practical. What happens with regard to the non-striker backing up and breaking the crease at the same time as the bowler is bowling?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by debbotheiron

Although I think that an electronic eye like that used at Tennis tournaments is a reasonable idea, I can't see it being at all practical. What happens with regard to the non-striker backing up and breaking the crease at the same time as the bowler is bowling?

hi

We dont really need an electronic eye,as is used in tennis,we have tv replays that do that job,and it would not help with LBWs would it?,,.

Cant say I would want the cricket punctuated,with bleeps every other over,we have enough sounds as it is.....

[debbotheiron]

Hi,

I wasn't actually advocating the use of electronic eyes, just pointing out difficulties to the idea which was posted earlier. I too would find it irritating, however, there is no way you could use TV replays for no-balls, how would this be done? would you look at a TV replay only after a possible dismissal or after every single delivery?

There is an argument for using TV replays and "hawkeye" for LBWs, but my personal opinion is that these should be tested further.

[Richard Jenkins]

As so many days are lost to the weather is there a sensible way of ensuring cricket can happen; Obviously you cant enclose the ground as in rugby/tennis (due to humidity i think the ball behaves unusually?) Could the bat be covered in a plastic or the ball waterproofed somehow without affecting the play. Perhaps you'll still have to come off if it rods it down, but play could carry on in a lightish drizzle type situation if it didn't last all day.