Cricket changes poll

[Richard Jenkins]

Well my thread on cricket changes got you all thinking, so I thought I'd do a poll. The top three choices will be sent to ICC to be considered. You may vote for multiple choices

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

the reason for my thumbs up for mixed teams (so to speak) isnt changing room perversions (well not JUST changing room perversions) but it doubles the chance of england findind a decent leg spinner.

[Captain Applehead]

I not a fan of massive changes to the game. Let's face it - it's an absolutely superb sport. I reckon you could live to be a hundred and you'd still be learning new subtleties, nuances of the game.

I think that technology has a part to play, and the Umpires job could be made easier by a 'cyclops' device to bleep for bowlers overstepping.

Also, if Hawkeye can be proved to be 100% accurate (somethink i'm not totally convinced about yet), then that could be introduced for LBWs. I heard an idea a couple of years ago (by Mr Benaud, i believe) saying that he felt a system whereby, a fielding captain had 3 chances each day, to request a third umpire decision (for LBWs, caught behind). This could work. If the referred decision came back as 'OUT', then the captain still has three left to use that day. If the reply was 'NOT OUT', then the captain has two left etc. This would prevent the game reducing to a farce with every time the ball hitting a pad there being an appeal, and would keep the game moving, with only legitimate appeals allowed.

[Goatman]

I've copied this over from another thread, as I can't be bothered to write it again:-

I reckon Europe should play like WI. With SCO, IRE and NL together, I reckon they'd put together a team at least as good as BAN and maybe as good as KEN and now ZIM as well. Add in a few Danes, Germans and Portuguese and so on, and they would surely be worth considering for test status after a few years. In the unlikely event of the Europe test team becoming so good they are unbeatable, you could simply strip off the top 1 or two constituent nations and make them stand-alone test teams. Make the constituent nations first class teams:- ie. Scotland, ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, Denmark, Croatia and bloody Latvia if they want to compete in Busta Cup, Red Stripe Bowl and Carib Beer Cup lookalike competitions between themselves. The "domestic" competition would drive up stabndards by concentrating talent, it would concentrate money to allow a proffessional class to develop, it would get players used to 3-4 day games, it would raise the status of the game in Europe and it woudl get players used to different conditions. Imagine a test series with one game in Lisbon, one in Amsterdam and one test rained off in the Emerald Isle! It would be like playing the first half of a tour in England and then jetting off to Chennai for the rest! It would also allow the continental game to evolve seperately to the English game, and not turn into a lesser clone. It woudl also allow better facilities to develop, as each nation would be required to maintain only 1 "quality" ground, and have access to a communal European pot for funding for this. As it stands, each country needs to fund several grounds they are hoping to eventually be promoted to first-class status from a very limited funding pot. NL for example has only 3 grass pitches in the whole country! If they could find money to maintain the VRA (national) ground externally, the money they spend keeping this facility good enough to host matches between SA and KEN and so on, as they have in recent times, could be spent elsewhere, which would be a real boon to the smaller clubs. I woudl love to see Europe go down the WI route, and I think it woudl be a great asset to the game.

[SSA.]

I quite like cricket just the way it is, and I am not sure if this qualifies as a change...

I would like the ICC to make a rule that all series between Test playing nations must have a minimum of 3 Test matches and a maximum of 5 ODIs (I guess they need them because it brings in the crowds and revenue)

There are too many meaningless ODIs being played and not enough tests.

[DaveGillespie]

Voted for LBW law for outside leg stump, Introduction of 'beep' for umpires ('foot fault') and Changes in balls. The foot fault idea is a good one, as it would free up umpires to concentrate on the business end. I'd like to see LBWs from pitching outside leg allowed in cases where batsmen are constantly thrusting the pad, not so much for marginal LBW decisions from seamers. And as far as the balls go, I would like to see a ball in use that gives a compromise between the Swing/Seam of the Duke but sllows the spinners to grip it like the Kookaburra. As it stands, using the Kookaburra between overs 15 and 65 in a test is criminal as it makes seam bowling a thankless task, and the Duke perhaps swings and seams for too long, not letting the spinners get a look in. Could probably mean be the biggest improvement possible as far as eradicating high scoring bore draws on featherbeds like Antigua - no bowler should have to suffer a pitch like that.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by SSA.

I quite like cricket just the way it is,

I would like the ICC to make a rule that all series between Test playing nations must have a minimum of 3 Test matches and a maximum of 5 ODIs (I guess they need them because it brings in the crowds and revenue)

There are too many meaningless ODIs being played and not enough tests.

Hi SSA
Interesting post,

You like the cricket the way it is,but with Qualifications.

I am not picking bones,but on one hand you say we need the ODI,for revenue( I agree ),but then you go on to say.there are too many meaningless ODIs Hmmm.

I dont see how we could cram any more test matches in.we are streched to the limits as it is.

I voted for 1 change,the umpire can use a replay,then they can get them LBWs,consistently right.

[Rich Greenfield]

How can you use a replay to get lbw's right? The cameras are too high to accuratly judge hieght

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rich Greenfield

How can you use a replay to get lbw's right? The cameras are too high to accuratly judge hieght

Well they use replays to help umpires judge run outs,and a camera can detect a no ball due to a foot going over the line,cant get much lower than that.

and Hawkeye gives a computer projected image,that is accepted to be almost totaly accurate, more than the umpires have been this winter.TV replays have shown just how wrong some umpires have been.

Ernest

[Rich Greenfield]

Hawkeye is not accepted to be totally accurate. There was a study i found on the net somewhere that said it was 98% accurate.