Boycott on Third Man - World A-Team Cricket Forum

Rachael · #1 (**permalink**) 26-05-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

[...]my impression is that in the modern era, teams very rarely have a third man. I think that is a mistake, because if you watch a Test match, there are more runs that go off the edge down to third man than there ever are through the covers. What I would do, and so would a lot of the older players, is have a third man to stop the boundaries. It goes off the thick edge between slip and gully and is nearly always a four. It's not a one or a two, but a four. And it is a moral victory for the bowler by getting an edge from the batsman, yet the batsman gets four runs for it. I think that is ridiculous. I would take one more man out of the covers, and instead of having three there, I would have two and put the third one at third man. I would, of course, leave a gap in the covers because I would want the batsman to try and off-drive the bowler, because if he gets it slightly wrong - doesn't get the line right or the ball moves away or bounces a little bit more - you have the slips, the gully and the wicketkeeper to catch him. To me, that is a better way of bowling.

See how have you seen field placings in Tests evolving over the years?

Seamer · 26-05-2008, 11:19 PM in reply to Rachael's post "Boycott on Third Man"

Totally agree.

Ponting in particular is one who deigns not to use one on a regular basis, and it has cost him badly on many occasions. The Ashes in 2005 was just one case in point, and i think i grinded bout 3mm off my molars during that tour while muttering "put in a friggin' third man you dope"

As a captain, i am far happier to see opposition batsmen score their runs from good shots, ie cover drives, than seeing them nick through or over slips for crappy boundaries.

When you have fast men operating, third man should be mandatory.

sanketh84

I agree with what u say Seamer...a third man nowadays is deemed to be a defensive position when ur going in an all out attack. i think aggresive fields are also about creating pressure on batsmen by stifling the runs(even if the runs are from edges) as much as taking wickets themselves. if you have batsmen like tendulkar or sehwag who have perfected the upper cut to the wider deliveries...it takes away genuine scoring opportunities creating more pressure. to see ponting make that mistake against the west indies where so many edges went for boundaries was baffling. i wondered if west indies got closer to the aussie first inning total and the windies requiring a smaller winning score...the aussies would have been hurt with every one of those edges or those played with soft hands between slip and gully going for four!!!

greg

If you watch the tape back of the England run chase yesterday against New Zealand i reckon we got nearly 50 runs down to third man which is a massive amount of runs to just give away.

I guess the excuse would be that they needed players in catching positions but it doesn't wash with me.

wilyoldfox

Couldn't agree more...

Aurelius

Quote:

Originally Posted by greg

I guess the excuse would be that they needed players in catching positions but it doesn't wash with me.

Especially considering that at one point there was no second slip either.

I remember one state game when Langer was the captain. Ben Edmonson (WA's fastest bowler) was bowling to a left hander, who snicked four balls in that over past first slip. Because there was no thrid man, they all went for four, and Edmonson was taken off the next over. Whenever I hear anyone comment positively on Langer's captaincy, I'm also going to remember that.

acker

A lets not forget with modern bats some of these nicks are carrying a fair way in the air down towards the boundary.

Plus the boundary is often roped in.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode