The free-hit does seem to have done the trick in T20s and ODIs, which is why I actually think it's unnecessary for Tests. If bowlers have started curbing the no-balls in the shorter forms, it's most likely that they'll keep it curbed for the longer forms as well; after all, it seems to me that a bowler bowls how he bowls, and that probably won't change regardless of the form of the game.

Why do we feel the no ball needs to be eradicated from test cricket anyway? I'm glad to see the bowler putting in the kind of effort which may occasionally mean that he oversteps the line in the desire to fling that ball down as quick-as-a-flash. In my opinion, the game is already skewed massively in favour of the batsman, so why should we add punishment upon punishment for bowlers who make a small error?

OK, I haven't been able to watch cricket on TV for awhile, but I am certain during the England/Australia twenty20 during the recent World Cup, that I was listening to TMS, when Clark bowled a no-ball to Darren Maddy. Ponting then moved several fielders (brought the fine leg up and put long on/off back) in preparation for the free hit, the ball was a yorker and Maddy was clean bowled.

Now I am happy to be wrong, and if that is the rule, I am fine with that, but surely the rule should be applied, and Captains not allowed to change the field!!

Because it's poor unproffesional cricket that can be fairly easily corrected if the bowlers actually put their minds to it. Now I can tolerate the occasional transgretion from out and out quicks striving for the extra pace but 90 percent of no balls bowled come from bowlers not making the effort to sort out their run up in nets. I remember in the late 90's when England had a major problem in this area (namely Dean Headly ) watching them practice (sadly using the term in it's loosest sense) prior to the game and the quicks were regularly overstepping by a couple of feet and it came as no great surprise that come match time the afforementioned lax approach to preparation spilled over into the game. You only have to look at someone like Dilhara Fernando to see that you can if you are bothered to do the work you can overcome the problem and the new improved version has lost nothing by keeping his front-foot behind the line.

Now if the whole concept of the free hit is simply a step too far (although it's hardly a new concept in test cricket given the old back-foot no ball law) and one freebie for the batsmen too many surely the existing penalty for overstepping should at the very least be increased? 10 penalty runs per no ball would certainly have the same impact as the free hit minus all of the unsavoury slogging.

The only thing I want to see regarding front foot no balls is Cyclops used to identify a noball and relaying that via a beep to the umpire so he does not shift his focus from down the pitch. It is ridiculous that umpires must shift their eyes on the moment of delivery.