Woolmer reveals

[Mr Hutt]

Woolmer has given an interview in which he insists that the ball tampering law should be scratched off

http://wwwc4.cricinfo.com/engvpak/co...ry/257514.html

He says in this article and i quote "Woolmer backed his players and insisted that they had done nothing illegal at The Oval, adding that he'd held these views earlier as well. "I'd allow bowlers to use anything that naturally appears on the cricket field," Woolmer continued. "They could rub the ball on the ground, pick the seam, scratch it with their nails - anything that allows the ball to move off the seam to make it less of a batsman's game"

I think to give statements like this at the apex of a hearing is madness, if he says he allows the bowlers to do anything what is he effectively saying that someone in the team did lift the seam?

He also goes on to say and i quote again "Every single bowler I know from the time I played in 1968 to 1984 was guilty, at least under the current law, of some sort of ball-changing. If you haven't played the game, like a lot of the umpires haven't, they don't know these things"

So basically everyone cheats? what do you all think? I for one am getting more and more dissapointed per day with this sport we all love.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Woolmer

I'd allow bowlers to use anything that naturally appears on the cricket field," Woolmer continued. "They could rub the ball on the ground, pick the seam, scratch it with their nails - anything that allows the ball to move off the seam to make it less of a batsman's game.

So Woolmer agrees with virtually every former player and commentator that's had something to say on the matter: no surprise there.

Originally Posted by Woolmer

Every single bowler I know from the time I played in 1968 to 1984 was guilty, at least under the current law, of some sort of ball-changing. If you haven't played the game, like a lot of the umpires haven't, they don't know these things.

Again, nothing new.

Originally Posted by Avkar

So basically everyone cheats?

No, No and No again: what everyone does is play by rules that everyone understands.... that are NOT the rules as actually written.

It's like driving in this country: the vast majority of responsible drivers follow rules... like "drive at an appropriate speed to the road and conditions and situation"; through my Parish (where one or two nuts are obsessed with enforcing a draconian limit) the police found every single driver (includung the bus driver) took one "30 mph" road at >35 mph and many were travelling at 40mph; every single vehicle was local... and basically driving responsibly.

As locals we all know that the stretch of road in question is OK up to about 40 mph so long as there are no pedestrians, horses, cars reversing out of drives or other such obstacles: we follow THAT rule.... and what's wrong is NOT our driving... it's the rule that's written down that says we should stick to 30mph.

Cricketers play a game by rules they all understand, including one that says you can pick at the seam, rub it on the ground and so on so long as you don't use introduced tools like bottle tops to do the job: it's not the fault of the players that the rules as written down don't correspond!

[Collyisamackem]

Originally Posted by Rachael

So Woolmer agrees with virtually every former player and commentator that's had something to say on the matter: no surprise there.

I'd love to see/hear examples Rachael, unless you mean they were talking about changing pitches to help bowlers. I'd really struggle to think of times I've heard or seen commentators other than Angus Fraser making such comments, which I regard as entirely wrong as opposed to efforts to make pitches more bowler-friendly.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

So Woolmer agrees with virtually every former player and commentator that's had something to say on the matter: no surprise there.

No way Rachael - I heard one ex pace bowler saying this on TMS, some of the commentaors "sounded" shocked.

It really is so silly to allow ball tampering, there can be no reason for allowing this.

It would be logical that if ball tampering is legalised, then to save money the ECB and other countries could buy second hand balls , nice and ready scuffed.

I bet not many batsmen subscribe to this crackpot idea to legalise ball tampering.

[Seamer]

I think the notion of allowing ball tampering does have some merit. If you are allowed to shine the ball, drench it with saliva and sweat, then why not be able to rub dirt on it or scratch it. Doing the later would be a gamble in any case - it might help but might make the ball worse to bowl with too.

Fair enough comments, but the timing is poor.

[DomainK]

No, I dont think anyone should be allwoed to tamper with the ball to an extent where batting will become a matter of trial and error because the batsmen will have no idea what the ball is going to do. Shining it with saliva still keeps the swing predictable...anything beyond that should not be allowed.

[Seamer]

Good points but tampering with the ball does'nt always make things better for bowling

I and a few of my club teammates are downright cheating bastards when it comes to ball tampering. I admit it and feel no great shame about it. It get's damn hot during our summer and when wickets are not falling, well, you have to do what you have to do. But the point is that is can backfire on you and is not an exact science. I ahbe found that out the hard way.

[DomainK]

Originally Posted by Seamer

But the point is that is can backfire on you and is not an exact science

The day it is made leagal, scientists will be appointed, laboratories will be set up, coaching classes will come up and new websites will start floating on what when and how of ball tampering (only that it wont be called tampering, they will probably call it some engineering)

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Mike

Sorry, for the delay with posting my provisional team but I found it difficult finding any consistent batsmen and I found it difficult choosing the bowlers from a large pool of candidates. It seems to me that too many bowlers have abnormally good figures whilst too many batsmen have ordinary figures. I'm not too sure what the reason for this is but a good system should be able to define its best players a lot better than this.

http://www.world-a-team.com/showthre...2926#post92926

Originally Posted by Mike

The batsmen are particularly inconsistent and the low averages of many contrast with the good averages of many bowlers. I don't understand this because the flat pitches in Pakistan should favour the batsmen but the stats show that the bowlers are on top right now.

http://www.world-a-team.com/showthre...9866#post89866

The above quotes were made by me a few weeks ago on the WAT Pakistan A 2005/06 thread. I was puzzled at the time why the bowlers in domestic cricket in Pakistan had such good figures on flat pitches. This ball-tampering scandal explains it. It can be the only explanation. At the risk of adding fuel to the fire, it seems that 'ball-tampering' or 'ball-engineering' must be rife in Pakistan domestic cricket. What else can explain that disparity between batsman and bowler? For those of you who wonder what International cricket would become if ball-tampering was allowed check out a few scorecards in the Quaid-e-Azam Trophy and the ABN-AMRO Patrons Trophy. I apologize if I'm wrong here but can anyone offer a plausible alternative explanation?

[Maranello]

LOL Mike. This has to be one of the funniest posts I have read, well done!

Originally Posted by Mike

I apologize if I'm wrong here but can anyone offer a plausible alternative explanation?

Gee, that's a tough one...umm..how about something really novel and unusual... such as poor batting technique by generations of Pakistani batsmen, especially the more recent ones? Not sure if there is any evidence for that? Oh wait, how about this... the batsmen who are brought up on taped tennis-ball cricket and start playing with a real cricket ball in their late teens, if that; batsmen who wouldn't know technique or concentration if it hit them on the head; a domestic culture where slogging is endemic, and 20-20 cricket is the most popular, in fact the only popular form of the game, and where even one-dayers are ignored for being too slow; is it any surprise that few teams manage to stay on the crease for more than 60 or 70 overs in a 4 day match?

And then we have batsmen such as Misbah-ul-Haq or Hasan Raza or Imran Farhat or Saeed bin Nasir or Bazid Khan etc, who average 40s or 50s in Pakistani domestic cricket, scoring runs for fun and rack up huge totals, fail abysmally at Test cricket. So these guys, who are the best batsmen in Pakistani domestic cricket, are still pretty poor, in general, by international standards! So is it any surprise that bowlers have good averages, when the "best batsmen" are not really that good?

If batting in Pakistani domestic cricket was as hard over the years as you make it out to be, the statistics would be the other way around (as they are for many Test players from other countries). But why let facts stand in the way of a conspiracy theory, eh? You have looked at the results from a handful of matches just for last season; I suggest you study the career averages of many of the stalwarts of batting in Pakistani first class cricket to get a better picture.