Scrap ball tampering law?

[aussie1st]

Bob Woolmer, the Pakistan coach, has called for the abolition of Law 42.3, which governs the condition of the ball and which was the centre of the controversy surrounding the forfeiture of the Oval Test.

"The whole irony and tragedy of this particular story is law 42.3," he told The Guardian newspaper. "But law 42.3 is an ass. It was brought in because of ball-tampering with razor blades and bottle tops and everything else in the past, but that's been shoved out of the game now. I'd scrub out the law completely."

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.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/engvpak/content/story/257514.html


Interesting thoughts, doesn't help when it was just revealed that Woolmer has been involved in a previous ball tampering case but none the less an interesting idea.

His idea would even up the game for bowlers although on the bowling friendly wicket it would be near impossible for batsmen to score runs. It would make those high scoring draws a lot more even.

I'm on the fence for this.

 

[nightprowler10]

Scrap it? No. But there definitely should be changes made regarding the ball. I think a newer ball should be made available a lot sooner. Maybe after 60 overs instead of 80?

 

[BlackCapForLife]

Don't get rid of them, they are there for a reason, just change the rules so it is a bit more of an even ledger.

 

[manee]

Well I reckon that you should be able to do anything on the ball except using foreign objects on it.

 

[nightprowler10]

Well I reckon that you should be able to do anything on the ball except using foreign objects on it.

Well then you would just need to grow longer and stronger finger nails

 

[sohum]

Wasn't this already posted here?

 

[nightprowler10]

That was a newspiece about Woolmer's comments on ball tampering law. This is a discussion on whether it needs to be scrapped.

 

[sohum]

That was a newspiece about Woolmer's comments on ball tampering law. This is a discussion on whether it needs to be scrapped.

Ah, well I thought both discussions could go hand in hand.

As I had said on that thread, they shouldn't get rid of ball tampering completely, but they should allow things that are permissible within the laws. Maybe I hadn't said this in that thread, but I remember saying it somewhere. :/

 

[nightprowler10]

Ah, well I thought both discussions could go hand in hand.

As I had said on that thread, they shouldn't get rid of ball tampering completely, but they should allow things that are permissible within the laws. Maybe I hadn't said this in that thread, but I remember saying it somewhere. :/

Well I'm not exactly an authority on the thread thing

Shining the ball is within the law already, anything more could cause problems. We could trek into the gray areas more often. I think it would be more feasible to make the new ball available sooner than 80 overs.

 

[Vcassano]

If we let bowlers use only items on the pitch to tamper with the ball then that'll satisfy them for a while. However eventually a team will struggle to bowl the opponents out and so tamper with foreign objects as well. It would just be an endless circle - you either have no tampering allowed or any.

Not that this sort of thing happens in cricket

 

[aussie1st]

Ah, well I thought both discussions could go hand in hand.

As I had said on that thread, they shouldn't get rid of ball tampering completely, but they should allow things that are permissible within the laws. Maybe I hadn't said this in that thread, but I remember saying it somewhere. :/

I would leave the shining stuff in as that gives the sides that have mastered reverse swing an advantage.

If they tampered with the ball too much I'm guessing the ball will break into 2 at some stage or a Gilly will smash the ball and it'd break into 2.

 

[brad352]

Why does he want to change the law, if he's happy to cheat anyway why give away their advantage by letting everyone do it?

But law 42.3 is an ass.

You're an ass, nobody else has any trouble following it- ask England how much trouble they're having swinging the ball

 

[icyman]

No need for the ICC to scrap it

 

[Kev]

I dont think the law should be scrapped. Infact I'd like to see something done about how teams throw the ball to nearly half of their side between deliveries. This is the most likely time that ball tampering happens. There isnt any real need for it and it slows the game down. Get rid of this, speed the game up a bit, and there would be time for more overs in a day too.

 

[nightprowler10]

Here's an article written by Andrew Miller on Cricinfo about this issue:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/engvpak/content/current/story/257623.html

He makes some good points using the Pakistan-India series as an example.