The Rule you most hate in cricket

[SciD]

The non striker taking long strides before the bowl is even bowled. The bowlers nowdays cannot even run out those jerks and some players like Hussey and Clarke take singles from the batting crease also.

 

[srk121]

hehe, Bodyline in the 1970s.. Ah some people make me smile

i did not know, that is the reason i put it in the bracket saying correct me if i am wrong. I was more of talking what westindies in early 70s used to do, bowl short bowl and when batsman is on backfoot then they bowl a fuller length.

Batsman can play all sort of storkes, then why can't bowler be allowed to bowl short balls. IF its over the head then give a NO ball.

I think cricket is bit batsman friendly game. I think bowlers have to much restrictions. I think bowler will ball short ball just to get batsman on back foot. Agai guys it's just my personal opinion. I may not have knowledge like other people have, but still love this game.

 

[Kev]

Of course cricket is biased towards the batsman, it always has been, even if you go right back to the earliest origins of the game. If it were biased towards the bowler it would be an incredibly dull (and short) game to play and watch. (Think playing BLIC against AI tailenders).

I forget who it was but I saw a bowler bowl a couple of overs of short balls in the CCh last season down at Canterbury. Nobody in the crowd was the least bit impressed I can tell you.

 

[slade]

I agree with srk, increase the number of short balls available to bowlers especially in tests. Maybe 3 an over. Its ridiculous how flat the wickets are these days, theres not really a fair contest between bat and ball. I think someone said that a bowlers are meant to bowl at the stumps but I disagree with that. Thats why there are other dismissals apart bowled and lbw and most seam bowlers bowl in the channel outside off. The bowlers job is to get the batsman out, and why protect batsman weak on the backfoot. They already wear a lot of protection.
Another rule is over throws off direct hits, penalising good fielding.
Someone said, the non striker backing up before the ball is bowled. The first time this happens, the batsman is given a gentleman's warning and if they persist, they can be run out.

 

[Skater]

If the ball hits the stumps from a throw, overthrows are not allowed in the Indian Cricket League.

 

[Supershtuffthat]

If the ball hits the stumps from a throw, overthrows are not allowed in the Indian Cricket League.

FINALLY common sense!!! Is the IPL taking off in India???

 

[karti_jai]

I hate DL rule....:crying

 

[Skater]

LBW.

It should be kept, but changed. It shouldn't matter where it pitches, if it hits the pad and would have gone on to hit the stumps then it's out. Simple.

 

[Howsie]

LBW.

It should be kept, but changed. It shouldn't matter where it pitches, if it hits the pad and would have gone on to hit the stumps then it's out. Simple.

How do we know it would of gone on to hit?

 

[Skater]

How do we know it would of gone on to hit?

Let umpires use Hawkeye with the predictive element.

 

[Howsie]

Let umpires use Hawkeye with the predictive element.

It would ruin the game far too much. Imagine someone like Warne bowling around the wicket, it would be almost impossible to survive as you would actually have to play at everything out there incase it some how comes back onto the stumps.

 

[Will_NA]

That's why it was scrapped. Bowlers would bowl negatively all day long and get wickets.

 

[SciD]

You cant Mankad anyone anymore. :

 

[age of the fall]

I hate that whole 5 days, 4 innings thing. I think they should just shorten it a bit. Maybe 20 overs.

 

[mattfb]

The rule that players can't go out and enjoy themselves a bit. The players did it all the time in the 70's-80's etc and they turned out just fine. Border, Waugh, Lilee, Thomson, Boon - they are all just classic Australian examples.