ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers

fair_balance · July 2, 2007, 10:05pm

Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers

Michael Holding explaining his rationale behind the no-ball/chakka rule:

This has been looked at because there were too many no-balls being bowled and apart from being asked to bowl them again, the bowler wasn’t really getting punished. ] This move was brought in to make the bowlers stop bowling so many no-balls and work a bit harder on their bowling, because a free-hit can prove to be very costly. In the past the batsman did have a chance to hit the no-ball but everyone knows that it is quite difficult to hear the call and then decide what to do with the shot after hearing the call. But if you know that the next delivery is going to be a free hit then the batsman definitely has a better chance of punishing that. So I think this was done to discourage the bowling of no-balls and bring some discipline amongst the bowlers and get them to do a bit more work in that regard.

Bowler was not getting punished?
What all punishment bowlers need apart from extra run that is awarded to batiing team when a no ball is bowled. If it was not enough they could have made it 2 runs. But awarding a free hit is stupid.

Did they have any explanation of bowl changing at 35 over mark.