Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
I havent seen a match where a white ball lasts the full 50 overs.
Ermm...I have. Hundreds of them. What the f** are you on about?*
Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Law no 3 is very stupid, you certainly cannot enforce a law when the game is going down to the wire. and saying that you (team) will have 2 minutes to send in a batsman to face a delivery well thats not a problem. Problem occurs when the batsman is on the crease playing under 40's C of temp.
Almost all grounds are capable of reaching the limit specified above, however when the "security teams" arrive and impose their so called "risk assessments" the boundaries limits are out of the windows.
I like the rule of changing the ball but it should be changed in 30th over not 35th, this is an invitation for bowlers to resort of illegal ways to induce the reverse swing or perhaps make an accidental foot stop on the ball, or more one bounce throws to the wicket-keepers.
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
ICC has gone to lengths in promoting the spirit of cricket in the most enticing way, possible.
Volume of cricket
- Introduce a limit to the numbers of Test matches, ODIs and T20 matches sides may play in any one series > Yes, hello. Introducing a limit on Test matches? Not feeling ICC on this one.
- Restrict to a maximum of seven the number of Twenty20 internationals that any international side can play in a year (excluding ICC events) > Great, great decision. Apart from the annual Twenty20 World Championship, there is just an enough volume of cricket for all family members to sit down during the course of an evening, microwave and dine with a TV dinner and feast their eyes on the most ludicrous concept of cricket available to them.
- Changes to playing conditions
If a bowler bowls a front foot no-ball in a ODI, the following delivery will be deemed a free hit and the batsman cannot be dismissed by the bowler from that delivery > 
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
To makes things even…if the batsman plays and misses the ball, the next ball he would be asked to walk away from the wicket…and it will be a free ball for the bowler…if the bowler hits the stump, the batsman would be out.
What crap !! Are No-balls the biggest problem in ODIs ??..they are unnecessarily trying to fix something that is not broken.
Do something about the rampant wrong LBW decisions…
Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
What is next ? If a bowler bowls a wide then batsmen get 50 run for free. This is getting ridiculous. Thanks ICC for f***g cricket again.
Additional fielder rule is good.
Thank God that they didnot implement the rule where they wanted to change the ball after 35th over.
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Reading the report, there is not even a hint, no whisper on anything concerning LBW’s and technology. I am baffled. The world has changed so much with the advent of latest tools and software but as long as the umpires are given the treatment only next to god, we can seal it with a tight-fitting lid.
There is a proper rectification of this; a position known commonly as a ‘specialist bowling coach’.
Changes to playing conditions
There will be a mandatory change of ball after 35 overs of each innings in a ODI; the replacement will be a clean used ball (CricInfo).
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Joote maaro salon ko… Sale sare Jahil idiot baithe hain ICC me
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. :rolleyes:] 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.
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
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.
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
ICC has yet to explain why it stands as the game’s governing body overseeing the limb-by-limb destruction of cricket.
But the round-table discussion of Greig, Chappell and Manjrekar have attempted their reasoning that a fair contest between bat and ball is in place.
Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Extremely stupid suggestions, specially the ball change after 35 overs . Such decisions are exactly why bowling attacks all over the world are getting less and less potent with additional focus on savings runs than taking wickets.
I agree. This is all very complicating (esp. the rule about the batting captain being able to choose when to take one of the power-plays, allowing 3 instead of 2 fielders outside the 30 yard circle during the second or third power-play (powerplays should be scrapped altogether IMO), free hit, ball change after 35 overs! (what the hell is that?)). It simple means no reverse swing in ODIs. Besides 20 power play overs is just too many. Maybe they should have 10 at the start and another 5 anywhere in the innings after that. I am however in favour of using hawk eye and giving additional powers to third the umpire for contentious decisions like LBW and bat n pad dismissals (account for most umpiring errors).
1- extrapolating the trajectory of the ball (hawk eye)
i.e. whether the ball pitched in line of off stump (for round the wicket LBW decisions) and whether it straightened enough after pitching to hit the stumps
2- whether the batsman managed to get his front pad outside off stump line when the ball hit him, i.e. over the wicket LBW decisions (third umpire)
3- LBW decisions where there's doubt as to where the ball hit the pad/bat first (third umpire)
4- bat n pad decisions (third umpire)
Third umpire with assistance from hawk eye can help get atleast 90% of LBW and bat n pad decisions right.
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Pakistan’s Shoaib says free hit law nonsense
KARACHI (Reuters) - Pakistan’s fast bowler, Shoaib Akhtar has described as nonsense the free hit experimental law to be enforced in one-day internationals from Oct. 1 this year.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) last month agreed to penalise bowlers for sending down a no-ball by allowing the batsman to take a free hit off the next ball without being dismissed in one-dayers.
The law will be tested on an experimental basis and is already allowed in a different form in Twenty20 cricket.
“I don’t support this law because already life is tough for the bowlers. It is nonsense. Why make it more difficult us,” Akhtar told reporters in the Pakistan camp on Thursday.
He said they already had to bowl on flat pitches and had the rules loaded against them.
“Why put more pressure on them (bowlers) with such laws that give the full advantage to the batsmen,” he added.
He said the free hit law was fine for Twenty20 cricket, which was not really that serious, but not meant for one-dayers which are a more competitive brand of cricket.
Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
wow i cant even believe some of these rules
free hit, what the hell...are they taking suggestions from 5 year olds? sounds like its taken from a board game
and i dont know why iam not hearing the players and ex players, commentators etc bash these dumb laws
they shouldnt stand for this crap
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Afridi happy with new free-hit rule
obviously :hehe:
KARACHI: Pakistan’s much celebrated all-rounder Shahid Afridi believes that the International Cricket Council (ICC)’s new rule of awarding a free hit to batsmen after a no ball delivery in one-dayers, was a nice innovation in the game, saying it would make the sport more entertaining and exciting.
The swashbuckling Afridi said he understood the apprehensions of fast bowlers Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif, who feel the new rule penalised a bowler harshly if he sent down a no-ball, but felt the two bowlers would not face any problem.
“Shoaib and Asif are two of the most accurate bowlers I have seen in One-day Internationals. They bowl very few no-balls. So I don’t see them facing any problems,” he said.
“The new rule will make the other bowlers also more accurate and disciplined to avoid giving away bonus runs and that is a good thing as less wides and no balls means less time lost in a match.”
Shoaib and Asif have expressed reservations over the rule, effective from October 1, which says on the very next delivery after after a no-ball, the batsman can take a free hit without any danger of being dismissed unless he is run-out.
The Pakistani pace duo has said the new rule would only increase the pressure on the bowlers in a game whose rules are increasingly a big advantage to the batsmen.
SOURCE: The News International: Latest News Breaking, World, Entertainment, Royal News
Re: ICC’s bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
thank god they didn’t make this rule when Waseem and Waqar were still playing. I do however feel bad for Rana now 
Re: ICC's bowls a bouncer to the bowlers
Well what they are trying to achieve with these ridiculous rules .The ever decreasing batting standards ? .sorry people ,u can't help batsmen in this way .
I agreed ,if they want to punish bowlers more ,make the one run for no ball as two .thats sensible . Other wise ,this ''free hit rule '' will kill the bowlers .