• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Sport
International Cricket 2016
<<
<
170 of 284
>>
>
Darren Lethem
22-07-2016
No more than 15 overs a day due to just one spinner, drinks breaks and DRS so 15 an hour should be the threshold. For every over not bowled in time you lose 10% of match fee per player. That'll speed them up
SULLA
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by GrouchoM:
“Sulla

Lots of comments but nothing constructive............................impressive”

Thanks. I'm chuffed

Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Touch and go whether the 90 overs will get in by 6.30. This seriously needs addressing”

It can get complicated if both teams bat on the same day

Originally Posted by davethecue:
“Moeen now batting at 9......”

But he's a front line bowler

Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“Think 15 overs is fair really.
but the issue is that teams know they can bowl at 12-13 overs a hour and nothing happens.
ICC only takes action if they bowl around 10-11 overs a hour which is a joke, that is the main reason overrates are poor across the world barring Asia.
even then in asia England overrate isn't good because they play 3-4 seam bowlers.”

In our league teams have to average 17 or they lose points. BUT there are allowances for wickets taken, lost balls, injuries and other stoppages. Stoppages do not include reviews.

We do not have a cut off time. If the weather and light is OK the game continues till the overs have been bowled or there is a result

Broad or Anderson should have been night watchman
Bhaveshgor
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“No more than 15 overs a day due to just one spinner, drinks breaks and DRS so 15 an hour should be the threshold. For every over not bowled in time you lose 10% of match fee per player. That'll speed them up”

they already do 10% of match fee per player for every over, the issue is they don't fine players or follow the rules.
they are so lenient when working out the timing.
Misbah won't even get a warning now since they could easily fine 2-3 minutes to explain the one over short.
Bhaveshgor
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by jcafcw:
“Banning players is wrong. People pay good money to see these sportsmen and we would be depriving the public of what they pay for.

The public have been properly entertained today even though they have only seen 89 of the 90 overs.

What could happen is a fine of 5 runs per missed over depending on who did. It could be 10 runs for serial offenders. That would sort it quicker.”

good point but they could be more strict in fining players and not actually being happy of having overs short.
swingaleg
22-07-2016
It was quite interesting when they showed that chart of the declining over rates every decade since the 1920s.........unfortunately I can't find it online for a proper study but what I noticed that wasn't really commented on was that the biggest fall appeared to occur during the 1970s

is that when spinners began to be much less used in Test cricket ?
mb@2day
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by swingaleg:
“It was quite interesting when they showed that chart of the declining over rates every decade since the 1920s.........unfortunately I can't find it online for a proper study but what I noticed that wasn't really commented on was that the biggest fall appeared to occur during the 1970s

is that when spinners began to be much less used in Test cricket ?”


Quite possibly but also when the West Indians started to use the strategy of crawling along at 12 -13 overs an hour as a defensive method to keep their pace attack from tiring and to stop the opposition scoring too quickly.
howard h
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by mb@2day:
“Quite possibly but also when the West Indians started to use the strategy of crawling along at 12 -13 overs an hour as a defensive method to keep their pace attack from tiring and to stop the opposition scoring too quickly.”

Worse than that, and not just the Windies. In the game ending in the dark @ Pakistan (which England won) Pakistan were down to under 10 IIRC.

One point to consider, if cut-off's 6.30 and let's say 85 overs have been bowled, that's short-changing the crowd of a fair whack of cricket.
alfamale
22-07-2016
Originally Posted by jcafcw:
“Banning players is wrong. People pay good money to see these sportsmen and we would be depriving the public of what they pay for.

The public have been properly entertained today even though they have only seen 89 of the 90 overs.

What could happen is a fine of 5 runs per missed over depending on who did. It could be 10 runs for serial offenders. That would sort it quicker.”

Agree. Although im not entirely comfortable with Extras being credited with huge runs i do like that idea of 5 runs (well id go for 6 runs) per over missed as i reckon its the only solution that would work. Pakistan had bowled approx 83 overs by 6pm. Imagine the thought of England score suddenly increasing by 42 runs, i think by 5pm the pakistanis would have been sprinting to change ends between the overs
SULLA
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by alfamale:
“Agree. Although im not entirely comfortable with Extras being credited with huge runs i do like that idea of 5 runs (well id go for 6 runs) per over missed as i reckon its the only solution that would work. Pakistan had bowled approx 83 overs by 6pm. Imagine the thought of England score suddenly increasing by 42 runs, i think by 5pm the pakistanis would have been sprinting to change ends between the overs”

Before you can start awarding runs you have to deduct all stoppages.
dtcdtcdtc
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by Terrence Chant:
“England batting first - anyone know what the bookies consider a par total?”

The spreads opened at 380 - 395 and were bought up to 384 - 399 at the start of play

Now trading at 499 - 514
dtcdtcdtc
23-07-2016
Just watching the Verdict and the interview with Alastair Cook

Ian Ward highlighted the fact that he had cut off the top corners of his bat
Cook said he does it as it helps him with a low grip

I didn't realise that you were allowed to do this as it means that 'there's less bat to edge ' the ball

Impressive day for England.
bradybrady
23-07-2016
Really enjoyed the discussion with the Sky guys dealing with viewers questions

The Sky guys always come across as good mates as well and it shows with their mocking of each other
makeba72
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by bradybrady:
“The Sky guys always come across as good mates as well and it shows with their mocking of each other”

I've always wondered about Nasser, though. Botham especially seems to tease him in ways that go OTT sometimes, and I wondered if they really don't get on.
bradybrady
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“I've always wondered about Nasser, though. Botham especially seems to tease him in ways that go OTT sometimes, and I wondered if they really don't get on.”

I've never noticed anything. Nasser always seem to encourage mocking of himself as well
bradybrady
23-07-2016
That looks a nasty blow on Woakes' arm
makeba72
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by bradybrady:
“I've never noticed anything. Nasser always seem to encourage mocking of himself as well”

I don't think Nasser has much choice other than to just go with it whilst live on air. I do think he gets a lot more teasing than the others, and in some cases, I've thought it's had a bit of 'bite' to it.
jake1981
23-07-2016
Looking a good decision to use Woakes as a nightwatchmen.
makeba72
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by jake1981:
“Looking a good decision to use Woakes as a nightwatchmen.”

I've long been a fan of having a 'positive' nightwatchman. As they said on TMS, who on earth wants to see the likes of Hoggard come out to bat at the start of a day? They need someone who can come out and play a bit.
mimik1uk
23-07-2016
my issue with the nightwatchman, maybe not so much these days as in the past, is that it means the "proper" batsman he is then batting with the next morning could get distracted a little knowing he has a rabbit at the other end and not play naturally
mimik1uk
23-07-2016
woakes will be disappointed here , this was a great chance for him to get his first test 100 after getting promoted a couple of spots to be nightwatchman
mimik1uk
23-07-2016
good session for england , just losing woakes

427-5 with root and stokes together with bairstow and ali still to come, wonder if england will try to get to 550 asap and get bowling around tea-time
Thrasymachus
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“good session for england , just losing woakes

427-5 with root and stokes together with bairstow and ali still to come, wonder if england will try to get to 550 asap and get bowling around tea-time”

Given the suspect weather forecast you'd expect them to get a move on
Villa
23-07-2016
OMG you call that conclusive?!!

The mark on the glove was already there before the ball passed!
tiger2000
23-07-2016
Absolutely shocking decision by the 3rd umpire, needs his eyes testing
seansnotmyname@
23-07-2016
Originally Posted by tiger2000:
“Absolutly shocking decision by the 3rd umpire, need his eyes testing”

Yep utterly bizarre, to overturn the decision on such flimsy evidence isn't really what the system should be about.
<<
<
170 of 284
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map