Australia in India 2013-14

A run glut like never before

With 3596 runs scored in 11 innings over six India-Australia ODIs, the time has come to revisit the imbalance between bat and ball

Abhishek Purohit

November 4, 2013

Comments: 180 | Text size: A | A

Rohit Sharma exults after reaching his century, India v Australia, 7th ODI, Bangalore, November 2, 2013
Rohit Sharma's 209 capped a series that had everything for batsmen and nothing for bowlers © BCCI
Enlarge
Related Links

"Welcome to F50. It's like a normal T20 game, only it's played over seven hours instead of three. And to compensate for biting a bigger chunk out of your day, there will be one less deep fielder to prevent boundaries. The entertainment doesn't stop, all day long." In a few years, one-day international cricket might well be sold like that, along with visuals from the ODI series between India and Australia to make for irresistible advertising.

For a series written off as meaningless even before it began, India and Australia may just have provided a glimpse of the future. Of what one-day cricket might become, especially on the subcontinent, with dead pitches, fast outfields, moderately sized boundaries and dew.

Australia and India scored 3596 runs in 11 innings over six games. Had the Ranchi ODI not been washed out halfway, and the Cuttack ODI been played, this series would have comfortably breached the 4000 mark, which has never happened before.

Fours. Sixes. Hundreds. A double-hundred. Take your pick. Feel like it's becoming stick cricket? Well, you asked for it when you started feeling "bored" during an ODI. There used to be something loosely called the middle overs, when batting teams tried to build by taking singles and twos and fielding sides tried to contain by restricting boundaries. Fans apparently found the middle overs too tedious, especially with the rise of T20 cricket.

To make ODIs interesting, administrators injected more "excitement". Now, with only four men allowed in the deep, a boundary is never too hard to hit and there are no middle overs. There are only boundaries. There is only excitement. The assumption, of course, is that more excitement will make ODIs more interesting.

An ESPNcricinfo correspondent who covered the Bangalore ODI did not come across anyone who appeared to negate that assumption, as India racked up 383 in 50 overs. People screamed and danced at each of the 30 fours and 19 sixes India hit. Most will remember it as the time they watched Rohit Sharma hit only the third double-hundred in an ODI. For many, it was an unforgettable evening, one of the best they have ever had. Stick cricket? Not for them. Reminiscent of an IPL evening's entertainment? Yes, with nationalistic fervour thrown in.

This is to take nothing away from Rohit's achievement, or Virat Kohli's or George Bailey's. Rohit, or any of the other batsmen, did not ask for the game to discriminate further against bowlers. Like some batsmen, he can't even be accused of slogging wildly. He largely played smooth, orthodox cricket strokes. Which is what is scary. The fact that he did not seem to take too many risks, and yet managed to compile 209 off 158, leaves one with plenty to ponder about the future of the game.

The fact that India did not seem to take too many risks, and yet chased 350-plus totals twice in the series, and that in one of them they sealed the match inside 44 overs for the loss of just one wicket, just adds to the horror. Australia were 211 for 8 in Bangalore, and still scored so rapidly that for some time, there was a realistic chance of 384 being overtaken.

A line of argument is that the bowling in the series was so bad even five deep fielders would not have made a difference. An example is Ishant Sharma's 30-run over to James Faulkner in Mohali. MS Dhoni put three of the permissible four men on the leg-side boundary, but Faulkner's sixes cleared them comfortably. Was it just plain bad bowling and good batting?

The fear of getting hit, of having reduced protection on the boundary, and of having no margin for error, could well have led bowlers to lose lines and lengths more frequently. You can try bowling outside off stump to a packed off-side field, but what if the batsman takes the ball from there and hits it to deep midwicket? The new restrictions mean the captain might not be able to place anyone in that region at that moment.

The batsman now knows one of either mid-off or mid-on will be in the circle. If not, then both third man and fine leg will be. On quick Indian outfields, a healthy edge will get you four more often than not. There is a smaller risk of being caught in the deep. With the kind of monster bats in use, an attempt to clear mid-off could easily go for six. An attempt to hit a six might clear the ground.

The one-day format has suffered so many tweaks it has become a hideous degenerate in some conditions, almost an extended form of T20. This series has shown us the kind of excesses the latest mutation can cause. Australia in India 2013-14 may well be remembered for introducing the world to F50 unless something is done about it.

Abhishek Purohit is a sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Abhishek Purohit

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by bobagorof on (November 6, 2013, 23:00 GMT)

As a non-Indian fan, I was often unable to watch the majority of the second innings of any of these matches because I had to go to bed. However, as the series went on I found myself less and less inclined to stay up to watch the match at all. When I knew that a team scoring at 7 an over could (and in Australia's case, would) be chased down I lost interest. 4s and 6s are interesting because they are difficult - they show the batsman has done well to pierce the field or clear it. Why is it interesting when it happens every second ball? It's like having dessert for every meal - after a while, you lose the taste for it. Of course, for a country obsessed with the shorter formats (and batting in particular) it will take longer than in other places, but gradually we will see the fan's appetite become sated and they will switch off.

Posted by Harmony111 on (November 6, 2013, 20:26 GMT)

@Abhishek.2626: I did not say there are no small stadiums in India. My main point was that why were ppl saying that India chased 360 in Nagpur in a small stadium when it was in fact almost as big as the MCG?

Having established that Indian chase took place in a large stadium & in the backdrop of India chasing 321 in 37 overs in Hobart, which is in Aus & not in India, + the fact that more than 10 yrs back India chased a (then) huge total of 325 in a final, it follows that the big scores India made in this series were not necessarily due to the small grounds but because of high quality batting. To talk about the grounds being small is to miss the point altogether.

Ok so Kotla is a small stadium. Does that demean the victory SL had over India in WC96 when India made 271? Do we talk like that or do we say SL batted well?

Aus scored 326 to India's 383. Do we say well tried Aus or do we say aus were batting on a flat track?

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 23:03 GMT)

It's not all doom and gloom. In India, we saw two powerful batting sides tee off against weak bowling units. In UAE, we are seeing the opposite. I am all for a balance between bat and ball - and that is a product of skills more than conditions.

Posted by ThatsJustCricket on (November 5, 2013, 20:20 GMT)

It may be a combination of different factors. The fact that the pitches had nothing for any bowler coupled with two largely lousy bowling attacks, the new rule of only 4 fielders on the ropes and mostly good hitters from both batting line up all put together results in this bonanza of runs. The UAE series seems to be the other extreme where both teams have a pretty good bowling but not enough power in batting. The difference is there for everyone to see. In essence, the new rules are not the only reason for this run fest.

Posted by legfinedeep on (November 5, 2013, 20:17 GMT)

I have lost faith in the credibility of ODIs for a while now, but even considering that, this series was a joke. I'll take a fair contest between bat and ball any day over these slogfests. The only positive is that it serves to really inflate batsman averages, especially players from those countries who traditionally make dead pitches. Their averages need to be adjusted down about 10 runs at least, to compensate because the wickets and the rules are flattering them to make them look better than they actually are.

Posted by foursandsixes on (November 5, 2013, 15:52 GMT)

This is not the death for ODIs, cricinfo and some fans don't really get it. Each country prepares pitches that favor its home team's strengths. In India's case, it is batting. There will always be low scoring matches at venues where the home team advantage is in their bowling (relative to their opposition). Also bowlers from both these teams were ordinary (other than Johnson who fared decently). You would have a different result (i.e. more competitive matches) with Pakistan, England, and SA in India due to their superior bowling. I do hope to see bowling pitches used in domestic season, as that will give Indians the ability to play abroad also.

Posted by amitgarg78 on (November 5, 2013, 14:45 GMT)

Most teams struggle to beat India at home. More so in ODIs where we have an absolutely powerful batting line up that makes up for a lousy attack. Bowlers struggle here. Period. Sachin scored his 200 against South Africans and no one would say they can't bowl. England usually fail to win any ODI games here and they too have a good attack. Lanka gets hammered. Almost all the time. They've not beaten India in a bilateral series for many years. And now they can't get past virat. Pakistan probably have the attack best suited for these pitches and so, they manage to hold their own. Size of the ground is same for both sides and so are the rules. So while these run gluts are not always exciting let's expect them anyways. Why?

Because, In a nutshell, all things being equal, batting strength wins you games in India and we've got plenty.

Posted by jackiethepen on (November 5, 2013, 14:00 GMT)

The Indian cricket captain and Indian commentators are fighting back to save ODI cricket and we should support them otherwise the future does look bleak for the one day game. People talk about football being 'fast', well if you go to an actual match instead of just looking at highlights you might get a different impression. There are times in a game when nothing much seems to be happening as players are trying to find an opening. The point is football is played defensively as well as aggressively and no team can cope otherwise. The structure of the game requires defensive players, mid field and strikers. No one just thinks the 'strikers' should be raining goals. That is where cricket has gone down the wrong route with t20. It should be a game to win or lose not be judged by how many sixes are hit. That should indicate that the balance between bat and ball is wrong. ODIs have full houses in England and we have games that are contests but this could change if the rules favour the bat.

Posted by susa360 on (November 5, 2013, 13:59 GMT)

Had India remove the last two wickets of Australia i.e, soon after 211 in the final ODI wud everyone say India has produced good dna for bowlers? NO we'd still stick to Ishant sharma over :D Batting has evolved from shot from book to deliberate cut to slog to scoop then switch hit.. now lets see bowling line n length stick to basics rarely seam will see reverse swing and spin will have a googly laugh. Its high time for bowlers to do something. When talking about 4 fielders outside ring, I join the rest it must be reset to 5.

Posted by GermanPlayer on (November 5, 2013, 13:31 GMT)

Aren't the Pak vs SA ODIs being played with the same rules? Yet 3 times out of 4 the teams struggled to pass 200 run mark. Its not the rules, it is just the useless pitches that were used in India v Aus games.

Posted by mahjut on (November 5, 2013, 13:17 GMT)

It doesn't matter which game you look at - rugby, football, hockey - there is a reasonable contest between attack and defense ... LO Cricket has lost this and as a result will lose a section of its audience too. T20 will survive because even folk like me, who prefer a good conTEST still enjoys cricket enough to sit through a 3-hour landslide victory of bat over ball ... and savour the breif moments when the independent candidate (ie a bowling anomoly) gets a seat in the 'house of batting lords'. But not for a whole day ... bit sad really but I never watch nuetral ODIs anymore

Posted by Puffin on (November 5, 2013, 13:14 GMT)

ODI is turning into a parody of cricket: at this rate we might as well not have bowlers, we'll just install a bowling machine each end because nobody wants the job any more. As for the batsmen, when they return to test cricket, it will be quickly discovered that what was good enough for ODI (with all the batsman-friendly rules helping them) is of no use in real cricket. Those teams willing to keep test cricket skills going locally will be delighted.

On the other hand, we could just try to prevent the games diverging like this and accept that a little less money will be made.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 11:58 GMT)

Bring down the two powerplays. Bowling PP to be taken by over 30, batting by over 40. Other than PP, allow 5 fielders outside the circle.

That said, lets not give out knee jerk reactions based on 1 series please. Neither India nor Australia can be said to have a very good Bowling attack, with the exception of Johnson who too is inconsistent. So taking that into account, we would have still had a lot of high scoring matches, but more in the high 290's, low 300's range, which is pretty much the par on an Indian pitch.

Posted by Abhishek.2626 on (November 5, 2013, 11:15 GMT)

Mr Harmony, There are loads of Other Grounds in India where the boundary is in 60's. Delhi for example. The Thirdman boundary there is 58mtrs. Aus, Eng etc have 4-5 grounds with about 80mts boundary. India too has 4-5 grounds with 80mts boundary.

But In Aus, almost all Intl cricket is played on those, where as in India, its just may be 30%. The rest of the grounds all fall within the 60-70 mtrs range. And The wicket. You know they are a mere extension of our National Highways.

Posted by Harmony111 on (November 5, 2013, 10:50 GMT)

@Rahul Nihalani:

I believe you are an Indian & so I am very sad to see your comment. I think you have not read my comment properly. My featured comment does not express my perception that Indian grounds esp Nagpur etc are small. I have proven that Nagpur is in fact almost as big as the MCG yet you are beginning your comment with a totally diff perception, you still seem to think that the criticism in this series that Indian grounds are small is correct when it is not the case in general. India chased 360 at Nagpur that was not a small ground, that is all that I wanted to show.

Btw, India chased 325 at Lords over 10 yrs back when the rules were a lot different. Now India are chasing 360s.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 10:01 GMT)

@Harmony 111: the criticism on smaller grounds is fair and your analysis does not take into account the belief/courage/audacity/intent of taking it on. If I know the boundary is short, I would like to take my chances, But if I know boundaries are large like UAE and Lords I will not go for some of the shots which otherwise would have felt me sixes.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 9:46 GMT)

There are multiple reasons as to why we are seeing such high scoring games in India. 1. No doubt that the pitches in India are very batsman friendly, particularly in ODIs. 2. This coupled with very fast outfields because the outfields are mostly bald and not lush green as in England or in Australia means boundaries are more easily scored. 3. Something has to be done about the bats - the way the bats are manufactured today, why don't we take a stand and reduce the thickness of the blade? 4. The field restriction of only 4 fielders outside 30 yard circle needs to be relaxed. 5. At least in Indian conditions, it has to be just one new ball for the entire inning. 2 new balls is not going to make any difference in India where there is no swing to be had. At least when the ball gets old, because of the abrasive nature of the grounds, spin and reverse swing will come in to play.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 9:40 GMT)

**Rules to implement **

#1 - Legalize ball tampering after 35th over

#2 - Any ground which has boundaries SHORTER than 75m (all 4 sides) is NOT allowed to be played on

#3 - Bring back the 5 fielder rule

Implement these 3 rules. Or else there will come a time when an average batsmen in ODI's will be averaging 50+

Competition excites people. Not fours and sixes.

Shoaib akhtar's battle against Ponting... Atherton against Donald... Warne vs Tendulkar... Lara vs Warne... these contests light up my heart.

NOT who can score the most runs on the flattest decks.

ODI cricket is becoming such a joke.

Posted by James1972 on (November 5, 2013, 9:40 GMT)

There are 2 issues here: 1. The batters are getting better due to T20 cricket, why are the bowlers not? 2. The rules / equipment are in favour of the batsmen Verdict: Batsmen are winning = not good for cricket

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 9:32 GMT)

I think all the crowing from Indian fans comes from the fact that they won the series. Good on them as the Indian batting atm is awesome under flat track conditions. I remember Dhoni moaning when India lost the 3rd match upon Faulkner's blitz. Wasn't Dhoni so cheesed off with the new ODI rules that he suggested teams may as well have bowling machines and save the bowlers the sweat. Dahwan is a gem who I think will do well even on fast wickets, likewise with Kholi. However Rohit Sharma and the middle order would struggle big time.

One can see the administrators trying to juice the game up for the fans, but the huge bats, dead pitches, field restrictions and protection afforded to the batsmen (pads, helmets and no bouncers) has swayed the game too far in the batsmen's favour. The series became a BORE-fest. Who would want to be a bowler when rules and dead pitches kill you? Batsmen know all they have to do is swing straight with massive bats and clear the boundary off mishits

Posted by Yogesh_Sawant on (November 5, 2013, 9:22 GMT)

It is the attitude of the batsmen more than anything else that is helping them score heavily and not just the rules. Bowlers will have to adapt as they did for powerplay's and T20.

Posted by naamprik on (November 5, 2013, 9:09 GMT)

I think that we are writing off ODIs a bit too quickly. The first three games were quite exciting, but the last two were like a six hitting competition. And when you have high class batsmen like Rohit and Kohli who can hit through the line with no fear of the ball deviating from the straight and narrow, we have a sixathon. While Kohli is more inventive, Rohit's innings was just great cricket shots. But I think that we all agree there needs to be a better balance between bat and ball. In India, the problem is predominantly the wickets, but this is by choice. In the IPL, there were several wickets with a touch of grass that gave the bowlers a chance. Similarly, with the Champions Trophy. But when India plays, the wickets are flat and hard. I agree with MS that we should go back to the 5 outfielders asap, but that will not help if the wickets are dead, as the ball will continue to go over their heads. But we need to see how India bats on overseas wickets before declaring the final verdict

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 9:02 GMT)

the 438 game was played before the introduction of the new rules. the most entertaining odi I have watched. rules have nothing to do with this

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 8:54 GMT)

It would be better to watch hongkong Super Sixes series which is way better than this stupid flat tracks. what a shameful pitches these has been. They are playing only for records. Time will come when team will stop visiting India because of this stupidity

Posted by Int.Curator on (November 5, 2013, 8:44 GMT)

This series scores 50/100 for entertainment.

50 overs a game of boredom for the fielding team powerless to stop boundaries.

Boundaries definitely don't equate to entertainment for fielding teams supporters.

Pitches that gives batsmen such a overwhelming advantage over ball detracts from the appeal of the game.

Cricket administrators will learn from these mistakes.

Fair pitches will be policy and F50 cricket will equate to entertainment.

Posted by CricLook on (November 5, 2013, 8:42 GMT)

I think cricket administrator are either trying to kill the 50 over ODI format or indian pitches will kill the format altogether. Already the game becoming one sided affair favoring batsman. How will the next generation respond from now on..? Will anyone dream to be a fast bowler or a genuine spinner ? The new rules also bring more critic to ODI format. Still I believe 50 over ODI is better than T20. Bowler should get more attention , with rules and pitches and obviously favor from ICC. Otherwise the game surely will lose its laurels.

Posted by Sagarneel on (November 5, 2013, 8:21 GMT)

Yes, the new rules are crazy, so are the nature of the pitches; however, that DOES NOT make the Vinay Kumars or Ishant Sharmas (and the whole pack of Aussie bowlers) look like 'good-bowlers-victimized-by-the-conditions/rules'. Let's get it straight, look at the stats of Bhubaneshwar Kumar, how many runs has he leaked? or Mitchell Johnson, when he bowled to his potential. Can any statistician furnish the number of yorkers the bowlers of both the teams bowled? Did we see any creativity from the bowlers, or some very well disguised slower deliveries? Agreed the ICC need to look at some of the aspects of the game, but more importantly, the teams should scout for some 'bowlers', and not just a couple of guys who can run and throw the ball.

Posted by Valerio_DiBattista on (November 5, 2013, 7:50 GMT)

I thought the series was a disgrace. I couldn't even bear looking at the scorecards, let alone watch any of the matches. To me, and I know a lot of serious cricket fans think the same, this is simply not cricket. I thought it was appalling.

Posted by gatman11 on (November 5, 2013, 7:29 GMT)

I think even with the easiest of bowling being delivered, it is still a batsman's ability to perfectly hit and keep doing so for the whole inning and reach 200 or to reach 100 in 52 balls. I think credit does go to the batsmen who can score with this capability. Please talk to David Whatmore to know how difficult it is to teach a batsman to make runs and make runs quick. So the point is that that there is variety in cricket sometimes somewhere either batting or bowling would dominate. A good cricket player is the one who plays to perfection in good conditions and also works hard and tries his best under unfavorable conditions. Al great bowlers have always performed well under difficult conditions.

Posted by gatman11 on (November 5, 2013, 7:21 GMT)

Is any body here following current cricket being played outside India also. There are series being played with same game rules and the the matches are very competitive. So ideas of changing rules based on one series are pretty ridiculous. The bowlers are doing pretty well in other series which are currently underway.

Posted by Naresh28 on (November 5, 2013, 7:05 GMT)

DEW.....could also be a difference when people are comparing UAE grounds to INDIA. There is a lot more dew in India at this time of the year. Ball could skidding through to the boundary. UAE the grounds might have less dew?

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 6:59 GMT)

Making better pitches may be????

Posted by Un_Citoyen_Indien on (November 5, 2013, 6:57 GMT)

@ ab_cricket: Indians ENJOYED this series. Nobody really cares if you or anyone else feels that that's a shame.

Posted by BackStreetBowler on (November 5, 2013, 6:49 GMT)

The article and a lot of the comments by readers presumes that the bowlers have done all they could, but were still massacred as they were victims of the playing conditions (pitch, 2 balls, fielding restrictions, etc.).

I, however, beg to differ. I am loathe to exonerate the bowling and let them off so lightly. The number of length balls that were bowled during the match were obnoxious. It was almost an invitation being extended to put the ball over the ropes ever so often.

I think the bowling performance was really poor by both sides. Better bowling sides would have run away with the series against India.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 6:46 GMT)

@ ab_cricket November 5, 2013, 6:10 GMT

You care for bowlers. You care for stumps go cartwheeling by a real fast bowler. You care for mistimed shot from a sweep is caught by a diving wicket keeper. You care for an innocuous part time bowler not only stops the flow of runs but also finds the leg before the wicket of a well established batsman. It's a shame that you have closed your eyes the new extra-ordinary dimensions are seen on world cricket. It's a shame when you start commenting with " India has always been a weak bowling attack and generally public in India regard bowling as a secondary unit in the game". Because you don't accept that there is a world beyond your imaginations & still cricket game is decided by runs only .....not by wickets.

It's a reality you don't want to understand & that is a huge shame.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 6:44 GMT)

Fielding restrictions have made the ODI cricket entertaining certainly, however these restrictions are not the only reason for such a wonderful entertainment. Flat pitches and quick outfield in India is not favourable for bowlers. On the other hand in dubai and abu dhabi, scoring 200 Runs is difficult with the same fielding restrictions. Flat pitches are not the real test of batsman and bowlers as well and are not good for health of cricket in future. Even Captain MS Dhoni also told the same thing in presentation of 6th ODI. ICC should revise their rules to not allow the batsman to score runs in such an easy manner with thick quality bats.

Posted by Naresh28 on (November 5, 2013, 6:37 GMT)

ICC to blame for new rule changes which should have been implemented only after a test run. BCCI for the flat tracks.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 6:33 GMT)

Its the pitches that have produced the 'sixathons'. Not the small grounds or the rules. Bowlers have been dominating in UAE (Pak vs SA) and thats because of quality bowling and sporting wickets.

The games in India are geared towards how they like to play their cricket; making 'records'. So they are producing records galore.

To be fair, India's strength is their batsmen so they have batting tracks. They know they can chase down almost any score with the sort of hitters they have on batting tracks.

Its a way of gaining home advantage that EVERY county in world cricket likes. Having said that, Dhoni shouldn't be blaming the rules of the game if his bowlers take more flak than the opposition every now and then. India did set the rules of engagement themselves, the impact of the ICC rule change was minimal since the batsmen were clearing the outfield by a distance.

Posted by biggyd on (November 5, 2013, 6:29 GMT)

india will pay the price for their poor pitches almost everywhere else they play in the world, and then their local runfests will become meaningless even to them.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 6:28 GMT)

Good cricket is a contest between bat and ball, but the quality of that contest isn't just measured in the score. If a normal score is 350 then so be it, as long as good bowling can impact the game just as much as good batting can. The problem in this series was not the high scores, but that every bowler got hammered for about the same number of runs per over, and few wickets were the result of good bowling. That's an issue with feather bed pitches, not out-fielders or good bats. Put these same players with the current rules and with their magical wonder-bats on a green pitch and we'll see if the batting continues to dominate the bowling.

Posted by ab_cricket on (November 5, 2013, 6:10 GMT)

I would rather see cricket die its death and put in the history books as a heritage sport than see a series like Ind Aus 2013-14. Its quite misleading what people think the meaning of the word 'Entertainment' is. India has always been a weak bowling attack and generally public in India regard bowling as a secondary unit in the game. You feed them with a batting superior match and the Indian masses are bound to get entertained. Its a shame we dont get entertained when stumps go cartwheeling by a real fast bowler. Its a shame we dont get entertained when a mistimed shot from a sweep is caught by a diving wicket keeper. Its a shame we dont get entertained when an innocuous part time bowler not only stops the flow of runs but also finds the leg before the wicket of a well established batsman . Its a shame!

Posted by PerfectTen on (November 5, 2013, 5:55 GMT)

It was a relief to see the series end. With the bowlers on both the sides having no chance of winning it for their teams, it easily was one of the worst series played between the two sides. The game becomes interesting only when there's a keen contest between the skills & temperament of the batsmen and the bowlers and not just batsmen from opposing teams. In this series all 22 looked capable of scoring sixes and fours at will, while capable strike bowlers looked pedestrian and part-time. If the trend continues without adequate changes to the way the pitches, grounds and of course the playing rules are made, we will soon see the apprehensions about the format's popularity coming true.

Posted by CricketFever11 on (November 5, 2013, 5:54 GMT)

Very small grounds lol.................

Posted by jbentham on (November 5, 2013, 5:30 GMT)

It is hard to assess whether the overall bowling in this tournament was shoddy, or whether the batting was outstanding. In all honesty, it could have been both and it could have been neither. Any cricket fan could verify that the current Indian team does not possess an exceptionally strong bowling line up. For a long time, the Indian team has relied on a strategy of batting themselves to a position of safety (or at least to a point where their bowlers aren't under much stress). Additionally, Australia hasn't been on-song since before the last ODI world cup. In the latest Ashes, Australia was convincingly outplayed by England - the series was marred by batting failures and inadequate bowling. The Australian bowling dept still looks weak. The fact that Australia, with their dodgy batting, were able to pull off some major victories could indicate that the bowling was not up to scratch. I don't agree that cricket needs to become "more entertaining" like an American sport.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 5:26 GMT)

We may as well have a bowling machine and have fielders at the ropes to fetch ball from the boundary line ;) Bowlers will become tigers, near extinct species! Singles will be applauded when 6's and 4's will be greeted with yawn. Sure way to kill cricket....

Posted by abirbanerjee on (November 5, 2013, 5:16 GMT)

In order to pander to "public taste", international cricket matches have become jokes..or circuses. People like to see fours and sixes - so shorten boundaries to lilliput standards, put in fielding restrictions... make pitches flat. I can think of no other game where the basic rules of the game and measurements are altered so much. Football is probably more popular worldwide, and people like to watch goals being scored. BUT... they didn't widen the goals to 50 yards, or make the fields smaller.. all in the name or popularity. Neither have they reduced the court size in say, badminton or tennis, just because people like to see great volleys or smashes. And, that did not dent the popularity of the games. The current one day or 20/20 game is not cricket, it's something else. Why are the powers-that-be in cricket making a mockery of the game ? Or, if they do, why call it cricket, and not hitcket or something ?

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 5:13 GMT)

@PFEL ... Johnson was only effective against Yuvi and Raina .. ! Had you not seen how Dhawan Rohit and Virat have hammered him...!! His economy was more than the required run rate ..!! how come you say he is agood bowler and others not..!!

Posted by Vinod on (November 5, 2013, 5:10 GMT)

I don't agree with the sentiment that more runs in ODI cricket is more entertainment. For me this series was boring to watch players hitting sixes and fours.. meaningless cricket. There is no challenge... Cricket has become a meaningless sports with every tom dick and harry can hit sixes these days, whereas no bowler can bowl yorkers like what Wasim Akram used to bowl even on the dead pitches of Sharjah. ICC should take the blame for this meaningless cricket, with more players in the 30 yard circle, allowing bats with thicker bottom, power plays etc. Let's analyze the damage being done...These days even if I have to put much effort in thatching a cricket match, I quickly lose interest to carry on.... I am sure there are fans like me, who want a contest with bat and bowl,, and not some meaningless boring cricket...

Posted by 9ST9 on (November 5, 2013, 5:02 GMT)

Really? we talked about this even back in 2009, and then it wasn't just the rules that were to blame: read this article - http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/439960.html

feather bed pitches must go, and the fans who want to watch only batting along with them.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 5:01 GMT)

ICC should try the old 15 over powerplay (only) once again to see the difference....

Posted by landl47 on (November 5, 2013, 4:42 GMT)

However you justify it, to me as a neutral this was a very unsatisfactory series to watch. I want to see bowlers challenging batsmen, not massive scores on both sides with bowlers contributing nothing except serving up balls to hit. 11 completed innings, 9 scores of over 300 and one of 295... two scores of 350 not being enough to win....38 sixes in a game. Bowling? Nothing to remember.

The home fans jumped around at every Indian boundary, gasped in horror at every opponent's score and had a great time. This may indeed be the future of cricket- a game where technique, strategy, concentration and courage count for nothing and thrashing the ball into the stands is all that matters.

It's just not a future that appeals to me.

Posted by Hamza.Arif on (November 5, 2013, 4:41 GMT)

All those defending Indian batting, i completely endorse their quality of batting, but one should never forget how they were exposed by same pakistani bowling line up in almost the same conditions in the same year. u gotta accept that indian & australian bowling is really below par which some how more often cancels out for their good batting. Even batter Indian batting tumbled in Aus & England to 4-0 defeat, which shows how much batting paradise they have got. on the other hand pitches in UAE r far more supportive, giving some assistance to Spinners n even good fast bowling, but indian pitches just dont to support their batting n may be thats why they r short of quality bowling as well.

Posted by JustIPL on (November 5, 2013, 4:31 GMT)

@Posted by on (November 5, 2013, 3:41 GMT): Grond is level as rules apply to both teams equally. If SA & Pak play india then the results will be no different. How moany runs india scored against pak bwoling in india? What was Kohli score? Any centuries.

Posted by JustIPL on (November 5, 2013, 4:24 GMT)

@PFEL: So that indian bowlers can contain the runs in death overs. This series was a drama to show that rules are injuring so that they are scrapped and india are able to defend in Australia. Two new balls are also tough to face by this so called young brigade. If a spinner tops the ICC ranking then boundary fielders and two new balls are not a problem. Even ashwin while he is on decline and is forced to abandon his doosra or carrom ball was able to contain the runs during the run fests. He conceded only few runs while both vinay and ishant were torn apart either side of his over. Another fact is that aussie three precious allrounders have shone their worth in this series and that is why india were reeling most of the time despite winning. Bowlers were of no good quality so only Johnson mattered which proves that good bowlers will be effective regardless of the rules, etc.

Posted by humi_cric on (November 5, 2013, 4:24 GMT)

ICC tries too many things, why not give a captain flexibility to place his fielder anywhere (without even 30 yard circle restrictions) in the last 10 overs (after two powerplays in the first 40 overs), I think this will eliminate the impact of T20 from the 50 overs game, as now a days most of the team first target is to play 30 overs with caution and then changed the mood to T20, just a food for thought.

Posted by satishchandar on (November 5, 2013, 4:18 GMT)

It really turned out to a F50 if you look at the end score alone.. If we carefully look into the proceedings, we would look a different picture.. The way the temas paced their innings need to be looked carefully.. Almost every game the teams were scoring at 5.5-6 in the first 30 overs and went berserk after that only.. When Shami broke the back of Aussie batting in one game, they ended up 300 still because of carful batting.. Rohit in every game reached 50 in almost 70 balls and the two 100s were off nearly 115 balls and just smacked out after that.. Finch and Dhawan would likely being in same vein unless tracks are slow and not condusive to stroke making.. Almost similar can be said with Watson and Virat.. Bailey and Rohit scoring huge chunk of runs was a bit due to track(not disrespecting their talents here but both are technically little circumspect).. While MSD is a all time great finisher in either innings, Faulkner scoring heavy might not happen every day(largely due to bad bwlrs

Posted by cricket_jaya on (November 5, 2013, 4:15 GMT)

@Chris_Howard> totally agree with you

Do we need 11 Players to play in this kind of pitches????

Posted by Proteas-13thman on (November 5, 2013, 4:13 GMT)

I say keep it~! Just add a fourth stump~! Bowlers will be smiling from ear to ear then :-)

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 4:10 GMT)

when Pakistan came to india that time what was kohli doing that tome whe he was not disparching. we have quality bowlets thats why u india's batsman had no clue that time. I think u forgot

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 3:46 GMT)

Two teams showcased their batting strength brilliantly while bowling and fielding was non existent coupled by a low quality bowling.

Bowlers who gave over 5 runs an over were always found to be uneconomical while bowlers who conceded under 4 runs an over were found to be very tricky.

It seems now the yardstick has doubled. 250 runs were usually defendable well not anymore. After two chases over 350 runs nothing seems to be defendable.

The famed Kapil's 11 defended a meager 180 odd runs in a 55 over game against the mighty West Indies to lift the 83 world cup and further went on to defend 120 odd runs in the Rothmans cup three years later.

Has cricket evolved so much that we will never see an underdog win ever again?

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 3:41 GMT)

If u allow Pak vs SA to play on the same track u will find a score of around 280-320 will be enough for a nail biting contest. U have to look at so many things, its not only pitch or new rules or small grounds, its some mediocre bowling & positive batting which has resulted in such huge scores. The rule of only 4 players protecting boundary is ridiculous as such, why should a captain be forced to restrict its fielding resources. At least in the last 10 overs more fielders should be allowed to protect boundary to make things even.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 3:31 GMT)

Same rules are there in India, BD & UAE. Pitches are also nearby same. Boundaries & environment are also same. Teams are different. Bottom rank BD could able to post decent 275-305 runs in 3 ODIs against quality bowling attack of Nzl. Pitches weren't deteriorated with the time. But still, in contrast, Nzl batsmen had no clue about BD bowling. Talk about SA v/s Pak & IND v/s AUS. Same balls, same pitch, same full tosses but Rohit/Dhawan/Kohli.Bailey/Maxy/Folkner dispatched them for maximum where as AB giving lolly back to the bowler, Faf/Duminy/Ingram/jamshed/umar/hafeez had no clue about ball. It showed pure disability of batting terms at one place that resulted in low score of 170+ odd maximum whereas on the other side we have seen gem of batting skills by top quality teams. But many experts see at different angle & are raising eyebrows on pitch, rules, balls,short fences. Haven't seen such mindsets before whose only agenda is to mock real performers & giving pat to blunders.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 3:18 GMT)

high totals depends upon who is playing whom and where , no 1 and 2 playing each other bound to hv high totals , teams playing in uae do not hv batsman/ players to match ind - aus team thats why totals are low

Posted by baba_dipen on (November 5, 2013, 2:50 GMT)

It will be called "FAST 50"

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 2:45 GMT)

So much talk about this-yet there's a huge BOWLING series over in the UAE. The era of bowling is not over. When Pakistan and South Africa can spin each other out for totals under 200 regularly, that shows that there is still quality bowling. India has ALWAYS gotten excellent batting and Australian batting is not that surprising either. Come on.

Posted by PFEL on (November 5, 2013, 2:32 GMT)

They should allow 5 men outside the circle from 40 overs onwards. The whole reason they changed it was because of boring middle overs anyway.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 2:23 GMT)

It should be taken in the perspective that out of the five other ODIs played in Bangladesh and Dubai only one saw a score in excess of 300 and two matches were won with scores of around 200. So the biggest issue is the nature of pitches in India. We should have pitches helping not only stroke play but also wickets with the new ball. Pitches with more bounce will help conventional spinners as well.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 2:01 GMT)

first off all I do agree with pitches being flat and new rules making very difficult for the bowlers specially in India. In India this is the start of the season and u can only have two kind of pitches. one very dry and slow spin which doesn't suit Australians and other one is flat rock pitches. so opted for the latter one which would benefit Australian and spectators! nobody had thought it would become overdose and batsman like rohit and Faulkner could hit centuries and double centuries!

Posted by vijaysun1 on (November 5, 2013, 1:51 GMT)

Just to add to my earlier point, I would have absolutely no problem if the boundaries were pushed back (not that it would have changed anything in this particular series since the sixes were so huge that they reached second tier of the stands in most cases).

A better way to achieve balance between bat and ball is to make the seam more pronounced (thicker) in my opinion, this will increase the ability of bowlers to swing/seam/spin the ball more and this will automatically mean batsmen have to be more mindful before playing attaching strokes. Good swing and spin bowling is as excited a spectacle as sixes and fours and all it needs is one rule change with respect to the ball. Not sure what the ICC's cricket commitee gets paid for if it could not think of that exceedingly simple yet effective change....but I suppose it's so much easier for everyone to blame the BCCI and cricket played in India....I hate how the ICC's cricket committee gets a free pass for allthe daft rule changes in ODIs

Posted by Chris_Howard on (November 5, 2013, 0:22 GMT)

It's quite simple really. One bowler, a bucket of balls and a keeper. No score if it doesn't reach the boundary. Ball boys to return balls hit for four or six and pick up other balls at end each over. There's your future.

Posted by   on (November 5, 2013, 0:14 GMT)

Though India won it was an even contest. But it was Indian batsmen VS Austrialian batsmen. The rules were bent so much it would have been more fun if teams had 11 batsmen each, Bowlers had no role. a bowler who gave away 100 plus in 9 overs ended on the winning side. Result can't be more shewed. Please lets make it an even contest.No power play field restrictions.No restrictions even in non power play overs. Only one ball.And maybe longer boundaries.

Posted by ex-Srilankan on (November 4, 2013, 23:37 GMT)

To those Australians and English fans criticicing the so-called flat pitches of India, I predict you are going to see 300 plus totals regularly in the Australia vs England ODI series after the Ashes.

Posted by LillianThomson on (November 4, 2013, 23:37 GMT)

Funnily enough, this might just be the salvation of cricket.

It has become pretty obvious that the BCCI is the economic superpower and has no desire for good governance of cricket, but rather just wants to get its own way.

Outside Asia, most of us primarily follow Test cricket. We watch it on TV on our days off work and school and when we have to work we follow it on the radio or on our smartphones. Those of us who follow cricket mainly ignore T20 and ODIs, which are for non-fans.

But Asians, and especially Indians, seem mainly to want to watch an orgy of 4s and 6s.

This widening gulf leaves the rest of us hope that India will go its own way and take with it and with our blessing our own 20 and 50 over specialists whom we really don't value anyway.

And with any luck we will then have Test cricket back for ourselves and can play by the rules we all want, including DRS.

I never much cared for ODIs and I've always detested T20. India can have both if we can have Tests.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 23:10 GMT)

@d1n0 whether bad pitches and shorter boundries are the part of new rules ?

nothing much to do with the new rules and if this is the case then why in other parts of the world we are having good ODIs?

these are the tactics to win matches.

we have strong batting and poor bowling. ok no problem. provide flat tracks with short boundaries. it's as simple as that.

a miss hit ends up in a six... thinks again because it has nothing to do with new rules.

looking forward for India SA series to find some answers.

Posted by jaideep1960 on (November 4, 2013, 23:06 GMT)

T20 matches compete with movies lengthwise - in fact they are even shown in theaters in 3 hr slots, and hence are so popular. It is this popularity of T20 that left ODIs no choice but to make things more exciting. I know that many out there will disagree with me, but cricket is no more than a form of entertainment, and is no more (or less) important than that. So, those purveying this form of entertainment must of necessity respond to customer demand - which they are doing pretty well. As for test matches, their future is the same as of any colonial pastime - to be indulged in, whether as participant or audience, by those that have too much free time. And to those lamenting about the loss of a pastime that fewer and fewer people have time for: I say please remember, the issue is not as important as curing cancer, feeding the hungry or space exploration.

Posted by pranavsinha94 on (November 4, 2013, 22:59 GMT)

India should bring back yusuf pathan to the squad on these pitches and INDIA WOULD SCORE MORE THAN 400 EVERYTIME

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 22:56 GMT)

Cricket is dying for me there has to be balance else forget your Mcgrath's Akram's Donald's.Lets see how these world class Indian batsmen perform in S.Africa i can bet my life they will fail miserably.

Posted by MinusZero on (November 4, 2013, 22:51 GMT)

True cricket fans only have an interest in tests anyway.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 22:47 GMT)

The reason why so many runs were scored in this series is not only that these are flat batting tracks but both teams have very poor blowing attacks. Compare this attack to England, South Africa, Pakistan or Windies they would not be such a run fest!!!!

Posted by Fogu on (November 4, 2013, 22:42 GMT)

Three series: IND/AUS: average of 685 runs scored per game @ 7.03 with avg wickets @ 52.7 BAN/NZ: average of 499 runs scored per game @ 5.46 with avg wickets @ 29.94 PAK/SA: average of 358 runs scored per game @ 3.85 with avg wickets @ 17.9

I understand the rules favor the batsmen more now but based on the above, I think there is no need to change rules yet. We just need to prepare better pitches in IN.

Posted by lee_man on (November 4, 2013, 22:08 GMT)

Who wants to to see a 50 over version of T20? I personally found the series to be very monotonous...just batsmen hitting the ball to all parts of the ground for an extended period of time. That's okay for T20 but it kills the 50 over game. The solution: No more flat tracks. Let's see the batsmen hit out when there is something in the wicket for the bowlers. That would be interesting.

Posted by tiger_1217 on (November 4, 2013, 21:42 GMT)

The current series has shown how boring ODI cricket has become on the flat indian pitches, I think even the crowd cheering for 4s and 6s felt boring after a point. There are two things that cross my mind 1) What about pitches outside the sub-continent, are they producing the same run chasing CONSISTENTLY? I say consistently, because this was the only series where almost every match was a 300+ score in every innings. And can these batsmen play the same with bowling of the likes of Steyn, Ajmal, James Anderson etc 2) Quality of bowling. With bowlers like Ishant Sharma, Mitchell Johnson, Vinay Kumar, etc the opposition can score even 400+ runs with the tail batting. Why are countries not able to find talented fast bowlers like McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh etc.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 21:36 GMT)

At the end of series.... i was bored of watching sixes and fours !!! Wickets were not falling..... cathes being dropped!!!

Posted by muxa on (November 4, 2013, 21:34 GMT)

@ mahesh s panicker : totally agree with you the new conditions are not to blame here ,not in the presence of such batting conditions ..are pak-southafrica series under some different rules ??

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 21:34 GMT)

No disrespect to the Sharmas and Kohlis, their individual feats are highly commendable. However, my love for ODIs has diminished after this series. I would prefer to be taken back to 1996 where the contests were more even between bat and ball. It just ain't cricket anymore...

Posted by ilililililililililililililx on (November 4, 2013, 20:52 GMT)

look at Pakistan vs south africa series. It is struggle to get over 200!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 20:41 GMT)

aus vs india ODI 2013 series was best series of all time. entertaining cricket and who says that virat or rohit or even bailey were playing slog shots or cross batted shots. no.

i think cricket is multi billion business now and people want to see entertainment in every over. when we see pak vs sa 2013 ODI series in UAE it looks extremely boring in front of greatest series between aus vs india where they broke lots of record.

salute to T2020 cricket format that players are coming out of their shells and starting to bat like king viv richards. thanks BCCI for great series and pre viewing us the future of cricket in next 5 years.

Posted by hamza893 on (November 4, 2013, 20:29 GMT)

Aren't you following Pak-SA series,batsman are dieing for scoring runs.In my opinion,the new rules have put more pressure on batsman than bowler, but if you make small ground ,fead and flat piches and such floppy bowling ,what you expect more.India will be a lot of trouble when they will face bouncy tracks, they have now become used to flat tracks and their bowlers average is now exceeding their batsmen ,LOL

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 20:23 GMT)

pathetic bowlinng by both teams and pancake like ptches are the main contributors for this run fest

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 20:20 GMT)

"The time has come to revisit the balance between bat and ball" The time has come to revisit Indian playing conditions, the same thing is not happening in other ODI series' in other parts of the world.

Indian batsmen should be dominating the rankings soon. Uneven playing conditions between different countries makes statistical rankings and comparisons highly inaccurate.

Posted by Herbet on (November 4, 2013, 20:17 GMT)

India, the country rather than the team, is killing cricket. I have a suggestion; how about making T20/F50 a separate sport? If you want to be an 'Entertainer', go to India and slog meaningless sixes into packed stands, past the dancing girls, with no fielders in your way. If you want to be a cricketer go to England, Australia or South Africa and play multi day two innings games on varied pitches requiring a variety of skills. The Indian 'Entertainment' could be like a bat and ball WWE Wrestling, as opposed to the traditional Olympic wrestling that would be cricket.

Posted by pakassasin on (November 4, 2013, 20:05 GMT)

I am not surprised as Dhoni is making a big fuss about that rule. A. because India have the weakest bowling in world cricket and B. their batsman love to play on runway. Even if 1 more fielder will be allowed, I don't think it will help them in anyways. Dhoni needs to find some good bowlers otherwise they will get smack all around the park.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 19:58 GMT)

Yes, the new rules played apart in the high scores but come on. The bowling in this series was abysmal. Both bowling attacks lacked any real consistency in bowling the right line and length and now everybody just is looking for something to blame. Most of the time all you saw was spinners bowling half trackers and the fast bowlers over pitching it or in the case of Vinay Kumar or Ishant Sharma just waist high bouncers. Blame the rules all you want but if any of the top class bowlers were here it would not have been this bad.

Posted by KiwiCricktstar on (November 4, 2013, 19:52 GMT)

I put it down to Indian pitches, its a joke. all you in indian fans need to know that what your watching isn't cricket... cricket should be banned from being played in india with all matches to be played in true cricket conditions in AUS, NZ Eng and SA

Posted by blthndr on (November 4, 2013, 19:44 GMT)

plz dont say anything abt the matches in dubai...its just poor batting from both sides.....SA just cant handle spin well tied their hands to spinners and pak never learn from their mistakes....

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 19:42 GMT)

Only those with short attention spans found ODI cricket boring. These flat pitches HAVE made the game boring. it's not a contest between bat and ball anymore, it's merely a contest of batsmen from one side against the batsmen from the other side. I thought the Pakistan vs South Africa game was far more entertaining. The game had it all, the bowlers actually stood a chance, the batsmen had to actually work for their runs and we ended up with a 1 run ballgame. Now that is entertainment. Not 700 runs scored for only 10 wickets like at Nagpur

Posted by sidh78 on (November 4, 2013, 19:40 GMT)

Dear indian team bashers who call india flat track bullies please note the record of india on fast bouncy seaming tracks out side SC 1.india won 2 WC in 1983(ODI)&2007(T20)in eng & SA respe. 2.finalist in 2003 WC in SA 3.won CT this year 2013 in eng without loosing a single match(including warm up matches) 4.won CB series in aus defeating strong aus team having hayden ponting symond in 2008 in straight 2 finals 5.won Nest West trophy in eng in 2001 6.won U-19 WC in aus in 2013. 7.won test series in eng,NZ,WI 8.Draw test series in SA in 2011(1-1).nearly won that series but kallis inning save SA from defeat but india totally dominate that draw test match 9.nearly draw the test series in aus 2-2 in 2008 if umpiring in that series was not poor. 10.won tri series in WI in 2013. 11.india A team played very well in SA in 2013. Also india won many series & tournaments SL Ban. So if india is flat track bullies how can india have such good records on fast bouncy seaming pitches.

Posted by tanveers on (November 4, 2013, 19:37 GMT)

With the new rules, Cricket has become a sport of cheap entertainment. Cricket is a game of a tussle between bat and ball. There has to be an even contest between bat and ball -- or else just do some underarm throws, make the boundary even smaller and decide on which team hits the maximum sixes wins. Drum roll! If they must keep these ridiculous rules of short boundary, etc. then ICC should draw a line for records, pre-2013 and post-2013 records because it is unfair/insult for the former batting greats to be compared with current generation of sloggers.

Posted by Digimont on (November 4, 2013, 19:32 GMT)

@sharidas - the entire point of this article (which you have completely missed) is that the contest between bat & ball has been won (to use boxing speak) by a knockout on the first punch. This is NOT a competition between bat & ball, which is the oft stated PURPOSE of this game we call cricket. The issue with the rules is that they are supposed to create an equilibrium between bat and ball, so that the contest can start from there, with all the variables an even contest between those skills (yes, and fielding) can create. Who hits the biggest and most frequent sixes is a competition that doesn't need bowlers or fielders. If that is the sport you love, then give it a name, but don't call it cricket.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 19:22 GMT)

I really hope when India comes to NZ that we produce true NZ style wickets. This will find out many of the Indian batsmen. What I hope we do not see in the future is 'standardised wickets', the whole point of cricket is variety in conditions and adapting.

Posted by InnocentGuy on (November 4, 2013, 19:22 GMT)

I do agree that this has become nonsensical but cricket is a business now and the businessmen only want something that sells and nothing else. That said, the increased challenges for bowling only means that at least one of batting and bowling can become stronger over time. In a single match, it is tough to even out conditions for batting and bowling. If the pitches are all pacy or all turning, then at least over a series, the batsmen get better and better and playing good bowling. The same can be held true here: if the pitches are all flat and rules are stacked against you, you'd think that over a period of 6-7 games or a couple of series, the bowlers eventually find ways to get better. What good are your skills if there aren't a few challenges thrown in to test them?

Posted by d1n0 on (November 4, 2013, 19:09 GMT)

Congratulations to the ICC in turning ODIs into longer T20Is. Bad pitches, shorter boundaries, altered rules are turning this game into joke. 2 balls were bad enough but they just keep adding it on... These kind of totals used to show up when the teams facing each other had large disparities in talent. It was boring then and it is boring now. No doubt India has an amazing batting lineup, but isn't it odd all 3 double centuries were scored in India??

Posted by sharidas on (November 4, 2013, 18:37 GMT)

Was the final result of 3-2 totally one-sided ? It was a closely contested series and irrespective of the fact that there were a lot of runs scored, the matches were exciting. As Nagaraj Gundappa stated, only a few batsmen scored big runs. Agreed that the pitches favored the batsmen more, but then it is also for the bowlers to find ways to restrict and take wickets,whatever the condition of the pitch. Batsmen have come up with improvised shots, so it is for the bowlers to improvise as well.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 18:34 GMT)

Same rules are there in India, BD & UAE. Pitches are also nearby same. Climate & environment are also same. Teams are different. Bottom rank BD could able to post decent 275-305 runs in 3 ODIs against quality bowling attack of Nzl. Pitches weren't deteriorated with the time. But still, in contrast, Nzl batsmen had no clue about BD bowling. Talk about SA v/s Pak & IND v/s AUS. Same balls, same pitch, same full tosses but Rohit/Dhawan/Kohli.Bailey/Maxy/Folkner dispatched them for maximum where as AB giving lolly back to the bowler, Faf/Duminy/Ingram/jamshed/umar/hafeez had no clue about ball. It showed pure disability of batting terms at one place that resulted in low scoring of 170+ odd maximum whereas on the other side we have seen gem of batting skills of top quality teams. But many experts see at different angle & are raising eyebrows on pitch, rules, balls. Haven't seen such absurd mindsets before whose only agenda is to mock real performers & giving pat to blunders.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 18:29 GMT)

Long ago a theory was propounded. It was called The Darwin's Theory which said the fittest will survive. ODI cricket is in a phase of evolution. And mediocre bowlers are being found out. Whilst having super short boundaries skews the contest in favor of batsmen, not much else does if a bowler has some skill. The quality of bowling in this series barring Mitchell Johnson was pathetic. Batsmen thrived. It was as simple as that. Put in a bowling attack of Ajmal, Malinga, Steyn, Morkel and the like on the same pitches against the same batsmen. I doubt if 3596 runs would be scored. And that should settle this argument.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 18:24 GMT)

Indian pitches are known for high scoring nothing new in that. With new rules it is difficult to score on a seaming pitch with 2 new balls swinging the whole inning & 5 fielders inside, while on a wkt like India, no scope for reverse swing no big amount of spin with a 25 over ball. So we are finding high scores going higher & low score further lower. Just wait till world cup, lets see the results all over the world. I think these new rules are more friendly for Aus/SA/English condition, where its difficult to score. Indian subcontinent pitches are easier so these bowlers are struggling here & with Indian batting in supreme form India is somehow winning here. We need 1 ball that can reverse swing & spin enough in the last 10-15 overs so that no team can score 100 runs in last 5 overs

Posted by TrueFactors on (November 4, 2013, 18:12 GMT)

I am wondering if we bring new rule in cricket - Batsmen cannot hit the ball outside 30 yard circle, if fielder is not set in 25 yards both side (left/right) of deeper position Or, no runs will be awarded, except if you hit it for six. This will force batsmen to play in direction where fielders are set and then there will be a more interesting competition in shots. Who knows.

Posted by inswing on (November 4, 2013, 18:04 GMT)

Bowlers must be protected to create a better balance between bat and ball. Otherwise, the quality of the bowler has no meaning, as both good and bad bowlers are hit for 7-8 runs per over. For short term excitement, we are harming the game because bowlers are simply not valued. Why should any kid want to become a bowler? So that he can be carted around the ground at will and pick up an occasional wicket of a miscue? Apart from having one more fielder outside the circle, the rules should be (1) one more bouncer allowed per over (2) no free hits for no balls (3) minimum required ground size, so the shortest boundary is no less than 85 meters or so.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 17:57 GMT)

Regardless of conditions - be it a dead pitch, small boundaries, new rules, whatever - chasing 350+ is no mean feat. I very much doubt that any other team would have managed to do it even once in these conditions, leave alone twice in 3 games. It only shows India's monstrous batting strength in the limited overs game. India will stay number 1 for a while to come. And to the author who called it a "meaningless series", in fact it turned out quite the contrary - a thrilling series that was well followed by cricket fans all around the world, and one that went right down to the wire. Please get your perspectives right!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 17:56 GMT)

The absolutely horrendous pitches and the small boundaries made the new regulations look even more ridiculous. Regardless of those horrible pitches, the new rules are proving particularly difficult in terms of reverse swing, and the spinner has less and less if there is no life in the track. This country is the countries of idiotic curators who thing cricket is all about batsmanship and there is nothing like a bowler's wicket, so I don't see any chance of a revival of proper ODI cricket in India any time soon. Perhaps they should now look to play a side full of batsmen who can bowl. Perhaps India can go in with Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli, Yuvraj Singh, Suresh Raina, MS Dhoni, Virender Sehwag, Ravindra Jadeja, Abhishek Nayar, Rishi Dhawan, Parwez Rasool and Joginder Sharma. Let the opposition score 500 and then let them chase it down in 38.3 overs. Or let them score 600 and restrict the opposition to 595.

Posted by Agila on (November 4, 2013, 17:48 GMT)

Its just a high voltage series between two of the best ODI teams in the world, Aus on one hand tried to attack India's weak link , which is Indian bowling, conversely India tried to play to its strength which is batting and hence the high scores..its neither the pitches nor the rules leading to ODI mutation. Its so illogical that people compare it to the SA/Pak series in dubai, where they had low scoring contests, where in SA are known to be vulnerable on slower pitches and spin based attack, and Pak were never known for their batting prowess anyways.

Posted by balajik1968 on (November 4, 2013, 17:44 GMT)

I haven't kept track, but I feel there has been too much tinkering with the rules over the last few years for ODI's. Maybe we should allow 5 fielders outside the circle, and then largely let things go on. These rules were changed to create some excitement during the 15-40 over period, when most teams looked to consolidate. I really don't know if it's worked, but the batting powerplay has not made much difference, mainly because there are minimum 10 more overs, and teams are looking to keep wickets for the end. Coming to this series, there have been high scores in India, but this series has been strange. Let us see how these pitches behave in say January, when a lot of Ranji would have been played. The Indian domestic season has just started.

Posted by binu.emiliya on (November 4, 2013, 17:41 GMT)

Everybody is praising too much about SA and PAK matches.In the first match PAK batting collapsed like school team chasing a modest score, it was bad shot selection of PAK batsmen cost the match for PAK, In the second match PAK bowled very well and SA batting was very bad.In the last match between NZ and BD , NZ was aggressive at the end only otherwise it whould have been 335-340 total and BD may chase down that total too

Posted by connectespn on (November 4, 2013, 17:15 GMT)

Those who complain about the Indian pitches being so batsman friendly and lets people score double ton easily. Few facts for you guys.

1, Ali Brown-Surrey-Glamorgan-268-2002 2, Shikhar Dhawan-India A-South Africa A-248-2013 3, Graeme Pollock-Eastern Province-Border-222*-1974 4, Jamie How-Central Districts-Northern Districts-222-2012 5, Virender Sehwag-India-West Indies-219-2011 6, Rohit Sharma-India-Australia-209-2013 7, Mohammad Ali-Pakistan-Customs-Defence Housing Authority-207-2005 8, Alvin Kallicharran-Warwickshire-Oxfordshire-206-1984 9, Ali Brown -Surrey-Hampshire-203-1997 10, Khalid Latif-Karachi Dolphins-Quetta-204*-2009 11, Alan Barrow-Natal-South African XI-202-1975 12, Ravi Bopara-Essex- Leicestershire-201*-2008 13, Vince Wells-Leicestershire-Berkshire -201-1996 14, Sachin Tendulkar- India- South Africa-200-2010

Double ton: In England pitches? 5. In SA: 3. In India? 3. In Pakistan? 2. In NZ: 1.

So logically English men prepare the batting paradise pitches ha?!?!

Posted by Rooohan on (November 4, 2013, 17:14 GMT)

For the future of cricket, make the game 36 overs, kill everything else.

Posted by muxa on (November 4, 2013, 16:52 GMT)

i think every one is forgetting about pak-southafrica series in dubai.... this 700runs per match was just dueto very flat pitches in india india depending on their batting and making advantage of their home conditions nothing to do with new playing conditions

Posted by Kh.Anjum on (November 4, 2013, 16:51 GMT)

very opposite and contrast stories are seen in UAE where 180 odd runs are enough for both teams to defend.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 16:47 GMT)

I like the idea of only 4 fielders outside the 30 yard circle. there's not a single dull moment in the match. bowlers need to bowl yorker length and also the bouncer rule to max effect. but overall the new rule has done wonders for the game getting the spectators involved throughout incl the middle overs batsmen have benefitted now the bowlers need to rethink new options. anyway no one's complaining

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 16:46 GMT)

Well, most of the cricket pundits seem to be ignoring one important aspect of statistics - the average and aggregate runs of bottom 9 among top 14 batters. 14, counting 5 batsmen + wk + allrrounder from each side. Except for Rohit, Shikar, Virat, Dhoni and Bailey, nobody else has played stunning knocks consistently (including Falkuner who has shown flashes of brilliance) and most of the results that we see are because of these top 5. Look at the figures of Raina, Yuvaraj, Ravindra Jadeja, Hughes, Watson, Finch, Voges, Maxwell, Haddin et al. Does it raise serious questions about bowling, pitch and rules? NO. So, a lot of credit for the high scores should be given to the top 5 batsmen who have been exceptional and have performed equally well outside the continent also ( ex:- Champions trophy). So, be liberal, broadminded and give credit where it is due. Kudos to Rohit, Shikar, Virat and Dhoni for making India a champion side and Bailey for making Australia a formidable opponent.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 16:41 GMT)

look by judging on the basis of a single series is not fair, whether the new rule should stay or scraped. look at the other series going on where bowlers have done far better job than what we saw in this series. we have to admit that bowling from both the teams were below par. In India we give an entertaining pitch, so more and more is liable. we have to see what impact this rule does in countries like Aus and SA where bowlers have an edge on batmen. for now i would that we should stick with these new rule at least for sometime.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 16:37 GMT)

At the same time while India and Australia were scoring 350's, SA and Pakistan were making smaller scores like 186 and 210. The difference was in quality of bowling and pitches. Lets see how India fares in foreign grounds and against tougher bowling attacks.

Posted by aditya.pidaparthy on (November 4, 2013, 16:33 GMT)

This series was a perfect storm of sorts. Bigger bats, smaller boundaries (Nagpur excepted) flat pitches, two hard balls and less outfielders, the last two coming together at the same time, made for a situation where the batsman could hit with impunity. Take even one factor away from them and you have matches like those in UAE with its slower pitches, where the teams are collapsing for around 200, because the batsmen are just not used to the bowlers having any advantage because batsmanship has degenerated. Something more than mere platitudes of being able to hit the right areas, needs to be done for the bowlers. It is mentally scarring for bowlers to see mishits travel for sixes. They are still stuck with the same 156 gram ball they had 130 years ago, whereas the bats have gone nuclear. Its a fight between a Bazooka at 50 ft & a pocket knife. There will be still some people giving platitudes about knife throwing skills. How will we convince a 13 year old to become a bowler?

Posted by SUPER_SIX on (November 4, 2013, 16:31 GMT)

Then why there are low scores in UAE? I think lack of quality of bowling good batting, pitch conditions are the reason for the run feast in India.

Posted by 2929paul on (November 4, 2013, 16:24 GMT)

@chiragbhagat So how do you compare Tendulkar's stats against those of days gone by, before field restrictions, bouncer limitations and leg side wides? The game moves on. It evolves. Stats are meaningless when trying to give a true comparison of players in different eras. Virtually all batting records are set on featherbed pitches and often against weakened attacks. Does that devalue them? Not really because someone still has to get the runs. And bowling records are generally set on bowler friendly pitches by a bowler having a good day e.g. Laker getting 19 wickets on a rank turner at Old Trafford in 1956. To judge the greatness of a player, you need to look behind the stats and see what else he brings to the party. That's why we have all these debates and they're never settled, especially since there's nobody left alive who played against Hobbs or Trumper or Spofforth to give first hand accounts of their brilliance.

Posted by Blade-Runner on (November 4, 2013, 16:20 GMT)

It was all about flat pitches, in fact the flattest in the world and 60 m boundaries, not the new rules. I didn't see such ridiculous high scoring games btwn Pak n SA coz they played under same rules too.

Posted by m_ilind on (November 4, 2013, 16:01 GMT)

So how about a regulation Test match field setting, with only 2 or 3 fielders allowed outside the 30 yard circle, then we may even see a triple hundred in an ODI. Feels like a natural progression of the game to go towards a limited overs format rather than a full 5-day test match that may or may not produce a result.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 15:56 GMT)

i want to allow 6 fielders outside the 30 yards circle.if there are 6 fielders outside the circle number of boundaries will be considerably decreased and only players with solid technique will score by taking singles n twos.

Posted by chiragbhagat on (November 4, 2013, 15:34 GMT)

With the new rules of fielding, the 350 runs are like early days 280 or 290 runs. Individual runs 150 is like early days century. So, if you say the records were broken, they were not really. If Kholi made century in 52 balls and compared with Sehwag, it is not right. If Kholi makes 70 centuries with new rules and is being compared with Tendulkar, it is not right! If pace bowlers can't put fielders on Third man and Fine leg, you can't compare those runs/wickets/averages with any other earlier days.... You cannot compare Apples to Oranges! You got to create new books of records with new rules in place. You Got To!!!

Posted by parwana on (November 4, 2013, 15:18 GMT)

saeed anwar 194 in india tendulkar 200 in india sehwag 219 in india now rohit 209 in india this is how india made his home pitches its time for india to deeply think about it and should take a brave decesion and make pitchew that has atleast something for bowlers for too if no 8 batsmen (faulkner) can play like rohit sharma thats i guess alarming for india

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 15:12 GMT)

very true

Posted by wolf777 on (November 4, 2013, 15:06 GMT)

Indian ground are smaller compare to places like Australia and South Africa. Grounds keeper are obsessed with making dead tracks that facilitate filthy large totals. One wonders why all three ODI double centuries were hit in India. Shots that easily goes for sixes, suddenly are catchable on larger grounds overseas. As there is more time to chase the ball and stop fours, miss-hits don't go for fours . Moving balls on lively and bouncy tracks suddenly becomes hard to hit even on smaller grounds. The same flat track bullies become bunnies as soon as they go overseas

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 15:05 GMT)

well written article.....even when i was small v were all obsessed with batting...even in most cric clubs in Kolkata a bowler will concentrate on his battin equally ....becoming a bowler is unglamourous in Ind...now d new rules nd pitches will create a batting fetish in d minds of young ppl nd den we will continue 2 cringe abt not having quality fast bowlers

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 15:02 GMT)

well i use to think the beauty of ODI was the num 5 and 6 batsmens would have a fair chance to score but the new rule o 4 fielders makes the laagan version of gola pake palli guma a reality

Posted by Anwar-Lara on (November 4, 2013, 15:00 GMT)

its also about, flatest pitches,excellent batting and ordinary bowling too..

Posted by SidLovesIndia on (November 4, 2013, 15:00 GMT)

IMO this series was a case for average bowling per innings by 2-3 bowlers in each side. If you check every ODI, you will find 2-3 bowlers going over 8+ an over with the rest around the 5 an over mark. Check the last ODI - India's much maligned bowlers were all just about 5 an over whereas Vinay Kumar gave 100+ in 9 overs. Sure pitch was flat and outfields were fast but scoring (and even chasing) 300+ in ODIs has been happening in India for about 10 years now. Learn to bowl yorkers and to your in-fields rather than blame ridiculous things like number of fielders outside the circle.

Posted by Nmiduna on (November 4, 2013, 14:57 GMT)

important article...i am happy for rohit and i always admire kohli..but if they think that these are world class achievements, it'll only do bad for them, especially when they play tests outside the subcontinent(if their board allows!) and these matches and the scoring rates show clearly that something is not right, this is not right! i was really frustrated when rohit couldn't deliver on his promise for so long, but oddly, i was not over the moon when he scored this double century..something is not right Mr ICC!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:52 GMT)

Why blame the pitches, when it is easier to blame the rules? The pitches in India have always been fast bowlers' graveyards. Over the last 10 years, they seem to have allotted an extended plot to bury the spinners here as well. Now we develop neither world-class fast bowlers nor spinners.

I'm done watching ODIs (except perhaps, the World Cup). I have more value for my 7 hours on any given day than watching a glorified net session. Why bother? I have my T20s and Tests: the only two things any cricket purist will ever need.

Posted by Former_SJCC on (November 4, 2013, 14:51 GMT)

Mr.Purohit, tries to make his case with very little statistical backing. if rules were the reason for such high totals what happened to the pak vs SA one day series that was being played at the same time. that was a very low scoring series simply cause you have 2 of the strongest bowling attacks in the world. lets talk numbers, since the rule change in oct 2012 the avg scores in one day cricket outside india has been 229 and in india 269. its only in this series that the totals were >320 no just due to the rules but really poor bowling. blaming the rules is to take away from the fact that the bowling from either side was poor. for india, i think shami was the only one who actually bowled 2 yorkers in one over. none of the others ex vinay or ishant even had one yorker in the whole series. the champions trophy which india won this year was with the same rules and nobody complained then.get used to the fact that the sport is going to evolve and so should the bowlers.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:48 GMT)

it is just poor bowling and flat tracks .. nothing is wrong with the rules .. Pakistan and SA are playing a series of low scores.. m sure the scores wud b lesser once ind goes to SA .. Ind and Aus have probably the best batting line ups in the world but they also r in the run for the worst bowling line ups in the world !!!!

Posted by Pavan_15 on (November 4, 2013, 14:46 GMT)

One must not forget the fact that if a batsman in clearing the boundaries easily,the confidence is fueled by the fact that there is no one in the deep and even a miss hit would carry it to a boundary. This also impacts the bowlers thought process and hence they are not at all finding their length and confidence in the bowling. Imagine if there were 5 fielders , then the bowler will try to bowl full and straight to stumps with confidence that batsman can only play straight down the ground where i have long on and long off and if he tries to play across like towards midwicket, he will miss and I hit..... even if he connects i have one fielder there too. So it is all due to the new rules of ICC which even more is suppressing a bowler's confidence and a captain's confidence on the bowler.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:46 GMT)

I agree to some extent the scores seen in this series could have been attributed to some extent to the new rules favouring batsmen. But I feel the bowling was quite bad in general...it seems the term YORKER is non existent these days (not like the 90s where the bigs Ws of Pak got bowl them at will), and almost a lost art form! If you look at Vinay Kumar's bowling in Bangalore, it was atrocious to watch for an 'international' bowler! He just kept feeding length deliveries, not really learning from his earlier mistakes. SO I think the bowlers are not learning!

Look at the other series going in UAE between SA and Pak, I don't see them talking or complaining about the new rules. Is it a coincidence that they aren't because they have perhaps some of the best limited overs bowlers in the world? I don't think so! It's time India acknowledges their bowlers are of low quality and can't take the heat!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:43 GMT)

I thought South Africa and Pakistan were playing with the same rules and India and Australia. The difference was the quality of the bowling attacks and the sporting pitches, instead of the roads India likes to play on because they know their batsmen can 'out hit' other teams on most days.

Posted by Leggie on (November 4, 2013, 14:39 GMT)

When two new balls were introduced for ODIs, I remember that suddenly 240s and 250s became the new norm - equivalent to 300s and 320s in the older form. I fail to understand how suddenly the new rules are seen as the reason for the run fest. IMO, high scoring in my opinion were due to a) Four top order Indian batsmen - Rohit, Dhawan, Kohli and Dhoni came to some extraordinary form at the same time and this remained throughout the series - which is normally a rarity; b) Indian bowling lacked skilled pacers; Ishant and Vinay were terrible; c) the pitches were nicely rolled out and were being used for the first time for the season after the monsoons. This made the ball come on to the bat, with consistent bounce. The season was such that there was no movement in the air and the pitch being smooth - there was very little off the pitch. On the same note, the pitch was too smooth for bite/turn and spin for the spinners. These 3 factors caused the run glut, and had nothing to do with new rules

Posted by India2014 on (November 4, 2013, 14:30 GMT)

This rule is killing professional cricket, only children will like it.

Posted by CricketMaan on (November 4, 2013, 14:29 GMT)

I said this some time ago, and sayingit again time to pack off ODIs, lets stick to Franchise based T20s and Test cricket. This way Cricket will both survive and flourish even amongst associates. 3 formats is too much for the game to go on for ever.

Posted by blthndr on (November 4, 2013, 14:24 GMT)

@ThinkingCricket ...u r absolutely spot on....its the mindset that has been changed....they know they can clear the boundry at will....there is nothing to do with small boundry as most percentages of sixes are more than 80m...these two teams are the no 1 & 2 teams and hav the most aggressive batting line up and biggest hitters of the game....

Posted by ReverseSweepIndia on (November 4, 2013, 14:24 GMT)

This sure is rules. Well, they were changed last year and teams were apprehensive and we did not see much of impact in Eng, cause these rules changes will always help a bit in Aus, SA, Eng and NZ where there is bounce and swing. But settled batsmen will make merry there too, now because initial apprehension is gone. One less fielder and a harder ball, you are always going to see 120+ being scored in last 10 overs when there is no spin, no reverse swing either. And yes, do not compare Ind-Aus series with Pak-SA. Pak has been a pathetic batting side of late (only thing worse in international cricket at the moment is our bowling) and CSA not doing any good in batting atm. On top of that both are excellent bowling sides, hence low score. I bet put those teams in Indian grounds and take India-Aus to gulf, results and scores will remain same as they are now.

Posted by eZoha on (November 4, 2013, 14:21 GMT)

Don't blame the new rules. PAK vs. SA and NZ vs. BD series were played with the same rule.

Very strong batting + too poor bowling + batting pitches = boring high scoring matches.

Make SPORTING pitches where everyone (fast bowlers, spinners, stroke players, grafters) will have some assistance. Otherwise demise of ODI cricket is nigh, regardless of the rule changes.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:16 GMT)

It has got nothing to do with the ground size.. the grounds in india are plenty big.. it has got everything to do with the bats.. an extra fielder outside would have made no difference whatsoever.. if you can hit the ball to the roof of a stadium, the opposition can have all the nine allotted fielders anywhere in the field and some more, you will still hit it out of the park.. the bats are lighter, have a huge meat and the balance is just impeccable.. with a flat surface, hitting the ball was anyway easy for batsmen.. now with these monstrous weapons, the ball is just a pitiable human invention that is meant to be butchered.. we need to wither make the ball swing a lot more or control the size of the bats.. meat of the bat needs to come under the bat laws too!!!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:13 GMT)

I think this article considers a myopic view. We should wait and watch other ODI series around the world before making premature comments like Dhoni does in trying to hide our poor bowling attack. Look at SA and Pak, they struggled to score 200 in Sharjah, or even New Zealand and Bangladesh, who scored believable totals. I think the problem lies with Indian pitches and the IPL is to blame. Kohli, Sharma, Dhawan, Bailey and Faulkner all are in supreme form and they took advantage of placid lifeless wickets. From the bowlers pov, I think Shami and earlier Johnson, showed that if you bowl really well, you will be rewarded, but yes the margin for error is very small in pitches such as these. A couple of ODI series in Australia, SA or even England and then we should pronounce judgements on the rules.

Posted by CricketChat on (November 4, 2013, 14:09 GMT)

It's too early to comment on the change in rules. Let's give another year before tweaking them again. On the current trend, they favor batsmen even more on flat pitches, but in bowler friendly conditions, they will make it an even contest.

Posted by AlbertPintoGussaHua on (November 4, 2013, 14:07 GMT)

Even if you allow 9 fielders outside the circle, who is going to stop all those sixes (107 in this series)... having said that, its time to use rules similar to a test in F50 as well or prepare for the bowlers to become extinct in a few years. When the rules are stacked so heavily in favor of the batsmen, why would any youngsters taking up cricket want to become bowlers? Then Dhoni will get his wish and we'll have to use bowling machines or forget about limited overs cricket altogether. Time for the ICC to ponder on such existential questions before its too late.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:05 GMT)

I don't think, rules are much of an issue. It's the one-sided pitch, small stadiums and short boundary ropes. The score of 300 hundred and above, is almost a norm in India, where even a lower order batman like Faulkner can hammer a hundred. Also, how often have you seen someone hit a six of a miss hit? ICC should, get rid of free hit for no balls, set regulations for boundary lines, allow bowlers to do maximum number of bouncers in a over and allow captains to be more creative by relaxing the field placement rules. Cricket is more exciting when there is equal chance between batsman and bowlers. Cheers.

Posted by tbcricket on (November 4, 2013, 14:04 GMT)

I might be wrong, but don't both teams get to bat and bowl? I recognise that there is a bit of a ridiculous element to the extent of imbalance between bowler and batter advantage in this series but both teams get an even (home advantage and toss aside) shot at the win. There used to be a clear definition between ODI cricket and Test Cricket, and T20's have blurred the lines a little, but this form of ODI seems to have increase the spectator appeal and maybe it needs to be looked at positively as well as scrutinised.

Posted by punter29 on (November 4, 2013, 14:03 GMT)

i dont think any effect of rules change its our bowlers who forgot YORKERS , BLOCK HAUL , SLOWER bowls even spinners bowling SHORT and PACEY Bowlers always make impact but with the fear of Hitting they forget Their BASICS .......... BOWLERS need to use their MINDS instead of blaming rules People use to watch first 15 overs and last 10 overs but now they sit and watch whole game which is good for the game .

Posted by heathrf1974 on (November 4, 2013, 14:03 GMT)

One problem is they keep allowing technology for bats but the ball has remained the same. Either you stop the improvements in bats or make the balls even more condusive to swing and with a higher seam. Also you need at least five players on the boundary, there are too many fours from mishits.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 14:00 GMT)

why is all bowlers like this old bowlers were better than new ones\

Posted by deepvanarasi on (November 4, 2013, 13:59 GMT)

It all depends on the conditions. While India and Australia have been scoring 350+ runs esily, South Africa and Pakistan are struggling to rech even 200 in Dubai. The conditions in other parts of the world will not allow such humungous totals being scored and chased down so easily. I believe that this series was more of an aberration than a norm.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:55 GMT)

This imbalance is mostly occurring in India, where pitches are prepared a certain way to ensure high scoring matches. If you take into the account of small stadiums, odi rules and short boundary ropes, than it won't be long when you might see someone scoring a triple hundred in this format. I mean, even a lower order batman like Faulkner scored a rapid fire century so what does it tell you about these pitches!! Sad thing is you will see more undeserving players being compared to greats; lara, ponting, dravid, amla, clark etc, which is bit disappointing.

Posted by Unmesh_cric on (November 4, 2013, 13:54 GMT)

It is not the new rules, but the pitches! If you offer some assistance to the bowlers, 5 men in the ring becomes an advantage for taking wickets. At the same time batsman have more chance to score a boundary. The new rules were made so that captains don't set negative fields in the middle overs, but instead look for wickets. But flat pitches make a mockery of these well-intended rules.

Posted by spot_on on (November 4, 2013, 13:52 GMT)

LOL... Complaining on new rules.. Produce a bowling squadron of the McGrath,Pollock,Walsh likes and then see what happens to the batsmen and F50 cricket!!!

Posted by EngineerKhan on (November 4, 2013, 13:50 GMT)

I think two new balls is an awful law. Besides it, nothing wrong with laws. If 4 fielders are allowed, then one power-play is excluded as well. You can see the on-going PakvSA series. From fans point of view, surely its bit boring to see No sixes and ball stopping in the pitch, but also we saw the vintage beautiful game of ODI when sub-250 is defended as well (and chasing team has equal chance of chasing it as well).

Indian pitches are the one which are really harming the game. These lifeless pitches are never going to help. India hosted the Pakistan earlier this year on pitches with some life and immediately we saw not only Pakistani seamers, but also Bhuveshnewar Kumar swinging it big. This is Cricket! And this is the actual test of likes of Kohli, Raina, etc

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:49 GMT)

Yes the rules have become harsh for the bowlers but it is not the only reason for this massive scoring. SA vs Pak series has same rules but we have not seen such scoring there because the bowling standards for both the sides are much higher than India and Aus and batting standards for Pak and SA(poor form) are poor compared to India. Also the pitches used in India offered nothing to bowlers.So it's too early to judge the new laws.

Posted by Paul-in-Finland on (November 4, 2013, 13:47 GMT)

Nothing to do with the super short boundaries & the rock hard " roads " called pitched in India ?

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:44 GMT)

get a grip - are people just conveniently forgetting that South Africa defended 180 odd and lost in a low 200's scoring game at the same time this series was going on?

Blame Indian pitches!

Posted by psingaraju on (November 4, 2013, 13:44 GMT)

What bothers me is the fact that no one is talking about the pitches. The art of forgotten yorkers and full deliveries is talked about to some degree, but what about the pitches? Fix that first. No help for bowlers of any kind, are you kidding me? One additional man outside the inner circle will provide no relief, about a third of the boundaries even in the current series were 6's, so the extra man would have ensured that the ball would have gotten back into play sooner, nothing else.

Bowling only speaks of part of the problem, we cannot lay roads in name of pitches and 65-70 yard boundaries will only add to woes. Curators and boards pull 'em up your socks! Sporting wickets please!

By the way, I am not complaining that we had run feasts ;)

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:43 GMT)

very true abhishek. we are on the verge of something call F50. but will we ever see a akram reverse swinging the ball. or mcgrath making batsmen go nuts by conventional swing or mustaq flighting the ball.

who will remember sachin because as it seems there will be many who would score more tons and runs then sachin bcs a century is too easy and we are seeing 140s being achieved quiet comfortably.

too boring has become of one day because chasing team may chase just about anything.

what can be done is have diiferent rules for subcontinent to that in england nz af aus because we just saw an amazing champions trophy.rules are just perfect for those conditions

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:42 GMT)

There is nothing wrong with the rules for sure. South Africa playing against Pakistan, New Zealand playing against Bangladesh, where the new rule haven't been an excuse.. At least set a minimum standard size of the boundary line. The grounds are just too small and the pitch was WHAT?? Any one knows??

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:36 GMT)

This new rule seems to make no sense. Come on guys, this further kills the competition between ball and bat.Should the bat always win?

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:35 GMT)

That's not bad but our people bowling is not fast bowling thinking they are fast bowlers they try to bowl Yorkers and short pitch balls which a medium pacer should not but they must bowl stump to stump so they can restrict the batsmen. Which they are not doing.

Posted by ThinkingCricket on (November 4, 2013, 13:33 GMT)

My first thought is that this is all in the mind. Most cricket writers, thinkers, players and coaches are hideously conventional and orthodox now. It's difficult to tell what is down to physical restriction (too tough to achieve) and what is down to mental restriction (so unorthodox that people won't try). We see players now trying things they wouldn't have earlier. I wish I could watch a Test on the same ground, and somehow magically, have people bat with the same freedom. Would they score 800? If 400 in 50 overs is par shouldn't it be easy to get 800? Most batsmen would rather leave outside the off-stump or poke and prod for an hour and get out for 20 in a Test rather than bat like Maxwell did and score a 50. The reason is simple; trying to hit in a Test is unorthodox. When you do the unorthodox and fail, you are irresponsible, you get dropped.

Yes, pitches matter, boundary sizes matter, field restrictions matter and new balls matter, but what matters more is the mindset of batters.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:28 GMT)

Very Well Written... The combination of the factors mentioned above and the sheer number of matches being played may provide the thrills and spills in the short term but will only go a long way to harm the game in many other ways on the long run

Posted by roundrockcricket on (November 4, 2013, 13:26 GMT)

f50 is another t20,we don't need two similar format of same game of cricket.i rather see batsman working hard for their run by running singles ,doubles and triples on minimum of 75 m boundaries and 5 fielders outside the circle.i hope icc take this into consideration before 2015 worldcup,big indian fan.

Posted by Miandad280 on (November 4, 2013, 13:24 GMT)

An interesting and thoughtfully-crafted argument, but is it really just a question of the new rules? They do appear to explain the run glut of the Australia-India series but in the Pakistan-South Africa series being played just a 2-hour plane ride to the east, bowlers have been on top. Something else is up.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:24 GMT)

ODI needs to change. I don't really care for the run-glut. We can have six fielders in the deep, or some loosening of the field restrictions, longer boundaries, or something. But we're also finally seeing the influence of T20 cricket coming through in the way batsmen are playing.

Maybe it's good for the game, I don't know. But the game has really changed recently.

Posted by ravikb on (November 4, 2013, 13:19 GMT)

It's not just about the new ODI rules. It's the kind of pitches and quality of bowling this series was played with. Watch Pak vs SA series. Even the scores of 200 have been defended successfully with a very well balanced wicket and good bowling attack. Another example is Ban vs NZ ODI series. This series is the only exception where huge scores are scored since the introduction of new rules. So, wake up India and start producing sporting wickets else your batsmen will be a walking wicket on pitches conducive to bowling!

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:17 GMT)

i dont think its the rules . rules were changed last year. and how many times we have seen 300 scored? or chased successfully before this series. you have to see other factors like pitch, bowling and mighty strong batting line ups with so much power hitters in it.

over all after new rules avg scores have gone down. but in india they are gone up. its wickets but more importantly mighty batting line up.

Posted by   on (November 4, 2013, 13:16 GMT)

Very well observed @Abhishek Purohit sir, I personally thing the new rules have made a huge impact not only in case of 4 fielders but also by the introduction of 2 new balls from each end, What it means is no reverse swing n no spin which is equal to bowlers bowling like bowling machines in subcontinent. I think keeping 4 fielders at times forces the fielding captain to be aggressive but only if there is something a ball does.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Abhishek PurohitClose
Tour Results
India v Australia at Bangalore - Nov 2, 2013
India won by 57 runs
India v Australia at Nagpur - Oct 30, 2013
India won by 6 wickets (with 3 balls remaining)
India v Australia at Cuttack - Oct 26, 2013
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
India v Australia at Ranchi - Oct 23, 2013
No result
India v Australia at Mohali - Oct 19, 2013
Australia won by 4 wickets (with 3 balls remaining)
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days