October 20, 2013

Bowlers are becoming an endangered species in limited overs

Heavier bats, shorter boundaries, and the two new balls are killing the contest
141

John Lennon's song "Give Peace a Chance" became the rally cry for anti-war protesters. Soon the refrain at cricket grounds could be: "Give bowlers a chance."

In the short forms of the game there's a chance bowlers will become an endangered species if the trend of heavier and better bats and shorter boundaries continues. This tendency has led to a surge in boundaries in general and sixes in particular. While this may sound like a favourable result in a game competing for the entertainment dollar, the long-term consequences may not be so desirable.

In the second ODI between India and Australia, 64% of the runs scored off the bat were accumulated in boundaries. Singles accounted for around 28% of the scoring - the majority of which would have been at the easier end of the scale, with the infielders back on the 30-yard circle - and about 43% of the deliveries were dot balls.

This means a reduced reliance on fielding and running between wickets - two of the more exciting skills in the game.

As the boundaries have been shortened and the bats have improved, the preference for power over artistry in batting has increased. Throw in abundant protective equipment, the prevalence of flat pitches, and the restrictions on bowlers and their field placings, and suddenly being a leather flinger is becoming about as attractive as eating a cold curry.

Even the new ball at each end isn't the advantage it first appears to be, as it reduces the chances of the old ball swinging, and the increased hardness means the batsmen can hit them further. Add a bit of outfield dew in the evening and that curry's looking really unpalatable.

However, administrators still aren't satisfied with their efforts to punish bowlers. The improvement in bats means the ball, once hit, travels faster. Hence there's a greater likelihood bowlers will be sconed by a straight drive. Additionally, the unfortunate fielders placed in a catching position 15 metres from the bat are more prone to hand injuries.

You can't blame the bowlers for thinking they are being served up as cannon fodder for the pampered batsmen.

More and more we're hearing commentators say: "The batsman is not frightened to take on the outfielders." That's because the odds favour them. But if sixes become even more prevalent, there's a danger the spectacle will become monotonous.

If batting skill is reduced to power-hitting, the bowlers will be less inclined to rely on guile for their wickets. There's no incentive for the faster bowlers to seek a length where the ball might swing, if sixes are constantly being crashed down the ground. Spinners too will be less inclined to employ flight to deceive batsmen.

We're already seeing the slower-ball bouncer and the wide yorker being regularly used to contain the hitting. Eventually bowlers will rely heavily on batsmen getting themselves out rather than on ambushing them.

The short-form games are designed for exciting close finishes. If huge first-innings totals become the norm, close finishes will become less prevalent, as the chasing team implodes, seeking an impossibly high run rate. Instead of fans who enjoy a contest, the game will attract spectators who would have revelled in the Lions-versus-Christians debacles.

Bowlers need to be offered a crumb in the shorter forms of the game otherwise they'll revolt, as they have done in the past, using extreme methods like Bodyline and chucking.

The problem is, bats can be further improved but little can be done to the ball to improve the bowler's lot. There must be consideration given to curbing the influence of the bat and placing more emphasis on the skill of the user. Making the boundaries fairer would be a good start.

Another move would be to redress the imbalance in the rewards system. Batsmen are being conditioned to believe rapid-fire boundaries bring bigger paydays than a well-constructed longer innings. Consequently they seek increased hitting power. If these trends continue, sooner or later the bowlers are going to declare war.

Former Australia captain Ian Chappell is now a cricket commentator for Channel 9, and a columnist

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on October 21, 2013, 2:02 GMT

    I think these measures should be taken to improve bowlers role in ODI cricket.

    1) it shoud be manadatory to have at least 80 meter boundries on any side of the ground.

    2) no fielding restrictions at all over the whole 50 overs, no powerplays. Captain should be free to place fielders anywhere for the whole 50 overs. This would encourage good captains as they will have to be creative with their field placings.

    3) Go back to the old system of using only one ball and changing the ball as late as possible ( after 35 overs). ICC could also fund a research project to make a ball which doesn't get dirty ( and hence, difficult to sight for the batsman under lights) for 50 overs. This would bring back reverse swing back into ODIs.

    4) Captain should be able to bowl one of his bowlers 12 overs instead of 10, if and only if he has at least 4 regular bowlers playing. This rule would limit the number of overs bowled by part-time bowlers, who not only offer batsmen easy runs, but also lessen spect

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    Brilliant article. Bowlers needs to be provided some security net else it will become a batsman game with bowlers just doing the formality of showing up. The era of skillful batsman will be long gone and all and sundry might become batting stars by getting those runs via top edges and mishits. I think the administrators need to understand that more runs will never make cricket more entertaining rather it will be the equal contest between bat and bowl. Some steps could be - 5 fielders outside the circle, powerplays contained to 10 overs, increasing the boundary size, 2 bouncers per over. This will ensure much quality matches. And for experimentation and run feasts, their are 20-20's to look forward. ODI's should remain in the form they are without unnecessary tinkering!!

  • cricaddict9118 on October 20, 2013, 5:27 GMT

    I believe the problem is with the administrators. They want this is to an entertainment business which generates money for them and unfortunately even spectators like those sixes too. But there is line present here. Sixes will enthrall spectators if it is happens once in a while and not if it becomes a norm. Already people have started going to grounds for inconsequential IPL matches. Administrators need to be smart enough to try and ensure they have to strike the right balance when they plan any games.

    But as we all know it will take ages to resolve administrative issues as finances are at stake. Somethings which can be done is to come up with better balls which are inherently designed to swing and bounce more to match the better bats! ICC should make a rule that 75m should be minimum boundary length with 80m being optimum and most desired to ensure those mishits of 65-70 m don't clear the boundaries.

  • flickspin on October 25, 2013, 15:30 GMT

    i love the modern game, its far more exciting than cricket 15 years ago.

    i love the amount of sixes and fours. i like teams scoring 300 runs.

    i reckon modern bats,smaller grounds and field restictions make the modern game exciting.

    cricket should reward skill, i love the ramp shot, i love the switch hit and the bowlers being put under pressure.

    i reckon in 10 years most batsmen will be able to switch hit.

    i have no problem with using carbon fibre tape on the back of the bat, which the icc banned.

    the icc should investigate ball science instead of 6 stitches(have 8 stitches) have a higher thicker seam(have a seam 5mm thick) or drill holes in the cork of the ball and fill with heavy and light substances( the ball still weighs 156g) but has weights in it so it dips,drifts and swings more.

    having 2 new balls takes reverse swing out of the game but bowlers should able to get double the amount of conventional swing

    i agree that 4 bowlers should to bowl 12 overs get rid of part timers

  • madvjs on October 25, 2013, 12:11 GMT

    Mr rookie4u, I dont understand where does the BCCI come into the discussion here. This article is to highlight the massacre of bowlers by the ICC Technical team. 100% agree with Chapple here, the bowlers are being killed by constant change of rules. I am really struggling to understand why does cricketing rules need to be changed almost every year. What is ICC trying to achieve? A good game of cricket is about the equal contest between bat and ball and current rules are heavily stacked against bowlers. Few rules I never understood (after playing and following cricket for 25 odd years now) Legside wide in ODI: Ball misses legstump by a centimeter, its a wide, Why?? LBW: Ball pitches outside legstump, batsman is not out, even if the ball is hitting the stumps, Why? These are few rules that need to be reconsidered to make the contest even. There could be a minimum boundary rule of 75m but you can see the batsmen these days are hitting close to 90m consistently

  • on October 24, 2013, 17:52 GMT

    If bowlers are not allowed to bowl more than 20% of the max balls their side bowls, there is no reason why a batsman should be allowed to bat more than 20% of the balls his side faces. May come back in case all the batsmen who followed him get out.

  • siddhartha87 on October 24, 2013, 8:41 GMT

    agreed.These 65-70 m boundaries are absolute joke. The boundaries should be minimum 80-85 m.Also 5 players outside the circle should be allowed.Sir vIv averaged 47 and had strike rate 90 back in 80's.With these current settings he would have averaged 70 and Strike rate 120 for sure.

  • rookie4u on October 23, 2013, 2:03 GMT

    This is how the beauty of the game has spoiled. Cricket administrators here have worked around the strength of home side. Preparing utterly rubbish flat pitches with shorter boundaries. Poor bowlers are mere spectators with ordinary batsmen toring them apart. That is why we haven't seen too many class bowlers to join the likes of Kapil and Zaheer.. Extremely ordinary set-up for bowlers. And hence you see Indian side struggling massively when they go to England, Australia, New Zealand. Not to forget the next world cup being down under, I'm sure BCCI will try their best to bully and get placid pitches there as well. I fail to understand why cricket is slowing getting to a point where it will be viewed only as a batsman's game.

  • jever03 on October 22, 2013, 18:43 GMT

    I think Chappell is right. If hitting sixes becomes the norm, as is already starting to be the case, then it's going to become boring. The thrill in cricket lies in the contest between bat and ball. Insure this thru these measures: 1. Why have the ten over restriction for bowlers? Allow 15 for one and 12 for two more. That brings a strategical dimnension to the game. 2. Keep the boundaries were they used to be: at the adversitising board and if it's stopped before and the fielder touches it in the process so be it - no boundary. 3. Keep the powerplays (another slightly strategic dimension) but allow more fielders outside the circle. 4. Go back to one ball. The two-ball-experiment didn't work out. 5. Allow two bouncers per over. 6. Get rid of overthrows. After those changes 250 is again an almighty total and a six is hit as often as a wicket is lost, which is how it should be.

  • towf on October 22, 2013, 8:31 GMT

    Personally I think limited overs cricket despite its success is flawed. Look at first class cricket and Test cricket, teams win by bowling out other sides as well as scoring the runs. Limiting overs and asking bowlers to get them all out within that time is probably going to result in high scoring draws, but what if the wickets become the target for the team bowling second and runs become the target for the team batting first? At least then bowlers, captains and of course batsmen will think about their wicket before becoming adventurous.

    Also please get more bowler friendly cricket balls, watching a new ball bowler in limited overs cricket mostly dull because almost nothing happens with the ball, rather batsmen get to set a foundation rather than trying to survive which is much more exciting to watch.

  • on October 21, 2013, 2:02 GMT

    I think these measures should be taken to improve bowlers role in ODI cricket.

    1) it shoud be manadatory to have at least 80 meter boundries on any side of the ground.

    2) no fielding restrictions at all over the whole 50 overs, no powerplays. Captain should be free to place fielders anywhere for the whole 50 overs. This would encourage good captains as they will have to be creative with their field placings.

    3) Go back to the old system of using only one ball and changing the ball as late as possible ( after 35 overs). ICC could also fund a research project to make a ball which doesn't get dirty ( and hence, difficult to sight for the batsman under lights) for 50 overs. This would bring back reverse swing back into ODIs.

    4) Captain should be able to bowl one of his bowlers 12 overs instead of 10, if and only if he has at least 4 regular bowlers playing. This rule would limit the number of overs bowled by part-time bowlers, who not only offer batsmen easy runs, but also lessen spect

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:41 GMT

    Brilliant article. Bowlers needs to be provided some security net else it will become a batsman game with bowlers just doing the formality of showing up. The era of skillful batsman will be long gone and all and sundry might become batting stars by getting those runs via top edges and mishits. I think the administrators need to understand that more runs will never make cricket more entertaining rather it will be the equal contest between bat and bowl. Some steps could be - 5 fielders outside the circle, powerplays contained to 10 overs, increasing the boundary size, 2 bouncers per over. This will ensure much quality matches. And for experimentation and run feasts, their are 20-20's to look forward. ODI's should remain in the form they are without unnecessary tinkering!!

  • cricaddict9118 on October 20, 2013, 5:27 GMT

    I believe the problem is with the administrators. They want this is to an entertainment business which generates money for them and unfortunately even spectators like those sixes too. But there is line present here. Sixes will enthrall spectators if it is happens once in a while and not if it becomes a norm. Already people have started going to grounds for inconsequential IPL matches. Administrators need to be smart enough to try and ensure they have to strike the right balance when they plan any games.

    But as we all know it will take ages to resolve administrative issues as finances are at stake. Somethings which can be done is to come up with better balls which are inherently designed to swing and bounce more to match the better bats! ICC should make a rule that 75m should be minimum boundary length with 80m being optimum and most desired to ensure those mishits of 65-70 m don't clear the boundaries.

  • flickspin on October 25, 2013, 15:30 GMT

    i love the modern game, its far more exciting than cricket 15 years ago.

    i love the amount of sixes and fours. i like teams scoring 300 runs.

    i reckon modern bats,smaller grounds and field restictions make the modern game exciting.

    cricket should reward skill, i love the ramp shot, i love the switch hit and the bowlers being put under pressure.

    i reckon in 10 years most batsmen will be able to switch hit.

    i have no problem with using carbon fibre tape on the back of the bat, which the icc banned.

    the icc should investigate ball science instead of 6 stitches(have 8 stitches) have a higher thicker seam(have a seam 5mm thick) or drill holes in the cork of the ball and fill with heavy and light substances( the ball still weighs 156g) but has weights in it so it dips,drifts and swings more.

    having 2 new balls takes reverse swing out of the game but bowlers should able to get double the amount of conventional swing

    i agree that 4 bowlers should to bowl 12 overs get rid of part timers

  • madvjs on October 25, 2013, 12:11 GMT

    Mr rookie4u, I dont understand where does the BCCI come into the discussion here. This article is to highlight the massacre of bowlers by the ICC Technical team. 100% agree with Chapple here, the bowlers are being killed by constant change of rules. I am really struggling to understand why does cricketing rules need to be changed almost every year. What is ICC trying to achieve? A good game of cricket is about the equal contest between bat and ball and current rules are heavily stacked against bowlers. Few rules I never understood (after playing and following cricket for 25 odd years now) Legside wide in ODI: Ball misses legstump by a centimeter, its a wide, Why?? LBW: Ball pitches outside legstump, batsman is not out, even if the ball is hitting the stumps, Why? These are few rules that need to be reconsidered to make the contest even. There could be a minimum boundary rule of 75m but you can see the batsmen these days are hitting close to 90m consistently

  • on October 24, 2013, 17:52 GMT

    If bowlers are not allowed to bowl more than 20% of the max balls their side bowls, there is no reason why a batsman should be allowed to bat more than 20% of the balls his side faces. May come back in case all the batsmen who followed him get out.

  • siddhartha87 on October 24, 2013, 8:41 GMT

    agreed.These 65-70 m boundaries are absolute joke. The boundaries should be minimum 80-85 m.Also 5 players outside the circle should be allowed.Sir vIv averaged 47 and had strike rate 90 back in 80's.With these current settings he would have averaged 70 and Strike rate 120 for sure.

  • rookie4u on October 23, 2013, 2:03 GMT

    This is how the beauty of the game has spoiled. Cricket administrators here have worked around the strength of home side. Preparing utterly rubbish flat pitches with shorter boundaries. Poor bowlers are mere spectators with ordinary batsmen toring them apart. That is why we haven't seen too many class bowlers to join the likes of Kapil and Zaheer.. Extremely ordinary set-up for bowlers. And hence you see Indian side struggling massively when they go to England, Australia, New Zealand. Not to forget the next world cup being down under, I'm sure BCCI will try their best to bully and get placid pitches there as well. I fail to understand why cricket is slowing getting to a point where it will be viewed only as a batsman's game.

  • jever03 on October 22, 2013, 18:43 GMT

    I think Chappell is right. If hitting sixes becomes the norm, as is already starting to be the case, then it's going to become boring. The thrill in cricket lies in the contest between bat and ball. Insure this thru these measures: 1. Why have the ten over restriction for bowlers? Allow 15 for one and 12 for two more. That brings a strategical dimnension to the game. 2. Keep the boundaries were they used to be: at the adversitising board and if it's stopped before and the fielder touches it in the process so be it - no boundary. 3. Keep the powerplays (another slightly strategic dimension) but allow more fielders outside the circle. 4. Go back to one ball. The two-ball-experiment didn't work out. 5. Allow two bouncers per over. 6. Get rid of overthrows. After those changes 250 is again an almighty total and a six is hit as often as a wicket is lost, which is how it should be.

  • towf on October 22, 2013, 8:31 GMT

    Personally I think limited overs cricket despite its success is flawed. Look at first class cricket and Test cricket, teams win by bowling out other sides as well as scoring the runs. Limiting overs and asking bowlers to get them all out within that time is probably going to result in high scoring draws, but what if the wickets become the target for the team bowling second and runs become the target for the team batting first? At least then bowlers, captains and of course batsmen will think about their wicket before becoming adventurous.

    Also please get more bowler friendly cricket balls, watching a new ball bowler in limited overs cricket mostly dull because almost nothing happens with the ball, rather batsmen get to set a foundation rather than trying to survive which is much more exciting to watch.

  • Greatest_Game on October 22, 2013, 0:54 GMT

    @ Johan Kotze. I am still reeling from the fact that I actually agree with something Chappel wrote. One thing that is clear is that he is definitely not beholden to the BCCI.

  • on October 22, 2013, 0:29 GMT

    The new rules are cruel on the bowlers. Players now feel 300 is a not tough target.It's not because batting has improved over the years because of 20 20. Bowlers have not been allowed to bowl to their strengths with a level playing field. Its no fun giving almost a new ball to spinners and expect him to be effective with a open outfield. There should be only one ball used and field restrictions removed totally. Even the power play in the first few overs curtails the effectiveness of great fast bowlers.We don't need tall scores and power hitting. We need a good cricket match in which better team wins and not the more powerful one. Keep all the fun in T20. Keep it away from ODIs. Great article Ian. Good assessment.

  • Ben_Hayne90 on October 21, 2013, 22:22 GMT

    Stadiums in Aussie, SA and England are fine. Even the pitches are mostly sporting and ensures good match. But in India it's opposite. Most of the matches are high scoring and they are prepare flat to help the Indian team. No wonder, Indians get hammered when they tour abroad.

  • cricfan65 on October 21, 2013, 22:16 GMT

    Agree with all the comments here.Test matches are an enadangered spieces, especially in the subcontinent. ODI's, if they are to survive, should be like " mini " Tests- no bowling or batting restrictions.only one ball through 50 overs, sporting pitches and sensible boundaries, standardised bats etc. Only then can we again hope to see a thrilling battle beteween batsmen and bowler- which is what this great game is all about. These 700+ run fests are fine if your team wins, but they ultimately cheapen the whole game ! And for those who enjoy that kind of stuff, there are always the T20s.

  • 512fm on October 21, 2013, 21:06 GMT

    Ian is spot on but don't expect anything to change though. This is exactly how the BCCI and Indian fans want it. Its all about entertainment to them and seeing Kohli and Dhoni smashing sixes all over the park is their idea of entertainment not a quality spell of fast bowling like we saw from Mitch Johnson in the last game.

  • shahid2020 on October 21, 2013, 21:01 GMT

    Very good article. The teams with superb fast bowling talent like Australia, South Africa and Pakistan are suffering more than others.

  • on October 21, 2013, 20:38 GMT

    T20 is fine, just the way it is. But the constant change to the ODI format is confusing and unnecessary. Personally, I think ODI should be reduced to 40 overs, and rules should be relaxed to ensure a even/competitive contest. Bowlers should be allowed to bowl many bouncers as possible and power plays should be obsolete. The use of concrete/flat wickets mainly exists in the subcontinent, where such pitches are consistently produced to ensure more sixes and fours. It's great that we are having such debates but real change will take place when ICC decides too, which is unlikely given how inept they usually are.

  • Behind_the_bowlers_arm on October 21, 2013, 18:10 GMT

    The power of bats has increased greatly and if anything boundary distances have decreased. Nothing worse than to see a bowler deceive and then see a mis-hit go for six. Increase the boundary sizes where possible, ditch all powerplays and only have a fielding restriction of a minimum of 4 men in the circle for all 50 overs. Rescind the bouncer restrictions also. The choice of batting and bowling alternating would also be a good idea but it would require the ICC take charge of pitch preparation. Some countries seem to forget that the hose and water has been invented when it suits them otherwise.

  • YashMarathe on October 21, 2013, 17:39 GMT

    If something isn't done to help the lot of the bowlers in 50-over cricket, they will revolt. And we've already seen it happening in a few cases. Peter Siddle, Australia's pace spearhead in Tests, no longer plays ODIs. Their most valuable paceman Ryan Harris and best spinner Nathan Lyon barely do. England's entire first choice lineup seem to turn up only for major ODI tournaments, most of them even gave the post-Ashes ODI series a miss. And I can only see this trend continuing. If something isn't done to help bowlers in ODIs (fewer fielding restrictions, larger boundaries, better pitches), my guess is that soon we'll see any bowler who has established himself in his country's Test team give up ODIs.

  • on October 21, 2013, 16:52 GMT

    You wil not find many South Africans agreeing with Ian Chappell often, but I think in this case most of us do!

  • Biso on October 21, 2013, 15:54 GMT

    It is time to revert to the condition with no field restrictions just as it was during the earlier world cups ( like the one in 1983 and earlier). Restrictions with fixed number of overs per bowler is OK. Off course one ball per innings will encourage quick bowlers to try reverse swing, especially in the subcontinent like conditions apart from helping the spinners. This massive unbalance between bat and ball will make the short format boring very soon.

  • Cobra0077 on October 21, 2013, 15:17 GMT

    Quite true, I have been posting something similar for quite some time. Actually I would go much further than what Ian said, that is many fast bowlers are getting injured when they are trying to do too much on these flat pitches (look at Stein who is injured again) and that is also tending them to bowl many short balls. T20 &ODI should be played with the similar rules as test. When a batsman is allowed to bat throughout the innings (if he is not out) then why should the bowlers be limited in the number of over's bowled & they should be no field restrictions. Something has to be done about the pitches, there has to be some uniformity there, rather than one extreme to another. When race tracks of over a mile long (horse racing) can be constructed in a manner to get some uniformity barring natural causes like weather, why can't a small are like a cricket pitch be constructed to get some kind of uniformity which would give all participants an equal chance to show their skill.

  • sridhar11111964 on October 21, 2013, 14:21 GMT

    I totally agree with all who shared their views regardthig this issue. There should be no power play and if batting team needs we may give them maximum of 5 overs only. In the same way the minimum length of the boundary should be fixed , not less than 85 m from all corners.Next the toss. The toss should be allowed only once in a series (for even number of matches )so that option of bowling or batting first shall be equally given to both captains. If the series has odd number of matches,then only the toss can be allowed(second time) for the last match of the series.

  • on October 21, 2013, 14:14 GMT

    There is a reason why the limited over game format has become more favorable for the batsmen and less to bowlers. It is due to the fact that the audience are there to see fireworks from the batsmen of either side and not for a bowling-dominated meagre 200-ish score match. So ICC has to see what the public demands and this has become the trend with limited overs, T20 to blame. All the rule changes recently, if you would have noticed, are batsmen favoring thus making sure that each game results in a 300 plus knock from each side and the audience feel satiated when they leave the stadium.

  • Jaani_gaddar on October 21, 2013, 14:10 GMT

    Spot On Ian Chappell . You always hit the bulls eye.Always a pleasure to hear your views and insights about the simple things of the game which make it such a great game.The basic principle is contest between bat & ball over any duration of time the game is scheduled for.T20's have become most predictable & the winner is just for the records, only games of contest between bat & ball are remembered. 50 overs is going the same way in this series one team only requires batsmen to win games. Why not have 11 batters who can chase maybe 700 runs.And the funny thing is seeing all the channels covering the games have all their commentators as former batsmen of all variety giving their expert view on the games before during & after the games. They keep on dwelling the fact that game has gone forward with batsmen chasing big scores and how exciting the batting is. Come on give us a break at least after the game is over. No wonder bowling skills are dwindling. Its not cricket anymore its baseball

  • Zahidsaltin on October 21, 2013, 13:36 GMT

    All other factors on one side and the imbalance created by the flate wickets stands as the most prominent factor in underminig bowlers role in the game. I would have liked ICC to take over the preparation work for international wickets. Some countries and specially India make their wickets such a dead thing that nothing would bounce or swing ever. Paradise for indian batsmen who only play to batting records.

  • on October 21, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    How about changing the ball to have a more pronounced seam? The main thing is that the Kokaburra white used has less seam than the dukes/SG. Hence make the seam more pronounced and see if this evens the contest.

  • GeoffreysMother on October 21, 2013, 12:34 GMT

    Very good, and timely article Ian. The hysterical demand for maximums ( as sixes are now called I believe) , the fireworks and the prizes for the biggest hits has fed this. The problem is that , in the end, it devalues the 6 and in the end makes the game boring for many. I turned off the run fest in Jaipur and watched De Villiers trying to survive and prosper against Saeed Ajmal on a grainy internet feed: marvellous stuff - but I suppose I am in the minority. It is good to see a lot of Indians and Australians agreeing with this as the IPL and Big Bash mentality is often blamed for driving this - as if people won't come to see more subtle cricket.

  • CricketChat on October 21, 2013, 12:29 GMT

    I agree with Ian. Most of the modern day inventions and changes are designed to help batsmen. All through this time, the bowler's true friends had pretty much remained the same: weather and pace through the air. I expect this trend to continue until scores around 400-450 runs in 50 over ODI and 250-300 in T20s becomes a norm. Only, when people get bored of meaningless scoring rates, will there be a concerted effort to bring back the ball-bat contest that is enjoyable by all. I would subtract 20 (min) from the batting averages of all batsmen who played after 1990 to compare with batsmen who played in the earlier era.

  • on October 21, 2013, 12:20 GMT

    I think we're all on the same page here, it's just no contest anymore, Chappelli has once again delivered here, probably for the heavy bat weilding BCCI to top edge it for six. Not having sky, i used to look forward to the IPL on telly (ITV4) of an afternoon when i returned from work, now it's a yawn fest, it's all samey, and why do i need a "six counter". I'll bet even Chris Gayle gets bored of it..... The only one's worth watching for me are ABV, Sanga and Dravid, lovely, but the bowlers? There's is nothing exciting to watch, it's a batsmans game, it always was.

  • popcorn on October 21, 2013, 11:55 GMT

    I agree with Chappelli. This stupid thinking that in order to bring more people through the geates, or more people watching TV means that we should see more sixes shows how poor is the ICC Cricket Committee.Now a 50 over ODI has become just an extended form of T20. Sic.

  • Cricket_Mad_completely on October 21, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    I have been saying this for years. Why is there so many restrictions on the bowlers and the fielders. Bowl only one bouncer an over; this made sense when batsmen's safety was a concern, now they are all dressed like gladiators... 1. Do not place any field restrictions; if someone wants to pursue a bodyline tactic, then well and good, they should be able to, batsmen can either innovate or duck or fail. 2. Lifting fielding restrictions also enables the captains to be creative in their field placements. 3. Go back to just one ball in one innings. If the white ball is dirty or is hit out of shape, then change it to a similar age ball but cleaner. Spinners are losing the confidence to flight the ball and get the advantage from a softer ball. The ICC should stop interfering with the rules of the game.One day batting should be more skillful than test batting because there is the pressure to score at a steady pace even when bowlers are on song and bowling a really good line and length.

  • on October 21, 2013, 11:14 GMT

    I am a great fan of Ian Chappell's writing and commentary. I completely agree on his thoughts and being an Indian i am sure BCCI will give damn about this article as they are more interested in financial gains rather than sports. If any of the suggestions given above does come into force believe me apart from Kohli none of the Indian batsmen will survive 50 over and our bowlers are not skillful enough to bowl on bowling friendly pitches (barring few).

  • RyanStephen on October 21, 2013, 9:33 GMT

    Preparing flat wickets to boost TV viewership rates is like printing money to boost the economy. Initially it works, but soon the money begins to lose it's value, and so it will be with sixes and fours.. They will start to become monotonous.

  • CricketMaan on October 21, 2013, 9:06 GMT

    its only the case in sub-continent or even so in India. We still dont see such tall scores or short boundaries often in Aus, SA or Eng where ball swings and seams a bit more. In here, it will always be the case of batters gaining more advantage thus no scope for a kid to become a world class bolwer.

  • Nutcutlet on October 21, 2013, 8:40 GMT

    When I see sides raise totals in excess of 350 and still lose in a canter, I know that match has been a dreadful game of cricket. Something is badly out of kilter - &, as I have said repeatedly & emphatically hereabouts - there has been a relegation of the bowlers' role to the level of farce. Wicket-taking attacking bowling does not belong to this run-inflated age and it does the game no favours: the crucial balance between bat & ball has been lost. Batsmen hitting 2,3, or 4 balls per over across or over the boundary begins to pall after a very short time. None of this seems to bother the crowd who continue to cheer wildly, so long as the batsmen are their own. They might as well be at a fairground for all the understanding of the game they display. The true cricket supporter is not interested in this pap; they're not there and in my case, neither is his TV on. This is the latest cynical betrayal of a great game by its administrators, who do not love cricket.

  • enigma77543 on October 21, 2013, 8:33 GMT

    Very good & much needed article, we urgently need some changes in the way things are going to prevent baseballization of Cricket. 1) Unlimited bouncers & no field restrictions - I think it will be very exciting for fans to see genuine quicks getting the batsmen to hop around & even bodyline shouldn't be a problem anymore because of the quality of the safety-equipment these days as well as improvement in medical facilities in case someone gets hit. 2) Standardized bats only - If bowlers can't just bring balls of their own choice to the game, batters shouldn't be allowed to bring their own bats; they must use the ones provided by the officials. 3) No bowling-quotas - There are no restrictions on the number of runs a batsman can score in a match then why restrict bowlers from bowling more than a certain number of overs - the best cricket is played when good batters are up against good bowlers. Even if pitches are flat, these changes could tremendously improve the quality of the sport.

  • Alexk400 on October 21, 2013, 8:00 GMT

    I think its a business. Smaller ground allows more sixers. But anything too much lose its value. They need to mix and match bigger ground with small to even the matchup. I always believe any team who has more athletic players will win the matchup in bigger ground. Not just real fast bowlers. You need fielders who can save runs and bring up energy of team. Also youth excels in bigger ground mostly. In India people like smaller ground just keep up with physical ability of people.

  • on October 21, 2013, 7:15 GMT

    lets have an experiment. lets make bowler friendly conditions and pitches in India. Let India team play one season. The results will show what is Indian batting capable of. I am sure batters like raina, sharma, jadeja, yuvraj wont get many runs. India success rate will drastically reduce. As I am sure I think BCCI are also sure about this, they will never do this, and we all know who controls the ICC. when we have a good contest between bat and bowl sides with good bowling will dominate (safrica, australia, england), this will happen because we dont have a lot of good batsman but only power hitters, these power hitters will fail once we have an even contest between bat and bowl.

  • rajkirp on October 21, 2013, 6:53 GMT

    I don't know whether it is true for all cricket lovers, but I rather see a match that is a contest between bowlers and batters than between two batting sides. I rather see a match played on a pitch that has something both for bowlers and batters than played on a pitch that has an advantage to either bowlers or batters. I rather see matches where chasing more than 5 runs per over will require special efforts from the batting side than see matches where chasing 6 runs per over is achieved without a sweat. I only hope that the administrators take care that a 50 over match should not be played out like a t20 all through 50 overs.

  • my_comments on October 21, 2013, 6:20 GMT

    Super Article!!! This is the present situation of cricket, where the technically sound batsman are overshadowed by hard hitters. T20 has created havoc in cricket. T20 should be played as a totally new sport than just another form of cricket. There should be standard ground sizes and weight of bats.

  • PrasPunter on October 21, 2013, 5:37 GMT

    @Roshan Payapulli, well said mate - my belief and I believe thats the case with most of the fans from SA, Eng and Aus - is that test cricket is the pinnacle of glory. With the limited-over versions, a team can easily mask their weaknesses and might even win WCs, but no such thing can happen with tests. Long live test cricket.

  • on October 21, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    should be able to ball tamper a bit the bowlers to even it out a bit within reason not overkill

  • waughjunior on October 21, 2013, 4:26 GMT

    All you have to do is let the quicks bowl more bouncers with less penalties for dropping it short. It might mke the batsman think twice about going for a slog.

  • on October 21, 2013, 4:12 GMT

    As some people have pointed out, I too agree with bigger grounds. There should be a minimum limit for boundary distances OR if there is one, it should be increased.

  • Kirk_Levin on October 21, 2013, 3:40 GMT

    The problem is mainly with India, where pitches are flat and stadiums are small. I don't understand why Indians are so scared to play on non-flat wickets back home. Just a way to inflate their average and score meaningless runs. Show some balls and start producing sporting wickets indians.

  • 777aditya on October 21, 2013, 3:12 GMT

    Superb Chapelli!! Gotta love it when he dissects such hot topics with such a profound study. He has just about covered everything there is that the bowlers rightfully whine about nowadays. Run fests are good once in a while, but low scoring thrillers have become a thing in the past even on Aussie, Kiwi, and RSA pitches. Asian pitches, be it India, SL, Pak, or Bangladesh - are like national highways. People like Chappell should be taken seriously because they love the game with all heart and are extremely knowledgeable.

  • Sheela on October 21, 2013, 3:07 GMT

    Opinion of Ian Chappel is on the dot. Shortening of boundary lines should stop forthwith. In India to increase the spectator capacity, playing areas in the grounds have been shortened. It is ridiculous to think only about batsmen's advantages. Why should bowlers be at the receiving end. ICC should preferably enforce a rule that grounds with boundary lines less 75 meters cannot host first class matches.

  • OneEyedAussie on October 21, 2013, 2:03 GMT

    It has to do with the way certain cultures view cricket. For some, the pinnacle of cricket is seeing an evenly matched bowler and batsman trying desperately to come out on top over one another. For some, the pinnacle of cricket is watching a batsman destroy a helpless bowler. It seems the ICC (and whoever is influencing them) is intent on moving to game towards the latter. I do feel sorry for bowlers because of the endless stream of ill-informed criticism they have to wear.

  • Alexk400 on October 21, 2013, 1:52 GMT

    I think india choose smaller grounds because indian players stamina and fitness comparably less than all other nation except bangladesh. Larger grounds always favor bowlers. You will see less sixers and batsman become circumspect before going for slogging on every shot that now every one doing.

  • on October 21, 2013, 1:11 GMT

    Bring back under arm bowling.

  • luks on October 21, 2013, 0:57 GMT

    There are pitches in India that have good bounce and favor fast bowlers but only a couple. If 50% of the pitches were good for pace bowlers there would be no issue. Why they don't do, I have no idea. I get the feeling that Ranji trophy which is decided on first innings higher total has led to dead pitches like Saurashtra where even Jadeja has hit triple centuries. No offence to him, but the pitch has a role to play. Harsha wrote an article about how some innings by youngsters in domestic cricket were more special because of more difficult pitches. We just need better pitch quality. That is all.

  • Nampally on October 21, 2013, 0:03 GMT

    The real answer to this problem is more bowler friendly pitches. If the ball is doing something off the pitch it won't be that easy to tear the bowlers apart. Green top pitches offer help equally to both batsmen & bowlers. Currently odds are heavily in favour of the batsmen with limitations on outfield reduced from 5 to 4. Increase the outfielders to 6 + give spicy pitches+ Boundary of 80 M. This will even the odds with level playing field. In India vs. Australia series of ODI's, 360 total has been chased down in 43 overs. Clearly the bowlers are being over matched in Odds.

  • bobagorof on October 20, 2013, 23:59 GMT

    I believe the problem is that there is too much tinkering with rules to encourage 'excitement' - 'powerplays' (introduced to encourage tactics from captains but now just taken at default times), staggered fielding restrictions, free-hits, etc - most of which does very little. Sri Lanka managed to innovate in the 1996 World Cup and attack in the early overs without needing a change to the rules to encourage it. Simplify the game: 5 bowlers, one period of restrictions early on, let the players be the entertainment.

  • bobagorof on October 20, 2013, 23:56 GMT

    EdwinD: restricting the number of balls a batsman faces is precisely the opposite of what you want to be doing. If a batsman knows he won't even bat out a third of the match, where is his incentive to do anything other than smash the ball? And if a few wickets fall early on, a batsman who is leading a recovery (as Dhoni did the other day) may have to retire before the close of innings through no fault of his own and expose the tail.

  • Chris_Howard on October 20, 2013, 23:47 GMT

    And then who cops the flak the big scores? The bowlers!!!

    They should certainly put physical limitations on the bats. e.g. maximum volume, thickness, weight etc.

    Plus allow fielders to touch the rope without conceding boundaries. And catches to count even if they step over the boundary.

    And get rid of powerplays and other short form fielding restrictions.

    A batsman should have to earn his runs.

  • onceanhour on October 20, 2013, 23:24 GMT

    Great Article and the Must for Cricket to Survive, Any Sport is a Challenge between players, its not about watches sixes and jumping , this is a very short term approach thinking its working, but in the immediate long run we are going to loose interest in the game, really dont understand the need for power plays n reducing the sizes of grounds, I think Administrators think spectators are not educated but they need to understand the challenge and excitement is the one that keeps audience stick to TV's and watch not mishits going to sixes people equally enjoy great balls, It high time bowlers and ex-players fix this

  • T-800 on October 20, 2013, 22:56 GMT

    Some time back, there was a proposal doing the rounds among the cricket experts that the one-day format needs to justify its existence in this age of T20. The only justification that one-day cricket can provide is by giving bowlers a chance and at least making this format an equal contest between bat and ball. T20 is largely a batsman's game and a boundary feast except for the rare extremely skilled bowlers like Sunil Narine. So, I don't quite understand the need for making new rules tilting the one day game in favor of the batsmen with the 4 fielders rule etc. Test cricket is always there but not everyone has the time to keep track of a five day match. Genuine cricket lovers have no interest in watching a 100 over slogfest. So, mostly in agreement with Ian Chappell, I say, either make the one-day format interesting by providing an equal contest between bat and ball OR just scrap this format and replace it completely with T20.

  • millsy24 on October 20, 2013, 21:56 GMT

    maddy7869 The majority of Australia's best ODI bowlers are sitting at home either injured or waiting for the test series.

  • kumarcoolbuddy on October 20, 2013, 21:46 GMT

    Every one talks from their (team's) perspective. I wish people who are complaining now also raised their voice when matches are happening in western countries like ENG, AUS etc. Ian Chappel should have talked about extremism in a specific department (pace/spin bowling or batting). When we go to ENG visiting teams, especially sub-continent ones, are now struggling because they are completely alien environment (You have to get used to the pitches and environment) and same thing with AUS tour. Why everyone on this earth is complaining only when matches are played in India? I guess the reason is western teams are struggling on sub-continent. What happened to SA in Dubai? Or did people forget that cricket is not just pace bowling?

  • ygkd on October 20, 2013, 20:34 GMT

    It is not just the India v Aus series in which this is a patently obvious problem. Take the Aus ODD match in North Sydney yesterday - who wants to watch a 50-over game played on a postage stamp where mishit sixes are all the go and "sparkling" centuries don't mean anything much at all?

  • likeintcricket on October 20, 2013, 20:27 GMT

    Yes, there should be a limit to the batsman like if a batsman scored 100 runs he should retire and one new ball instead of two and standard cricket bat's weight. Current cricket gives you a feeling that the great hitters like Viv Richards and Shahid Afridi and Botham are not really extra ordinary. But these batsman could have scored centuries in 17 balls under these conditions with these bowlers around.

  • RG88 on October 20, 2013, 18:50 GMT

    Some more changes need to be made in ODI. Fielding restrictions can be made more innovative. 2/3/4/5 fielders should be allowed to be outside the 30 yard circle for 1/2/3/4 blocks of 5 overs each. An elaboration - For the 1st 5 overs (overs 1 to 5) only 2 fielders outside the 30 yard circle. For 2nd 5 overs (overs 6 to 10) only 3 fielders outside the 30 yard circle. The 2nd 5 overs slot wherein only 3 fielders outside the 30 yard circle should be used by the batting side before end of 40th over. The rest of the 7 5 overs slots wherein 4/5 fielders can be outside the 30 yard circle should be used by the discretion of the bowling side. The defensive bowlers would get the protection of 5 fielders.

    The concept of 2 balls can further be evolved wherein it is the bowling side which must decide in which overs would they like to use the 2nd ball. There will be a situation where 1 ball is 40 overs old by the end of the match and the other ball is 10 overs old.

  • maddy7869 on October 20, 2013, 18:15 GMT

    How Ironic, both the Indian and Australian media and cricketers moaning about the dying breed of pace bowlers, which makes me laugh as they are forgetting the Pakistani Pace bowling industry and the South Africans not to forget the West Indians so I guess rather than address the real issue of not having quality pacers Ian Chappell should write an article on the poor quality bowlers these two teams have got. But unfortunately that would expose the real issue and the weakness these two teams have and would have them for a few years to come unless they get a modern day Waqar or Waseem or Irfan but guess they don't..... Something to think about and guys be honest when you reply to my post. (Neutral Fan from Pakistan)

  • KarachiKid on October 20, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    These kind of sensible articles are few and far between. Look at India-Australia series. You will find many many more people writing in praise of batsmen and their explosive skills then anyone noticing what Ian Chappel just noticed. Partly the blame lies in spectators in South Asia who just want fours and sixes. India is also losing quality seamers. Has someone noticed that none of Indian bowlers play more than a few series before fading out. Balaji, Pathan, Singh, Munaf Patel, Agarkar and at least 10 more only played a few series and vanished. Only exception being Zaheer Khan.The reason is quite simple, dead wickets with Tendulkars, Sehwags and Kohlis smashing the ball around the park. What kind of bowler can prosper in this situation?

  • on October 20, 2013, 18:07 GMT

    agreed 100% with Ian.

  • ilililililililililililililx on October 20, 2013, 17:59 GMT

    Pakistan is doing fine with the bowling department. Bowling SA and WI for 98 and bowling india out for 160. The only rule that needs to be made is only 1 new to be used.

  • EdwinD on October 20, 2013, 17:53 GMT

    The problem with having no restrictions on a bowler is that teams would pick 3 or 4 bowlers only, and pile the side with batsmen...to address the balance maybe batsmen should only be allowed to face a certain number of balls - say 100, or a 1/3 of whatever format is used?

  • on October 20, 2013, 16:46 GMT

    two simple rule changes in T20 will solve everything: innings will end when 5th wkt falls and all 20 overs are power play overs. it will separate great from good, bowlers batsmen and captains.

  • MiddleStump on October 20, 2013, 16:36 GMT

    Chappell must be commended for bringing up several issues that is going to kill cricket if corrective action is not taken. There is nothing wrong with the shorter forms of cricket provided the spectator is not cheated. As a cricket fan for half a century, I was eager to watch the one day game when it appeared in the seventies. But I stopped after watching a few matches. The idea of a bowler being allowed to participate for only 10 overs while the batsman could bat for the full duration of the match was against the basic spirit of cricket. Great bowlers of that era like Lillie and Roberts would be idling by the boundary once their quota was completed. As a fan, I want to watch the best bowlers go against the best batsmen for the entire game. Alas. I was forced to watch a manufactured contest. Things have got worse since then. The only way to restore balance is by removing the bowling restrictions, require a minimum distance to the boundary, and fix a limit on the weight of bats.

  • on October 20, 2013, 16:09 GMT

    Good bowlers can still get wickets. Johnson had a good spell in Mohali and had india 70/4. All other aussie bowlers were ordinary, and they ran into MS Dhoni. He can hit sixes with a hockey stick!! India had the game in the bag except the over from Ishant, which was really poor bowling more than anything else.

  • on October 20, 2013, 16:06 GMT

    Suggestions in all forms of the game: allow helmets, gloves and batting pads as the only protective gear. No more thigh pads, forearm guards or chest pads. No one will die but bravery will become a part of batting again and give fast bowlers some bite. Make struck on helmet a dismissal or at least make it mandatory for batsmen to leave field for 2 hours. Before hitting a batsman in the head changed an innings. Give that back to the fast bowler. Remove the pitched outside of leg stump protection if batsmen try reverse shots. Allow as many bouncers as the bowler wants. Or limit them to 2 bouncers not scored from off the bat. You get no protection if you smite a bouncer for 4 or 6.

  • GoldenAsif on October 20, 2013, 15:55 GMT

    However a few steps might help redress the balance between bat and ball

    - 2 bouncers per over - Fielding restrictions reduced from 15 to 10 overs. 5 initially and 5-over batting power play (anytime between 6th and 41st over) - Increasing the boundary size (apparently boundaries are slightly shorter in LOIs compared to tests) - Play with one ball. Playing with 2 balls means ball does n't get old enough and hence no reverse swing!

  • GoldenAsif on October 20, 2013, 15:54 GMT

    Although it is true that bats have improved since the 70s and 80s and limited overs cricket is a batsman's game (hence India are such a dangerous side in LOIs despite their weak bowling), we cannot generalize like that

    Good bowlers who knew how to bowl at the death were still mighty effective. I am talking of the likes of Ambrose, Wasim, Donald and McGrath etc.. Even someone like Pringle who was a line and length bowler and spinners such as Saqlain and Murali were very difficult to get away in the death overs

    You cannot use crap bowlers like Ishant and Sami as examples. They will be caned no matter where they bowl in an innings. Even Broad, Anderson and Gul are not good death bowlers in ODIs. Gul is a better death bowler in T20Is... cont.

  • on October 20, 2013, 15:54 GMT

    One of the best T20 matches I saw on the telly was in the IPL: CSK vs RR. This fixture has probably given the greatest encounters in the IPL. One match in particular where Mohit Sharma and Tim Southee where bowling on a length and getting lots of outswing, and Dravid and Rahane had to whether a brutal storm from the seamers. It was absolute quality cricket!!!! Just like a Test!!!! Then Watto came on later and managed to take the game away. The target was only 140 mind. But it was awesome to watch. Those sort of matches will become a rarity.

  • dcglynn on October 20, 2013, 15:52 GMT

    Surprised the author didn't mention the Kookaburra ball - it's a complete abomination and gives nothing to bowlers.

  • on October 20, 2013, 15:40 GMT

    It's things like this that confirm the superiority of the Test format and why it will never die!!!!

  • on October 20, 2013, 15:39 GMT

    This is mainly the BCCI's doing as they want to attract crowds and make money. They aren't a business, they are a cricket organisation. Why can't we have a former cricketer as chairman of the BCCI? All they do is provide flat tracks and small grounds so the batsman can do their thing. Cricket is a contest between the bowler and batsman, not the batsmen of one team and the batsmen of the opposing team. Stop the madness! Why are there all these rules like Powerplays as well? Why can't it just be no restrictions to the fielding team? No one would dare restrict the batting team!

  • Truemans_Ghost on October 20, 2013, 15:33 GMT

    The article is certainly true if you look at the evidence of the last 3 ODIs. However if your memory stretches back more than 2 weeks, you will notice that in the Champions Trophy a number of the critical games, not least the final, were won by the bowlers, often with some quite low scores. Not all games are played on flat tracks in India, however.

  • KD1402 on October 20, 2013, 15:13 GMT

    Need to standardize and limit bat thickness. Tired of seeing top edged sixes. Not only does it diminish the value of whats supposed to be the most exciting part of the game, its making it routine, and hence not exciting. Football wont be fun if goals are 50 ft wide and theres 25 of them each game. Not to mention, its completely skewing the historical context of performances and records.

  • on October 20, 2013, 14:49 GMT

    Welcome Ian....I totally agree. The game has always been for the batsman but all the restrictions placed on the bowler and fielders makes it even more so. Why can two batsmen bat the entire 50 or 20 over (as the case might be), but a bowler can bowl only 10 or 4 overs in a game. What if the bowler is in his element today, yet he is limited. No such thing for batting.

  • ladycricfan on October 20, 2013, 14:28 GMT

    Now that we have T20 for the 4s and 6s , ODIs should be played with test match rules. Remove all the fielding restrictions, play with one ball, boundary ropes as in test matches etc, etc.

  • doubleyukes on October 20, 2013, 14:25 GMT

    Dear Ian I am not sure I agree with your comments fully. The present format encourages batsmen to take risks with the result there are more wicket taking chances. If i look at the present series the batsmen are not slogging but hitting good cricket shots to score runs. Its a different era and its the bowlers who can adapt to this that will survive. Even in this format of the game it is clear taking wickets at regular intervals brings the advantage to the bowling side. Ian's thoughts are a bit old fashioned so dont buy that. The only issue in india is the wickets favot the batsmen a lot!

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on October 20, 2013, 14:17 GMT

    I do agree ,to an extent. But bowlers are 'endangered species' if you are the likes of the Indian m/pacers esp. Ishant or Anderson ,Broad etc. Don't thing it is so when some 1 as good as a Mitch Johnson is bowling his L/Arm scorches be it any pitch, any format -ODI,T20,test - or IPL, CLt20 . In fact , the only person in any danger is the batsman as you would expect facing world's fastest trying to bounce your head off @ 150 kph -:)

  • on October 20, 2013, 14:06 GMT

    Allow bowling captains to give 2 bowlers 12 overs in the innings.

  • Gordo85 on October 20, 2013, 13:55 GMT

    I fully agree with you two new balls is not the right way to go about things. I can't understand why one ball can't last 50 overs but what is wrong with changing it at the 38 over mark with a ball around a simular age? As someone said to me sometime ago maybe the stumps need to get bigger in order to make it an even contest. I have to also agree why would anyone want to be a bowler in cricket these days when you have it even harder now more than ever.

    Also I have to agree with you about the shorter boundaries, some fields are way too small or short to make it an even contest.

  • aahahaa on October 20, 2013, 13:50 GMT

    boundaries needs to be longer and standard all over. allow minimum 5 outside the circle, always. 2nd new ball an option for the bowling captain after over # 35. allow one bowler to bowl 12 overs. no runners. rethink on leg side wide rule (right now it is a joke) and about due something has to be done to negate the advantage for the batting team.

  • on October 20, 2013, 13:27 GMT

    An easy way to improve the bowler's lot - get rid of the Kookaburra! It would be a start if the Duke ball was made mandatory, or an alternative with an even more pronounced seam.

  • on October 20, 2013, 13:20 GMT

    No the problem is in India they are playing on Roads, too batting friendly , time to juice up the pitches a bit and also get rid of the batting powerplay its too much in favor of the batsman

  • PrasPunter on October 20, 2013, 13:00 GMT

    @Herbet , fantastic suggestion mate. Every contest will be worth a watch, with that suggestion of yours. May be it can be put on trial. But the powers-that-be of the game wouldn't be interested. So it will remain on papers.

  • PrasPunter on October 20, 2013, 12:53 GMT

    @Raghuraman RajaNarayanan, mate, you made me feel nostalgic about the glorious days of ODI games !! Can a team ever defend a score like that ? Can we ever witness a classic like the WC 1999 semifinal when Aus defended 213 ? Wondering why the ICC toys way too much and tinkers with the format. Lets get back to that era of the 90s - 15 overs with 2 players outside the ring , one ball per innings and all that stuff - the game will become more competitive. No point enacting the 20 over stuff for 50 overs.

  • on October 20, 2013, 12:34 GMT

    The only bother here is why now, this has been a problem for 5 years, why during an India Australia series? :)

  • on October 20, 2013, 12:34 GMT

    Is cricket meant to be a sporting contest or is it entertainment? Will cricket go the way of professional wrestling, a spectacle rather than a contest?

  • BRUTALANALYST on October 20, 2013, 12:19 GMT

    The introduction of helmets and improved padding did more than newer bats to change the game. Once your dome is protected there is literally nothing to be scared of, bouncers that once caused sheer terror in a batsman are now meaningless hit me balls and no good batsman has any fear to even charge pacers.

  • on October 20, 2013, 12:12 GMT

    Make the boundary slightly bigger 75-80m so you only get rewarded for good shots. Also allow bowlers to bowl more than 10 overs. Say 2 bowlers can bowl up to 15 overs.

  • anton1234 on October 20, 2013, 12:07 GMT

    I have always been for the idea of a 80-85 metre boundary minimum. The short boundaries makes a mockery of the game. Since ODI and T20 matches use distance tracking (by the TV companies), why not award 7 runs for 100 meter sixes and 8 runs for 120 meters. You can experiment with limited overs cricket. I think it will add an extra dimension to the game. People love to watch huge sixes. Most people are not impressed with 70 meter sixes.

  • 07sanjeewakaru on October 20, 2013, 11:30 GMT

    Thanks Chappelli...!If 50 overs game become a extended 20 over game,It will die soon.Bigger bats,Small boundaries and cricket illiterate crowds who need every ball to go pass the boundary will kill this wonderful game in near.. near ..future.They don't care if bowler is replaced by a bowling machine which could bowl their favorite batsmen with a big edged bat.Cricket will become baseball ..How can we compare this big scoring 50 overs with previous classic encounters of it like 250 is a winning total had it been chased down it would've required great skill of cricket other than massacring bowlers in a flat pitch with big bats. As there is T20 50 over game should provide glimpse of what test cricket is all about,with fair pitch for bowlers and batmen (40%for bowlers not 1% like these days).I think cricket pleading for cricket loving public who could enjoy running between wickets,who could understand and appreciate attacking strategies like field placings..etc.not cricket fans....

  • on October 20, 2013, 11:29 GMT

    Herbet, I completely agree with you.

  • malepas on October 20, 2013, 11:29 GMT

    Spot on Ian and what happening is that T20 being varnished over ODI's which is a shame, the following must be done, 1- Min boundaries to be 75 mtrs. 2- 5 fielders outside after power-play overs 3- Ball to change after 35 overs ONLY if there is dew or significant discolouring. 4- 2 bouncers in each over, over-head bouncers to be called wide as they judged now. I think to keep the ODI cricket T20 free is the need of the hour to make it more of based on skills and techniques and not butchering of cricket we seeing in current India-Aus ODI's, NOT good for cricket at all.

  • Schahidt on October 20, 2013, 11:18 GMT

    I have always felt that limited-over cricket is biased towards batsmen. I will cite at least two reasons for my belief. When a bowler is bowling well, he is given only 10 overs and that's it. But if a batsman is batting well, he can continue to bat for the entire inning of 50 overs. Why put a limit on bowler and not on batsman. If a bowler is bowling well, why he cannot bowl more, say 20 overs? Also, if a bowler bowls one bouncer which is his main weapon, he is not allowed to bowl second. But the batsman is allowed as many sixes as he can. Why no one puts a limit on batsman and say you can only hit one six in an over. I know it sounds silly, but putting a limit of one bouncer on bowlers sounds equally silly to me.

  • on October 20, 2013, 11:09 GMT

    Cricket, for me, is enjoyable only when it is a contest between the bat and the ball. Never when it is a contest between the bat and the bat. It is really simple.

    Yes, for those who are not that bright and patient to enjoy the 'ball vs bat' and who get excitement only when it is 'bat vs bat', there is a platform. That platform is called the T20. It will be great if the 'bat vs bat' is limited there.

    Brilliant article by Ian Chappell.

  • srikanths on October 20, 2013, 10:30 GMT

    Ishant might be messed up there , he just lost it . Even discounting a bolwing performance like that, it is a fact that in ODI s, a 270 total used to be a sure winner, is no longer the case, a 300 is still gettable. Some people argue that all performances in sports keep improving. Not logical. This is not running or jumping .A batsman is pitted against a bowler , unless the batsmen have improved more than the bowlers over the years the argument does not make sense. Agree with Ian Chappell that something needs to be done to bring the balance back. You see someone like Pollard and Gayle and a few others also mishitting balls for sixes, not one off but repeatedly. May be former players can think of novel ideas, like some on field placements, bouncers etc to bring greater parity between ball and bat

  • ladycricfan on October 20, 2013, 10:19 GMT

    Give curators incentives. Reward them extra if the score is less than 300.That will encourage them to prepare sporting pitches that will aid the bowlers.

  • Herbet on October 20, 2013, 10:14 GMT

    As a genuine suggestion on how to improve limited overs cricket (both 50 and 20 overs) why not get rid of the fielding restrictions? All of them, power plays and everything. Make it so that the only thing that distinguishes it from first class cricket is the fact that it is just one day long and a team can only bat for 50 overs. Make the batsmen earn their runs and pay for bad shots, like they should always have to do.

  • Herbet on October 20, 2013, 10:11 GMT

    "But if sixes become even more prevalent, there's a danger the spectacle will become monotonous."

    We are way past the point of it being monotonous. With the flat tracks, field restrictions, tiny boundaries and all the other things you have listed we have got to an equivalent point where if in football/soccer the goals were trebled in size, the pitch shortened and defenders were told where they could stand where they could run. The value of goals would plummet and any old goon who could boot a ball would be a star, while defenders would be made to look like hapless idiots. That's the state limited overs cricket is in, but it is the runs that are devalue and the bowlers hapless. That's why I don't watch it, and don't consider it cricket.

  • on October 20, 2013, 9:46 GMT

    lambasting hapless bowlers like Ishant Sharma is not the solution. The fear of getting whacked was evident even on the faces of Ashwin, who constantly bowled a negative line and R Vinay Kumar who pitched it short more often than not. Tomorrow, anybody can be butchered like Ishant with the game leaning in the favour of batsmen and if continued to be treated as ( modern) spectator friendly.

  • Sarfin on October 20, 2013, 8:59 GMT

    I miss the era when 250 runs tested the skill and character of chasing team. Now it seems you don't need to think. Just go and hit. You barely need to read the game and pace your innings according to that. Now you don't need to judge match situation. All you need is to go in the middle and score at a rate over 6.

  • on October 20, 2013, 8:49 GMT

    its pathetic situation in cricket,sorry for the bowlers .the quality of bowling gone down these days .tired of seeing over used slow balls,short boundaries.

  • Mervo on October 20, 2013, 8:44 GMT

    It leaves the T20 stuff for dead. It will be gone in 5 years. Johnson's bowling last night showed raw pace still counts against batsmen of average quality.

  • on October 20, 2013, 8:37 GMT

    i dnt know what icc was thinking and changed the ODI rules..its not helping the bowlers.Specially on subcontinent pitches, where there is no seam and swing movement. its should be a contest between bat n bowl. Heavier bats, shorter boundaries, field restriction, 2 new bowl (in sub continent condition) are not helping it. For entertainment, twenty-20 is there.I think, one new ball and 5 fielder outside 30 yard circle after power play over is a way to go. It will bring both pacer and spinner in the game .

  • SamRoy on October 20, 2013, 8:36 GMT

    That's why I have always said go back to red ball. I understand it is difficult to pick it in coloured clothing but at least it creates a balance between ball and bat. One thing the administrators can do is whenever a cricket match is played over the weekend and if the climate is not too hot play it during the day. And remove all these field restrictions. Should allow 5 or 6 fielders (I don't mind 9) outside the circle whenever required. And at least have 60 yard boundaries everywhere (70 yard is preferable but I don't think except a few grounds in Australia any ground has 70 yard boundaries on all sides). And have something in the pitch for all bowlers (spinners and fast bowlers). All of these suggestions may not be feasible everywhere but if they are used it makes for better cricket.

  • on October 20, 2013, 8:34 GMT

    Just tweaking a few rules can bring back the slight advantages ODI bowlers had in the 90s. Remove the two new balls rule and get rid of one power play. Have more grass on pitches and dont crop it off completely before the match. Is it so hard to do? If people want to see power hitting they can go watch golf or baseball. This is cricket. And bowlers need to have some advantages too. Just a couple of days ago we saw Ishant going for 30 in an over n India losing due to it. Had there been just one new ball it would have reversed and we wouldnt even be seeing that kind of ridiculous chase.

  • wnwn on October 20, 2013, 8:26 GMT

    Bowlers should be encouraged to take wickets. For me, the most exciting ODI's have been low scoring with plenty of wickets falling.

  • Hardy1 on October 20, 2013, 8:17 GMT

    Get rid of leg byes while we're at it

  • on October 20, 2013, 8:11 GMT

    Spot on Chappelli, and I think the short boundaries, batsmen friendly wickets and new rule changes have all pointed out some of the problems happening in the Ryobi Cup. In the first few games at Bankstown, the pitch was slow. Given the fact that batsmen have become so used to hitting boundaries over singles, many batsmen either got out trying to hit a boundary, or got out because they couldn't hit boundaries -- all when they should have been working singles and twos. Subsequentially, teams regularly failed to score 200 in the first few games, which as you can imagne, simply isn't a good enough score and should never really be remotely possible to defend. Only teams with experienced batsmen, such as Victoria, managed to regularly win on that Bankstown pitch, recognizing the importance of rotating the strike.

  • on October 20, 2013, 7:27 GMT

    "But if sixes become even more prevalent, there's a danger the spectacle will become monotonous. " Absolutely right! As for me, I always love to see the ball (preferably red) speeding along, grazing the green, towards the boundary! Brutal hitting sixers in T20 matches is certainly awesome, but, forgive me the image, it reminds me of a charging rhino, while I grew up enjoying running cheetahs and racing deers! Sorry, I am not dismissing sixers, but wont you like just the exact amount of sugar in your coffee, and not multiple spoons of sugar there!

  • on October 20, 2013, 7:17 GMT

    The runfests have become borfests. When a team can chase down 360 one day, then there is some value in it, but not when 300+ totals are regularly chased down. The pitches should have something in them for the bowlers, then lets see how many of these batsmen are able to smash it around so easily. And people like Ravi Shastri, who reckoned that the flat monster in that 360 chase game was a beauty should be send packing from the commentary box.

  • Bucky77 on October 20, 2013, 7:11 GMT

    Whilst the odd run-fest provides great entertainment, the sight if 300+ plays 300+ soon becomes dull - the contest just isn't there. Variety in overall scores, and therefore in the way games are played comes from the pitch. So long as there's a mixture of pitches that offer sometimes bounce, seam, spin and the odd one with variable bounce to keep batsmen in their toes, then the balance will be restored. It's the very least bowlers deserve!

  • S.Jagernath on October 20, 2013, 7:00 GMT

    The important questions are why are the ICC allowing bats to get so thick and heavy?why do cricket boards allow such batsmen friendly pitches to be prepared?and why are the dimensions of grounds so small?Curators in the circumstance of that 2nd ODI must be fined,it is his fault for the production of a bland contest.The introduction of free hits & having less fielders outside the 30-yard circle is a joke.It is as if bowlers are still being punished for Bodyline!

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:55 GMT

    Watch those matches from Australia on you tube which happened in the eighties. Perfect balance between bat and ball.

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:43 GMT

    Its not long before bowlers will be enendangered species

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:34 GMT

    totally agree with ian. Bowling is far more difficult than batting. But if pitches, boundary sizes as well as the rules start favouring batsman, then quality of bowling will not only diminish, batting defensive technique will also decrease. Overall cricket will suffer and become unpopular. People will eventually get sick of seeing top edges go for 6 or outside edges clearing the third man boundary. Infact it is obvious by rapid decline in attendances in matches over past 5 years.

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:15 GMT

    All these stupid rule changes for making the game more 'entertaining' contributed to the down fall of the quality of cricket. Spinners have no say. No revese swing. Free hit for what? . If the batsman is beaten, there should be a law that he cannot score run of the next ball:-). Keep it simple. Its a game between bat and ball.

  • on October 20, 2013, 6:04 GMT

    Would a bowler like Wasim Akram bowl the kind of rubbish the Indian and Australian bowlers dished out. Does Vivian Richards, Botham Kapildev needs a heavy bat to hit sixes. The problem obviously lies in between. The batsmen has become bold enough to take on bowlers. Show me a single bowler who can bowl a decent yorker. Leg cutters and offcutters, where r they?. Show me some bowlers who can swing the ball ( do not blame flat pitches for the lack of swing). I liked the way Boundaries in the australian grounds used to be ( no ropes). Bring it back.

  • Buggsy on October 20, 2013, 5:45 GMT

    So true. Why would anyone want to become a bowler these days? Sure, it's still a level playing field in Tests but otherwise bowlers are just there to make up the numbers.

  • PSK_analyst on October 20, 2013, 5:38 GMT

    The new rules have marginalised the bowlers even more , one of the things they can do is give the bowling captain the option of using two new balls or disposing off one of the balls at any stage of the innings , minimum boundary lengths should be made mandatory , don't know how far this this could be done, and maybe use a heavier ball to counterbalance better bats. The whole spectacle of ODI cricket is becoming a bore and it isnt going to get better from here, and we could improve pitches for a start .

  • roygbiv on October 20, 2013, 5:31 GMT

    As a bowler, watching India's chase in the second ODI was awesome in the original sense of the word, i.e. it inspired awe and a little bit of fear. The bowlers have an extremely small margin of error on batting friendly limited over wickets and sometimes you feel there is nowhere that they can bowl to prevent runs. Meanwhile, the batsmen's margin of error has increased significantly. The thicker bats, while weighing the same, allow for edges, mishits and anything not of the middle to still go for a four or even a six. I think that this is the imbalance that needs to be addressed. Perhaps a regulation that the distance between the face and back of the bat at its largest point can only be x% of the width of the face. If theses players used bats from the 80s, how many of these mishits would be caught I wonder? If the batsmen pay a higher price for getting it wrong, I think balance would be restored.

  • on October 20, 2013, 5:31 GMT

    For a change, need to agree with Ian Chappel

  • DRS_Flawed_NeedsImprovement on October 20, 2013, 5:26 GMT

    Advent of t20 changes the mindset of batsmen, so my recommendation below are not one sided.

    1. Strict regulation for Bat dimensions and weight. 2. Allow bowlers to bowl unlimitted bouncers. 3. Allow 6 fielders outside the 30 yard circle in non powerplay overs. 4. Two new ball should be scrapped, as author said it is disadavantage for both fast bowlers and spinners, no reverse swing and no turn. 4. Boundary lines should be no less than 75 metres at shortes boundaries, 80 metre boundary would be more nice.

    Hope above rules will give serious challenge to batsmen.

  • maddinson on October 20, 2013, 5:12 GMT

    Agree with Ian, these are ridiculously small grounds and probably the dream batting tracks provide bowlers no chance. There is hardly any contest between bat and ball.

  • on October 20, 2013, 4:47 GMT

    I agree with Ian Chappel's comment. There is changes of rules required for favoring Bowlers

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on October 20, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    I am die hard fan of ODI, I was really disappointed when icc changed rule of having only 4 fielder outside the 30 yard circle. To make odi more beautiful contest between bat and ball i recommend.. 1. Allow bowlers to bowl unlimitted bouncers. 2. Allow 6 fielders outside the 30 yard circle in last 10 overs 3. Two new ball should be scrapped bcz it is disadavantage for both fast bowlers and spinners, no reverse swing and no turn. 4. Boundary lines should no less than 80 metres.

  • on October 20, 2013, 4:37 GMT

    play more in India u Aussies, then u'll cry for bad pitches for bowling. India is always a surface where only batting survives. Bad place for Cricket !

  • on October 20, 2013, 4:36 GMT

    I agree with Ian's sentiments. The 2 new ball rule should be scrapped. Reverse swing late was one of the joys of the game. Also, no bouncer limitations. Lets bring courage back into batting.

  • KingYaz on October 20, 2013, 4:08 GMT

    I strongly agree with this article. I've been thinking the same thing recently. This might sound like a conspiracy, but I think the BCCI has too much control and is pushing the ICC to favor the batsmen and killing the game of cricket in the process. All the new rules are against the bowlers, they are ruining the balance between batsmen and bowlers. 300+ scores shouldn't be the norm. I can't help but think the Indian cricket board has a hand in this, as India can't produce quality fast bowlers. Action should be taken to preserve the game.

  • vaidyar on October 20, 2013, 3:38 GMT

    Also, the moment the pitch has something to offer for the bowlers, the batsmen just capitulate. There is no incentive to play the fighting innings. They usually get 3 or 4 chances and if 3 of those are guaranteed to be in friendly flat tracks, they might as well just not bother much about their technique in juicier pitches. Look what happened in the 3rd ODI. Except for Kohli and Dhoni rest pretty much didn't turn up. Yuvraj, Raina and Rohit Sharma are the worst in that respect.

  • Insult_2_Injury on October 20, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    Baseballs' Home run derby is a side show, which quickly goes from awe to ho hum. So too is the mishit six in cricket. I remember being gob smacked at Pontings timing from his massive sixes in the World Cup final in South Africa. Now the ludicrous restrictions on bowlers and field placings have spectators expecting a six an over. Featherbeds like those being produced in India are also contributing to disdain if the score doesn't pass 300. Time to go back to contests. Some of the best nail biting spectacles are with scores between 180 - 250 where boundaries are at a premium and you believe your bowlers can influence the game. If not, then allow 7-2 leg side fields the same as on the off, because as we've seen, four boundary riders doesn't strike fear into any batter with a lump of 4x2. With no field restrictions then at least the bowler can try and influence the batsmans' thought, rather than just being today's 1 Day or T20 bowling machine.

  • PratUSA on October 20, 2013, 3:28 GMT

    Two things have become a joke now days, for every single ground in the world you hear 'it's a small ground', that's because ropes are brought in by several meters if ground is of decent size. And second is screaming of 'maximums'. Sixes have lost the old charm already. Recently 39 runs were scored in an over in a game as if making fun of Sobers and Shastri hitting only 36 in a bygone era. I suspect cricket will only wake up after it's already too late.

  • on October 20, 2013, 3:17 GMT

    Hard to believe now that we had a tie when the team batting first scored just 126 - that was India vs West Indies in 1992. Players in either team reads like who's who - Srikkanth, Sachin, Azharuddin vs Haynes, Lara, Richardson on the batting; Kapil, Prabhakar, Srinath vs Ambrose, Marshall, Patterson in bowling!

  • on October 20, 2013, 3:11 GMT

    Totally valid points Ian chappell makes here. This two new balls rule needs to be thrown out of the window first. Making the boundaries bigger should be another move that must be initiated quickly. Reverse swing is an art sub continent bowlers used to great effect in death overs of the ODIs and that has completely been taken away with this two new balls rule. These days even if a bowler bowls the perfect yorker it ends up being gun barrel straight and batsman can easily make good connection and hit that ball out. The crowds love interesting tight games and giving bowlers a chance will make that happen. T20 format can serve their appetite for 4s ad 6s.

  • on October 20, 2013, 2:50 GMT

    I know it has been mooted before would would Ian like to see ALL fielding restrictions (except possibly powerplays!?!?!) removed so that the most innovative captains can set the fields he wishes and thus bring the balance back a little to the fielding side and aid the bowler?

  • on October 20, 2013, 2:50 GMT

    I know it has been mooted before would would Ian like to see ALL fielding restrictions (except possibly powerplays!?!?!) removed so that the most innovative captains can set the fields he wishes and thus bring the balance back a little to the fielding side and aid the bowler?

  • on October 20, 2013, 3:11 GMT

    Totally valid points Ian chappell makes here. This two new balls rule needs to be thrown out of the window first. Making the boundaries bigger should be another move that must be initiated quickly. Reverse swing is an art sub continent bowlers used to great effect in death overs of the ODIs and that has completely been taken away with this two new balls rule. These days even if a bowler bowls the perfect yorker it ends up being gun barrel straight and batsman can easily make good connection and hit that ball out. The crowds love interesting tight games and giving bowlers a chance will make that happen. T20 format can serve their appetite for 4s ad 6s.

  • on October 20, 2013, 3:17 GMT

    Hard to believe now that we had a tie when the team batting first scored just 126 - that was India vs West Indies in 1992. Players in either team reads like who's who - Srikkanth, Sachin, Azharuddin vs Haynes, Lara, Richardson on the batting; Kapil, Prabhakar, Srinath vs Ambrose, Marshall, Patterson in bowling!

  • PratUSA on October 20, 2013, 3:28 GMT

    Two things have become a joke now days, for every single ground in the world you hear 'it's a small ground', that's because ropes are brought in by several meters if ground is of decent size. And second is screaming of 'maximums'. Sixes have lost the old charm already. Recently 39 runs were scored in an over in a game as if making fun of Sobers and Shastri hitting only 36 in a bygone era. I suspect cricket will only wake up after it's already too late.

  • Insult_2_Injury on October 20, 2013, 3:34 GMT

    Baseballs' Home run derby is a side show, which quickly goes from awe to ho hum. So too is the mishit six in cricket. I remember being gob smacked at Pontings timing from his massive sixes in the World Cup final in South Africa. Now the ludicrous restrictions on bowlers and field placings have spectators expecting a six an over. Featherbeds like those being produced in India are also contributing to disdain if the score doesn't pass 300. Time to go back to contests. Some of the best nail biting spectacles are with scores between 180 - 250 where boundaries are at a premium and you believe your bowlers can influence the game. If not, then allow 7-2 leg side fields the same as on the off, because as we've seen, four boundary riders doesn't strike fear into any batter with a lump of 4x2. With no field restrictions then at least the bowler can try and influence the batsmans' thought, rather than just being today's 1 Day or T20 bowling machine.

  • vaidyar on October 20, 2013, 3:38 GMT

    Also, the moment the pitch has something to offer for the bowlers, the batsmen just capitulate. There is no incentive to play the fighting innings. They usually get 3 or 4 chances and if 3 of those are guaranteed to be in friendly flat tracks, they might as well just not bother much about their technique in juicier pitches. Look what happened in the 3rd ODI. Except for Kohli and Dhoni rest pretty much didn't turn up. Yuvraj, Raina and Rohit Sharma are the worst in that respect.

  • KingYaz on October 20, 2013, 4:08 GMT

    I strongly agree with this article. I've been thinking the same thing recently. This might sound like a conspiracy, but I think the BCCI has too much control and is pushing the ICC to favor the batsmen and killing the game of cricket in the process. All the new rules are against the bowlers, they are ruining the balance between batsmen and bowlers. 300+ scores shouldn't be the norm. I can't help but think the Indian cricket board has a hand in this, as India can't produce quality fast bowlers. Action should be taken to preserve the game.

  • on October 20, 2013, 4:36 GMT

    I agree with Ian's sentiments. The 2 new ball rule should be scrapped. Reverse swing late was one of the joys of the game. Also, no bouncer limitations. Lets bring courage back into batting.

  • on October 20, 2013, 4:37 GMT

    play more in India u Aussies, then u'll cry for bad pitches for bowling. India is always a surface where only batting survives. Bad place for Cricket !

  • ODI_BestFormOfCricket on October 20, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    I am die hard fan of ODI, I was really disappointed when icc changed rule of having only 4 fielder outside the 30 yard circle. To make odi more beautiful contest between bat and ball i recommend.. 1. Allow bowlers to bowl unlimitted bouncers. 2. Allow 6 fielders outside the 30 yard circle in last 10 overs 3. Two new ball should be scrapped bcz it is disadavantage for both fast bowlers and spinners, no reverse swing and no turn. 4. Boundary lines should no less than 80 metres.