Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Warwickshire v Hampshire
#81
They sorted that problem out in tennis all that is needed is for specific time allocating down to seconds. One simple rule could be that time cannot be spent on field placing after over has commenced except for if there has been a change in facing batsman.

Mind you Trotty might have an issue or two when batting!!
LE - aka John
Reply
#82
(30-09-2017, 08:46 PM)exiledinkent Wrote: No reasonable chance of the appeal succeeding.
But the system is ridiculous. A slow over rate should be punished by a fine or the suspension of the captain in future games. It shouldn't lead to the relegation of a team which has won more points than another.
I can see the argument for such a draconian punishment in circumstances where he slow rate is deliberately unsportsmanlike but I haven't seen any evidence that that is the case here.

On the contrary, I think the punishment for slow over rates in the championship is much better than for test cricket, where the captain gets fined a percentage of his match fee. Too many times I've been to test match cricket to watch them crawl through 80 overs in a day with no real punishment. At least docking points should be enough of a disincentive to make sure teams don't do it.

Of course, the other option is to award run penalties within the match, and that way the opposition aren't disadvantaged as much by any slow play.
Proud to be a Bear
Reply
#83
I have always favoured the latter option, EB. I find the same with football whereby players are retrospectively given bans for incidents not punished correctly during the game, it comes as no assistance to the opposition on that day who otherwise might have won the game had the opposition played with 10 men for 40 minutes or what have you.
Paul fondled my onion bags.
Reply
#84
(01-10-2017, 04:09 PM)Leicester Exile Wrote: They sorted that problem out in tennis all that is needed is for specific time allocating down to seconds. One simple rule could be that time cannot be spent on field placing after over has commenced except for if there has been a change in facing batsman.

Mind you Trotty might have an issue or two when batting!!

They really haven't LE. Its so open to debate with players regularly going over the 25 sec allowance between serves yet the umpires will call a time violation during a crucial point. also the umpires don't in to allowance that the players might have exhauseted themselves playing a 35 shot rally. Its a total farce in tennis.

Reply
#85
(02-10-2017, 10:06 AM)Lilly Wrote: I have always favoured the latter option, EB. I find the same with football whereby players are retrospectively given bans for incidents not punished correctly during the game, it comes as no assistance to the opposition on that day who otherwise might have won the game had the opposition played with 10 men for 40 minutes or what have you.

Thats where var can come into play in football.

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)