NO Ball

[archie mac]

I think they should change the no ball rule in Test Cricket to that used in ODI; ie a free hit to the batting team

Not as silly as it sounds, when they had the back foot no-ball law, the batsman would have time for a free hit (because the umpire called it off the back foot, which is much earlier in the bowlers delivery motion).

I think we would see a huge reduction in no-balls at the Test level, I am not sure why but they really annoy me

 

[Perm]

Didn't expect this from you archie, surprised really. Plenty of people started whinging when they changed the ODI rule to include a free-hit, and if they did the same with Tests, we'd hear for weeks for Twenty20 was taking over cricket.

 

[archie mac]

Didn't expect this from you archie, surprised really. Plenty of people started whinging when they changed the ODI rule to include a free-hit, and if they did the same with Tests, we'd hear for weeks for Twenty20 was taking over cricket.

I thought it was a crap idea when I first saw it in 20/20, but am happy to say that I was wrong

 

[Richard]

Yeah, the original idea of the no-ball was a free-hit. Not sure I'd use the exact system used in OD (and Twenty20) cricket but I'd certainly be in favour of such a system in Tests, and I reckon it'd near enough completely rid us of no-balls, because everyone would always make the effort to not bowl them - including, vitally, those being introduced to the art of bowling.

 

[Top_Cat]

If they're going to maintain the silliness that is the front-foot no-ball rule in the first place, why not?

 

[Dick Rockett]

If they're going to maintain the silliness that is the front-foot no-ball rule in the first place, why not?

What's wrong with it?

 

[Jono]

I'm prepared to admit I was wrong actually.

I still hate the idea of a free-hit, because often good batsman start playing ugly ****ty strokes and often they come off.

But I'd love to see stats of the average amount of no balls before the free-hit rule came in the international arena for one-dayers, and before. I'm sure it would have dropped significantly, and that can only be a good thing.

Possibly one of the rare cases when the end justifies the means.

 

[Manee]

Free hits should not come into Tests because Tests are all about earning every run possible whilst preserving your wicket. Freehits aid cheap runs with no regard for the latter either.

 

[slugger]

^^^^^

What you say has some merit, but that little consolation when you are given or got out on a no ball, that wasnt picked up...

 

[Goughy]

Punishment would far out weigh the crime.

As it is a no-ball carries plenty of punishment for quite a trivial matter.

A batsman cant get out, a run is given, any runs scored are credited, the ball must be re-bowled, fines for slow over rates are accrued.

There is no balance to a free hit being added.

If it were to be added in Test cricket it would be more than unfiar.

 

[Top_Cat]

What's wrong with it?

Damn near impossible to apply consistently. How many no-ball wickets gets missed every season? We've had quite a few in the Test series' against India and SL and there are heaps more, especially with TV stations making a point of highlighting it. How many LBW's/catches behind are botched by the umpire because he has to watch a 2 inch thick line and determine whether a bowler was a millimetre in front or behind the line? In my mind, the amount of mental effort/attention required to police it impacts far too much on crucial aspects of the game like LBW's and catches to make it worthwhile. Either find a way to automate it or change it I say.

 

[The_Bunny]

Damn near impossible to apply consistently. How many no-ball wickets gets missed every season? We've had quite a few in the Test series' against India and SL and there are heaps more, especially with TV stations making a point of highlighting it. How many LBW's/catches behind are botched by the umpire because he has to watch a 2 inch thick line and determine whether a bowler was a millimetre in front or behind the line? In my mind, the amount of mental effort/attention required to police it impacts far too much on crucial aspects of the game like LBW's and catches to make it worthwhile. Either find a way to automate it or change it I say.

Automation the way to go.

 

[archie mac]

Punishment would far out weigh the crime.

As it is a no-ball carries plenty of punishment for quite a trivial matter.

A batsman cant get out, a run is given, any runs scored are credited, the ball must be re-bowled, fines for slow over rates are accrued.

There is no balance to a free hit being added.

If it were to be added in Test cricket it would be more than unfiar.

Good points, I still think it would greatly reduce the amount of no-balls. I wonder how many less no-balls have been bowled in the ODI game since it has been introduced?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Punishment would far out weigh the crime.

As it is a no-ball carries plenty of punishment for quite a trivial matter.

A batsman cant get out, a run is given, any runs scored are credited, the ball must be re-bowled, fines for slow over rates are accrued.

There is no balance to a free hit being added.

If it were to be added in Test cricket it would be more than unfiar.

Bingo.

 

[archie mac]

Bingo.

Spoken like a true bowler

 

[Richard]

Jack's a spinner though - surely he bowls off a few paces and therefore never even looks like overstepping the crease... doesn't he?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Haven't bowled a no-ball in at least four seasons. For a long while my front foot was closer to the stumps than the front foot crease.

 

[Richard]

Damn near impossible to apply consistently. How many no-ball wickets gets missed every season? We've had quite a few in the Test series' against India and SL and there are heaps more, especially with TV stations making a point of highlighting it. How many LBW's/catches behind are botched by the umpire because he has to watch a 2 inch thick line and determine whether a bowler was a millimetre in front or behind the line? In my mind, the amount of mental effort/attention required to police it impacts far too much on crucial aspects of the game like LBW's and catches to make it worthwhile. Either find a way to automate it or change it I say.

Yeah, it's nothing short of plain madness that the bowler's-end-Umpire is expected to make this call. I've said it hundreds of times: there must, IMO, be a way of using some form of technological aid to take the calling of no-balls out of the hands of the standing-Umpire, and it should be something which can infiltrate down as many levels of the game as possible, and it should've been the first thing we ever used Umpiring technological aids for. Ridiculous that, 16 years after it was first done, we're still no nearer to removing fault on the no-ball front.

 

[Richard]

Haven't bowled a no-ball in at least four seasons. For a long while my front foot was closer to the stumps than the front foot crease.

Shame all spinners don't follow that sensible method.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I'm with Goughy here. Take away the run penalty if anything. Batsmen have it all their own way these days. Frankly, I reckon us quicks should be allowed a beamer per batsman, especially if the batsman's a mouthy **** at which point the beamer allowance increases accordingly.