-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The follow on rule
- Thread starter NUFAN
- Start date
HeathDavisSpeed
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nah. Like it as it is. You know what you're going to need to do right from the off. We know how much maths confuses cricketers (c.f. Duckworth-Lewis and the Yarpies)
pup11
International Coach
Though i agree with what T_C said but i don't think anything is going to get changed about the follow-on rule, but then i don't think follow-on' are really that relevant nowadays either, most of the captains prefer to bat again no matter how many runs they might be leading by, they still like to ensure that they make the opposition bat last on the track, so that kind of an approach from most of the teams has virtually eradicated follow-on from modern day test cricket.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Personally, scoring rates have done more to eradicate the follow-on. Use to be you'd make a team follow-on to give you time to bowl them out because there was no time for you to bat again. Now, teams happily bat again, belt the bowling around the place and set up a declaration.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
See I think a team who gets bundled out for under 120 chasing 200 actually deserves to follow on if the captain who batted first see fits to decide this.
I do see your point re: high scores,
BoyBrumby
Englishman
CBA to do the leg work, but I'd be interested to see the win/draw/loss ratio for enforcing as compared to not (obviously when the team has the chance to). Especially over the last decade.
Won't be definitive by any stretch, of course. We actually won after enforcing at Trent Bridge in 2005, but by doing so we left ourselves with a rather nasty little 120-odd to chase which we eventually made with a decidedly brown trouser inducing 3 wickets to spare. I think batting again would've been the way to go despite the apparent vindication of Vaughan's decision
Won't be definitive by any stretch, of course. We actually won after enforcing at Trent Bridge in 2005, but by doing so we left ourselves with a rather nasty little 120-odd to chase which we eventually made with a decidedly brown trouser inducing 3 wickets to spare. I think batting again would've been the way to go despite the apparent vindication of Vaughan's decision
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is true and the disadvantage of being set a small total after having made the oppo follow-on. Sure it's only a small total but that also means they're going to throw everything at you, knowing they won't have to sustain it for very long. Probably the ideal time to make another team follow-on is if you're so far ahead, the probability that they'll make you bat again is small. Any 4th innings' chase over 100 or so and the chance of an upset is always there.....
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
No matter what is decided, any game can be lost, won or drawn.
Simply, I would ALWAYS enforce the follow on.
It is the most positive action.
Nothing leads to 100% wins but enforcing the follow-on places all the momentum with the bowling team and gives them control over the outcome.
Any captain that does not enforce the follow-on is either a ***** or has a reason I cant think of. The one I hear the most is 'the bowlers are tired'. **** 'em. Thats their job. Quicks need to be bowled into the ground and then bowl some more in the pursuit of victory.
The best captains are those that work their quicks with no compassion or sympathy. Bowlers are tools to be used.
"To victory and don't spare the seamers"
Simply, I would ALWAYS enforce the follow on.
It is the most positive action.
Nothing leads to 100% wins but enforcing the follow-on places all the momentum with the bowling team and gives them control over the outcome.
Any captain that does not enforce the follow-on is either a ***** or has a reason I cant think of. The one I hear the most is 'the bowlers are tired'. **** 'em. Thats their job. Quicks need to be bowled into the ground and then bowl some more in the pursuit of victory.
The best captains are those that work their quicks with no compassion or sympathy. Bowlers are tools to be used.
"To victory and don't spare the seamers"
Last edited:
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
Well, seeing as this is a two day game, then the follow-on rule kicks in at 100 - so less than 162 (and at 13/3 that looks likely) will lead to a follow-on: and with bugger all time left, of course Team Vettori, sorry New Zealand, will enforce it.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Personally my attitude to the follow-on has always been "use only as a last resort".
IE, if time's running-out. If there's more than 1-and-a-half days left - bat again. Always. IMO.
As for the change, as Corey pointed-out, the extreme ends of the spectra are problematic. I don't see that any new rule would be any better than the current 200-or-more one.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Only one team has ever lost in the history of cricket after enforcing the follow on (Australia, lost three times). And the first two were in the 19th century, I think.
Those are damn good odds to go by. It would be odd if Kolkata made captains more defensive, because that's one out of 1500.....
Those are damn good odds to go by. It would be odd if Kolkata made captains more defensive, because that's one out of 1500.....
Matt79
Global Moderator
Those stats are likely warped by the fact that captains around the world learnt from the lesson of Kolkata and became more cautious in enforcing the follow on - otherwise we would have seen more examples of upsets in recent times.
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
What lesson? The lesson that freakish things happen from time to time and when they do there are recriminations thrown around.
Therefore it is better to put your team in a worse position rather than risk the tiny chance of increased criticism. Absolute ***** and cowardly cricket where fear of failure and criticism is more important than doing what is best..
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I probably wouldn't enforce the follow-on in Sharjah (it's annoying when your bowlers get heat-stroke, undermines the winning effort) but aside from that, absolutely agree that piling on a 500+ lead is defensive and I wouldn't go for it myself. I wonder how many boring 5th day draws would have been wins if one team had enforced the follow-on?What lesson? The lesson that freakish things happen from time to time and when they do there are recriminations thrown around.
Therefore it is better to put your team in a worse position rather than risk the tiny chance of increased criticism. Absolute ***** and cowardly cricket where fear of failure and criticism is more important than doing what is best..
Matt79
Global Moderator
^^ Nah, as someone pointed out before, with modern scoring rates, taking your second innings straightaway and putting a loss out of the equation is a much more reasonable option. The ODI and now 20/20 experience players have mean that they're much more proficient at judging these things.
There are times when the follow-on is the correct choice, there are other times when it amounts to giving a sucker an even break. To slavishly adopt one choice over the other is not good tactics.
There are times when the follow-on is the correct choice, there are other times when it amounts to giving a sucker an even break. To slavishly adopt one choice over the other is not good tactics.