• 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.

If you could change anything about cricket -

Craig

World Traveller
The English just dream of being number one in Test cricket well, for ever, but not that I think will be happening for some time :tongue:
 

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
I'd get rid of the "not an LBW if pitched outside leg" rule.

Saw Tendulkar just padding away MacGill in Adelaide. Darn annoying.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
LongHopCassidy said:
I'd get rid of the "not an LBW if pitched outside leg" rule.

Saw Tendulkar just padding away MacGill in Adelaide. Darn annoying.
Definately don't think that one should go. It'd make things much too easy for bowlers (and I am one haha).
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
LongHopCassidy said:
It is a batsman's game, SOC.......
I'd have to disagree with you mate.......how do you think bringing in your proposed rule change is going to help the situation?
 

tooextracool

International Coach
odyssey said:
Well at least the umpire can have a look (upstairs)....and the incident can only be ruled on by 3rd ump if it's obvious.....if it's not obvious then throw it back to the umpires.
err if the third umpires cant figure it out, whats the point of referring it to the on field umpires?
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
overrates are too slow as it is. there is no way that cricket could hope to continue its prosperity as a spectator sport if we had decisions being referred to a 3rd umpire every few overs and taking a minimum of two minutes to be decided.

and what excuses would we have when our side loses a series? :)
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Neil Pickup said:
Well, going off recent history.. pitch, chucking, nasty opposing captains, dodgy food...
haha, actually I'll give it to you boys, you never seem to come out with any excuses when you lose. Everyone just goes 'we were crap' and the rest of us nod our heads in agreement having realised that well in advance. :p

(But maybe not this time around.......)
 

odyssey

Cricket Spectator
tooextracool said:
err if the third umpires cant figure it out, whats the point of referring it to the on field umpires?
Well if the third umpire can't pick up something obvious then send it back to on-field umps.....and they will probably let decision stand (not out) or...w/e
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Son Of Coco said:
haha, actually I'll give it to you boys, you never seem to come out with any excuses when you lose. Everyone just goes 'we were crap' and the rest of us nod our heads in agreement having realised that well in advance. :p

(But maybe not this time around.......)
Not any more.. England think they are good.. Get ready for some "Dodgy Biltong" stories!
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
There is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far too much for me to single anything out.
Eveything to make the game as neat and tidy, fair and fulsome, as possible - decision-making, judgement of batsmen and bowlers, etc.
The recognition amongst fans that Test-match statistics are not the be-all-and-end-all, and do not sum-up conclusively a player's performance.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
odyssey said:
Well at least the umpire can have a look (upstairs)....and the incident can only be ruled on by 3rd ump if it's obvious.....if it's not obvious then throw it back to the umpires.
So waste an amount of time and make no decision then tell the umpire he's got to make it?

That makes no sense to me.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Not necessarily it wouldn't until the technology is guaranteed 100% correct.

At the moment it isn't, and although someone may say 99%, that is 99% of all decisions, and the 1% is going to be the really tight one.
 

Top