Endless Summer of Cricket

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
roo2macca said:
Head throws away his wicket once again. He's not doing his reputation any favours when he continues to get out cheaply like that.
Click to expand...
Can't read too much into today, was probably told to hit out and get out.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

FR0GGY said:
I’m not sure about the outrage that the umpire should be warning the bowler he’s going over (sure he should be calling no balls)
Shouldn’t it be up to the bowler to stay well clear of the line?
Click to expand...
The front foot rule ruined any chance the bowler has of not bowling a no ball. It is IMPOSSIBLE to judge where your front foot is landing.
Again, benefit for the batsmen. **** the batsmen.
As a bowler, you can run in and sight the back line and plant your foot behind it. Simple.
As a bowler you dont have any idea where the front foot is going in the delivery stride. No cues, nothing to judge it by. Zilch, zero, nada!
**** the batsmen!
 
Doc_ said:
The front foot rule ruined any chance the bowler has of not bowling a no ball. It is IMPOSSIBLE to judge where your front foot is landing.
Again, benefit for the batsmen. fu** the batsmen.
As a bowler, you can run in and sight the back line and plant your foot behind it. Simple.
As a bowler you dont have any idea where the front foot is going in the delivery stride. No cues, nothing to judge it by. Zilch, zero, nada!
fu** the batsmen!
Click to expand...
I haven’t played cricket higher than grade 3 but I think just move your mark back by a foot or so they must know within a foot where they are otherwise they wouldn’t be so close all the time.
 
FR0GGY said:
I haven’t played cricket higher than grade 3 but I think just move your mark back by a foot or so they must know within a foot where they are otherwise they wouldn’t be so close all the time.
Click to expand...
You cant judge it. Run into/with the wind, longer/shorter stride. In the delivery stride it is impossible to judge where you are. With the back foot rule, you can easily see a line to plant your back foot behind. No reason to EVER bowl a no ball. You have something to judge your position by.
THE worst rule ever introduced to cricket. All because the poor little batsmen gets a thousandth of a second less.
 
Doc_ said:
The front foot rule ruined any chance the bowler has of not bowling a no ball. It is IMPOSSIBLE to judge where your front foot is landing.
Again, benefit for the batsmen. fu** the batsmen.
As a bowler, you can run in and sight the back line and plant your foot behind it. Simple.
As a bowler you dont have any idea where the front foot is going in the delivery stride. No cues, nothing to judge it by. Zilch, zero, nada!
fu** the batsmen!
Click to expand...
As a bowler, you know from repetition (and practice) exactly how long your delivery stride is - and therefore where your back foot needs to land, in order for your front foot to be at least partly behind the front line.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Doc_ said:
Thje rule was only brought in because of back foot draggers.
The umpires should just have called no balls if you dragged your back foot.
Click to expand...
The rule was introduced to stop fast bowlers from trying to deliver the ball from half way down the pitch. If fast bowlers didn't try to cheat, then there wouldn't be a need for the rule.
 
Cap said:
And should have been going for it.

Head won't last the summer, he needed atleast a 50, team orders or not
Click to expand...
Lol, your understanding of the situation in cricket is rather limited.

I'm at the test for all days next week, so perhaps we catch up & I'll educate you about the game. ;)
 
Poor fast bowlers, having to have a small part of their foot behind the line... Cry me a river.

Seriously - fast bowlers rarely practice bowling behind the line; they are constantly over stepping during practice. Is it any surprise then, when they also overstep in matches? They practice to fail, and that's exactly what they achieve.
 
Vader said:
The rule was introduced to stop fast bowlers from trying to deliver the ball from half way down the pitch. If fast bowlers didn't try to cheat, then there wouldn't be a need for the rule.
Click to expand...
Interestingly I heard the ex fast bowler Shane George talk about new technology he has developed which tracks the bowlers boot v the crease to automatically notify the on field umpire if a no ball... so may become a thing of the past
 
Vader said:
The rule was introduced to stop fast bowlers from trying to deliver the ball from half way down the pitch. If fast bowlers didn't try to cheat, then there wouldn't be a need for the rule.
Click to expand...
The rule was introduced because some bowlers were able to land their back foot behind the line then drag it forward and gain an advantage. Most bowlers dont drag the back foot. I was shocked the first time I saw someone drag their back foot. It looked physically impossible. I still cant figure out how they do it without falling over.
 
Kane McGoodwin said:
Interestingly I heard the ex fast bowler Shane George talk about new technology he has developed which tracks the bowlers boot v the crease to automatically notify the on field umpire if a no ball... so may become a thing of the past
Click to expand...
Wire it up to give them an electric shock, then see how many know where their feet are.
 
Doc_ said:
The rule was introduced because some bowlers were able to land their back foot behind the line then drag it forward and gain an advantage. Most bowlers dont drag the back foot. I was shocked the first time I saw someone drag their back foot. It looked physically impossible. I still cant figure out how they do it without falling over.
Click to expand...
The purpose of which was to bowl the ball from as far as possible down the pitch, minimising the time & distance that the batsman has to react. Like I said, with slight exaggeration, attempting to bowl from the middle of the pitch.
 
Vader said:
The purpose of which was to bowl the ball from as far as possible down the pitch, minimising the time & distance that the batsman has to react. Like I said, with slight exaggeration, attempting to bowl from the middle of the pitch.
Click to expand...
It should have been made a rule that if you dragged you back foot over the bowling crease (you know, the line next to the stumps thats called the BOWLING crease) that it should be called a no ball.
There was no advantage for the bowler with the original rule. **** all advantage for a bowler unless he drags the back foot.
Again, **** the batsmen!. Dont bowl too many short balls at the little prick. If it pitches outside leg you cant be out lbw. WTF? Why not. It called leg before wicket. Cover the pitch if it rains or it gets too hard for the little darlings. All the time, the advantage goes to the little prick with the bat in his hands. **** em.
The best cricket is when the little campaigners dont get to dominate.
 
FR0GGY said:
I’m not sure about the outrage that the umpire should be warning the bowler he’s going over (sure he should be calling no balls)
Shouldn’t it be up to the bowler to stay well clear of the line?
Click to expand...
Spot on

Would be like a driver who gets pinged for speeding saying, "Hey! But that's how fast I always drive. I haven't been called up on it before. No fair!"
 
Kane McGoodwin said:
Interestingly I heard the ex fast bowler Shane George talk about new technology he has developed which tracks the bowlers boot v the crease to automatically notify the on field umpire if a no ball... so may become a thing of the past
Click to expand...
Peter George
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top