Australia / News
- Australia home
- |
- News
- |
- Features
- |
- Photos
- |
- Fixtures
- |
- Results
- |
- Domestic Cricket
- |
- Players
- |
- Grounds
- |
- Records
|
Players' survey comes up with more innovations
Four stumps and first-ball free hits for Twenty20
Cricinfo staff
December 20, 2007
 |
|
An Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) survey conducted on the future of Twenty20 has raised some interesting suggestions for the shorter format of the game, reports the Sydney Morning Herald. The ideas included using four stumps instead of three and giving a free hit from the first ball a batsman faced.
The other innovations the domestic and international players developed were an extra over for bowlers who took a wicket and no leg-byes. A return to the Supersub and technological ideas, including hand-held television screens for umpires to allow them to make faster run-out decisions, were also proposed.
"Whilst a lot of players are traditionalists, they are moving down a path of wanting to bring more people to the game," Paul Marsh, the ACA chief executive, said. "What's really important is that whatever innovations are brought in, they don't affect the integrity of the game on the field."
In what could be a major move, 41% of Cricket Australia-contracted players expressed their support for wearing shorts during Twenty20 matches, while 82% favoured changing uniform colours. Only 6% felt playing live music during the game would affect their performance.
Players were much less excited on the issue of using nicknames on t-shirts - as in the recent Twenty20 international between Australia and New Zealand - and of celebrity players for one-off appearances. The rugby league player Andrew Johns turned out for New South Wales earlier this year.
International players had no problems with the use of on-field microphones and in-game interviews. Adam Gilchrist and Andrew Symonds were tagged during the game against New Zealand and 94% were in favour of using microphones while 88% had no issues with batsmen being interviewed right after their dismissal.
Do you agree with some of the suggestions put forth by the players?
| ||||||
| Comments have now been closed for this article |
||||||
Top
Sponsored Links
Western Union Instant Win Game
NoPurchaseNecessary. Subject toOfficial Rules
Buy Ashes merchandise - clothes, books, DVDs & more
At Cricshop
Get the right speed and online tools
Rogers Business Internet
No Minimum Balance NRI Account
Citibank
and get a calling card
Perhaps every batsman could initially face 10 balls (excluding no balls). If he is not out at the end of his 10 deliveries he retires ... but can be bought back to resume their innings after everyone else has batted at least once. This way every batsman gets to bat at least once and if you are good enough, and lucky enough, you may still score a century. If a player is out during their 10 balls then the balance of those balls are carried over. I think that except for the keeper every player should have to bowl at least one over. I think to increase the chances of centuries being scored the value of runs should be increased as well. Over the fence = 10. A boundary =6; Targets around the ground could also earn bonus points.
Posted by Sanjeev_Kumar_Mumbai on (December 21 2007, 05:15 AM GMT)We should keep most of the rules as is fundamentals to the cricket that has given this game as a status of one of the most intelliegent field game. 4 stumps, first ball free hit, playing in shorts etc I suspect will not be welcome by fans. Live music, chat with players, more technological gadget for the field umpires etc are good ideas for making the game more attarctive. A rule like "3 pass out" i.e. a batsman should be declared out if he don't score on 3 consecutive "legal" balls (excluding no-ball, wide etc). This could give more balance towards bowlers.
Posted by hermithead on (December 21 2007, 04:16 AM GMT)Not to sure about the 4 stumps or free hit but I'd like to see these just to simplify the game a bit. -No Overs instead 120 balls -Bowler can bowl as many balls as they like -Bowling side changes ends at the 60 ball mark -Specialist teams -Crease line is behind the wicket -Striking batsman is safe to stand out of his crease unless a) he charges the bowler or b) attempts a run - then he can be stumped or run out. -Fielders/bowlers can wear non-webbed gloves -Bowlers can mankad -Maybe use an Indoor cricket ball instead of normal ball
Posted by georgeF on (December 21 2007, 02:58 AM GMT)Test cricket is the true test of a countries strength - but 20/20 is going to be essential for the financial health of the game and is the eventual replacement of one-day cricket - which has become dull and boring - so it doesn't need too many changes. Let's not ruin it in the short-term by making it a joke.
Posted by sachintha81 on (December 21 2007, 01:49 AM GMT)T20 is going in an extremely foolish direction. Period. I don't like this 'bang - bang' format of cricket at all. Let it be what it is - a game that is faught with patience and skills. Not just 'free hitting'. It's sad to see that CA is talking about Day Night Tests as well. At least let Test cricket be what it is...
Posted by chad on (December 21 2007, 01:47 AM GMT)Imagine a tournament with 10 national teams. Each nation hosts 15 Twenty20 games each year, played over the course of a week or two, involving all (or most) of the teams in the competition. Each team would end up playing about 30 games over the course of a year, in all sorts of different conditions, and a credible champion could be crowned at the end of the year. In each location, multiple games could be played on each day. Attendance could be boosted by ensuring that the home team played a game on most of the days. Such a tournament could be spread out over the year, but any given team would probably only have commitments for 15 weeks of the year. This would leave plenty of time for other forms of cricket. I truly believe that the ongoing popularity of this form of the game lies in the format of competition adopted, and not in minor rule changes (to which players will adapt in unexpected ways, anyway).
Posted by Rooboy on (December 21 2007, 01:22 AM GMT)Why does every topic involving Australia (and most that do not as well) bring out people whose only real comment is to denigrate Australia? 'Aussies as usual are trying to make a mockery of a lovely game' 'Aussies are going crazy' 'other countries are not making a mockerry (sic) of the game with tight shirts and nicknames' (what?!?) 'Australia are just trying to invent something so they can claim they made a major contribution to the development of 20/20' Give me a break! For those with limited comprehension skills, the article makes NO suggestion whatsoever that 4 stumps etc will be implemented, they are simply ideas that some of the players have come up with. I would have thought that canvassing the players opinions was a good idea, and I suppose some of the respondents here would agree if it was done by the BCCI etc, but not when done by Australia. Of course such an exercise will provide some crazy ideas - it doesn't mean they will be included into the rule book any time soon
Posted by y2yakaawesome on (December 21 2007, 01:17 AM GMT)i like the 4 stumps suggession as bowlers also need to have atleast one benefit for being in the twenty20. And i disagree for the first ball free-hit suggession, as it is an extremely thrilling and exhilirating moment when a batsman gets bowled first bal. The stadium jumps w/ excitement. F.Y.I I am always right!!! :)
Posted by vipin on (December 21 2007, 00:15 AM GMT)Four stump and free hit............ perfect way to end the excitement of 20-20 game. 20/20 is a batsman game it make it fair one could introduce 12 0r 13 players on the fielding side. have a minimum number of people permanently on the boundary. the idea of super sub is more practical here...... In case of tie.... each team gets to bat an over .......the batsman have to invert their normal batting hand...RHB bats left hand and LHB bats right. or five bowlers get to bowl a ball each and 5 different batsman face ball each at the end the highest scoring team wins there could be infinite such suggestions
Posted by pkill on (December 21 2007, 00:13 AM GMT)none of those changes would work. the best change would be all players, barring designated keeper, have to bowl. too often, the bowlers have to save a match as batsmen, and never the other way around...too many jokes at glenn mcgrath's expense, how about a few overs from matty haydon or mike hussey...