ROOM 111: The three daft cricketing laws which need consigning to history

The Cricketer begins its series compiling which areas of the sport need a re-think. MARK BALDWIN kicks off with three regulations which need erasing from the rulebook

trescogayle221101-min

Am I allowed three wishes?

In my defence, they are all wrapped up into one big wish: can we PLEASE get rid of the three daftest laws in cricket?

I know others will undoubtedly have their own little ‘hit list’, because cricket is that sort of game; it has generated regular heated debate, and very often controversy, since shepherds (reportedly) played bat and ball on the Kent and Sussex Weald several centuries ago.

So here are my three bugbears, in order of equal importance.

First, in ALL forms of cricket, if a brilliant piece of fielding results in the stumps being broken by a direct hit, then NO overthrows should be allowed if the successful throw does not result in a batsman being run out.

Is Ben Stokes barging into the Big Four? TEST MATCH TALKING POINTS

In other words, if the stumps are hit, a ‘dead ball’ shall be called by the umpires. How often have we seen the ball careering off at an angle, after breaking the stumps, and beating a fielder who has sprinted into the right position to back up the throw?

It is penalising teams, and the individual players involved, for great skill. It is daft. (Obviously, however, if the throw misses – and is not successfully backed up – then overthrows will be allowed. That’s because you don’t reward failure!)

Second, in ALL forms of cricket but ESPECIALLY in short-form and limited-overs’ games, ANY ball bowled above the knee of a batsman standing upright in the crease is to be called a NO-BALL.

At the moment, it has to be above waist-high to be called as such, and it is DAFT. I have lost count of the number of times I have seen batsmen given out when they have spliced up into the air an attempted swipe at a fast full toss that would have hit them squarely in the solar plexus.

You don’t need to have played to any high standard of cricket to know just how difficult it is to hit a high full toss arrowing in on your ‘abdominal area’.

runout221101-min

Is it right that the fielding team is punished for executing a fine piece of skill?

It is the bowlers who need to be penalised for anything above the knee, whereas at the moment it is often the batsmen who pay the penalty. And, in tight T20 or other one-day contests, a wicket unfairly taken with a full toss at thigh/waist height can be the difference between a team winning or losing.

Third, can we PLEASE reduce further the weight of bats? It is patently ridiculous (no, let’s say DAFT again!) that mis-hits now regularly fly for six (not helped by some stupidly short boundaries, it must be acknowledged) and so this too needs outlawing.

The art of batsmanship – whether at Test, first-class or limited-overs level – should be primarily about timing and not about sheer naked power. Big hitters like Chris Gayle, Carlos Brathwaite or Ben Stokes will still clear the ropes quite easily if they connect properly while wielding bats much less railway sleeper-like than the ones they are currently allowed to swing.

More to the point, actually, is why huge, heavy bats also allow so many lesser talents to smite six after six. It’s getting really boring.

OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR ROOM 111

Subscribe to The Cricketer this Christmas and receive a £20 John Lewis voucher or Alastair Cook’s autobiography. Claim your free gift here

Comments

LATEST NEWS

STAY UP TO DATE Sign up to our newsletter...
SIGN UP

Thank You! Thank you for subscribing!

Units 7-8, 35-37 High St, Barrow upon Soar, Loughborough, LE128PY

website@thecricketer.com

Welcome to www.thecricketer.com - the online home of the world’s oldest cricket magazine. Breaking news, interviews, opinion and cricket goodness from every corner of our beautiful sport, from village green to national arena.