PDA

View Full Version : Changes for ODIs implemented from 30 October,2012


Saifulsohel
October 29, 2012, 11:55 PM
Changes for ODIs implemented from 30 October,2012:
**Powerplays and fielding restrictions
There will be only two blocks of Powerplay overs, instead of three. For uninterrupted innings,the first block will be during the first ten overs and only two fielders will be allowed outside the 30-yard circle. The second block, comprising five overs, will be taken by the batting side and must be completed by the 40th over. Onlythree fielders willbe allowed outside the circle during the second Powerplay.
During non-Powerplay overs, a maximum of four fielders can be placed outside the circle, a reduction from the earlier five.
**Short-pitched deliveries
Law 42.6 (a) has been amended to allow the bowler a maximum oftwo short-pitched deliveries per over in an ODI. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/588728.html

Imteaz
October 30, 2012, 12:18 AM
Not bad. How many days Bangladesh will take to use this properly? A thread for this will come shortly :)

Sohel
October 30, 2012, 12:57 AM
Now watch Nazza! explode with his exquisite timing :up:

Jadukor
October 30, 2012, 02:57 AM
Really crap rules!
This is equivalent to making the Goal Posts wider to make Football more interesting

Why do we need to further handicap bowlers by restricting only four fielders in the outfield? This will make things really difficult for spinners who are already marginalized by the implementation two new balls and powerplays.

MohammedC
October 30, 2012, 03:00 AM
^^^ Crap rule for batsmen: PP cut down to 15 overs from 20 overs

mij
October 30, 2012, 04:18 AM
The way they keep changing the rule. Soon you will be able to hit the ball with your pad, how many change do we need

Jadukor
October 30, 2012, 04:21 AM
^^^ Crap rule for batsmen: PP cut down to 15 overs from 20 overs

not really... there can never be more than four fielders outside the inner ring from now on which means as a bowler you have to sacrifice one fielder between third man, fine leg, cover, deep mid wicket, long off and long on. This really plays into the hands of the batsman even more than the reduction of 5 power play overs.

Antora
October 30, 2012, 05:02 AM
I don't think it was necessary to implement these changes. I miss the good old days of cricket, where power plays were non-existent =(

mij
October 30, 2012, 05:38 AM
not really... there can never be more than four fielders outside the inner ring from now on which means as a bowler you have to sacrifice one fielder between third man, fine leg, cover, deep mid wicket, long off and long on. This really plays into the hands of the batsman even more than the reduction of 5 power play overs.


:up: :up:

cricheart
October 30, 2012, 07:56 AM
Dont feel like any major chnge btw. PP cut down to 15 overs was very expected anyway as 3 blocks of PP idea has proven failed in term of "making it interesting". So far hype & interest of T20s allready overtaken ODI, so ICC really need to think about more innovative ideas to implement here to survive this jamodi compitition.

BANFAN
October 30, 2012, 09:55 AM
When Indians are at the helm, these things will never end, untill people lose interest and the game is finally destroyed. Completely unnecessary changes.....

Saifulsohel
October 30, 2012, 10:36 AM
Two bouncer per over is significant change.Pacers will be more effective.

Roni_uk
October 30, 2012, 10:58 AM
Good for us... less Power Plays are the better for us because we suck at power hitting and we can now restrict others to go beyond 300 - win win situation.

Dilscoop
October 30, 2012, 06:55 PM
I like the double bouncer law. Batsmen are becoming buncha sissies playing in soft conditions with zero 100MPH bowlers.

Spidercam rule-- there will be so many confliction with this. Unless you have a stupid person moving that thing around, I dont see ball hitting that anytime soon.

Dilscoop
October 30, 2012, 07:00 PM
One other thing I'd like the ICC to look into is the extra run calls, such as byes, legbyes, etc. Those should left alone for the scorers. I dont see why Umpires have to decide that. The batsmen are always trying to convince whether they got a touch on it or not. Sometimes they get robbed.

Sohel
October 30, 2012, 10:18 PM
In all seriousness, these changes have been made to further T20fy the format. Now the batters have less time to "settle-in" during the PPs and will be expected to take more chances sooner. They're expected to be aggressive from the 45th over anyway, therefore the requirement to take the last PP before the 40th makes sense. The two bouncers per over rule will make things more interesting for the fielding side, provided it has guys who can bowl those on a variety of pitches without being hooked or pulled out of the park.

That being said, fielding restrictions favor the batting side BY DEFINITION and future HOFs and worldclassy total batsmen like Nazza!, Rocky and Imzie will excel under these rules. I'll be sure to bring my um-be-rella because it'll rain sixes when these guys don the green and red. Nazza!'s wicked bouncers will add yet another dimension to our world beaters with the incomparable trio in it.

Jadukor
October 30, 2012, 11:19 PM
none of these changes benefit the spinners... two new ball and the two bouncer rules are going to favor the pace dependent sides like South Africa, Australia and England. We rely heavily on spinners and these changes are likely to do further damage to our chances of winning.

al Furqaan
October 30, 2012, 11:52 PM
none of these changes benefit the spinners... two new ball and the two bouncer rules are going to favor the pace dependent sides like South Africa, Australia and England. We rely heavily on spinners and these changes are likely to do further damage to our chances of winning.

We've been saying that since 2008 when the original rule changes came into effect (eg the batting powerplay). We won the very first match played with new rules (v NZ) and overall we've won a dozen+ plus matches and been really close in probably a half dozen more. These changes represent no real effect on how our spinners operate which has always been our strength. Its true these rules will favor teams with pacers, and its true our spinners will take a bit more of a beating...but it will remain to be seen how much of an effect it has. I personally don't think it will affect us much. A lot of major teams like India, SL, PAK rely on their spinners and I don't think they will lose too much sleep over this.

Personally I think the 20 over PP rule and # of fielders was fine. I like the 2 bouncer rule.

RazabQ
October 31, 2012, 02:36 AM
Guys, let's face it, for a neutral cricket fan, watching 3 containment minded SLAs bowling 30 overs is not exciting ODI cricket. So changes will be made with that end in mind.

Jadukor
October 31, 2012, 03:11 AM
I don't subscribe to the theory of more boundaries = more entertainment
as if somehow if fours and sixes were hit every over from ball one the game would become more exciting. Even if it is the path towards success still we already have a format like that which is the T-20.

The 50 over format doesn't need to be a longer t-20 game... it has it's own value of bringing both Test and T-20 skills into play under one game.

As i have said before, the football administrators are not trying to increase the width of goal posts to get more goals. The value of goals is so precious because of how hard it is for a team to score one.

We need rules that maintain the balance between bat and ball and rewards skill rather than brute force.

These days without the 'Doosra' (which probably wouldn't have been a legal delivery in the 80-90s), spinners are not making any impression in the ODI game. It's because the environment for a spinner is getting increasingly difficult. The ball is now only 25 overs old by the end of 50 overs and soon with the 4 fielder rule they will be swept or reverse swept for a boundary at will.

mij
October 31, 2012, 06:27 AM
I don't subscribe to the theory of more boundaries = more entertainment
as if somehow if fours and sixes were hit every over from ball one the game would become more exciting. Even if it is the path towards success still we already have a format like that which is the T-20.

The 50 over format doesn't need to be a longer t-20 game... it has it's own value of bringing both Test and T-20 skills into play under one game.

As i have said before, the football administrators are not trying to increase the width of goal posts to get more goals. The value of goals is so precious because of how hard it is for a team to score one.

We need rules that maintain the balance between bat and ball and rewards skill rather than brute force.

These days without the 'Doosra' (which probably wouldn't have been a legal delivery in the 80-90s), spinners are not making any impression in the ODI game. It's because the environment for a spinner is getting increasingly difficult. The ball is now only 25 overs old by the end of 50 overs and soon with the 4 fielder rule they will be swept or reverse swept for a boundary at will.


:up:

Its making easier for batsman, our spinner will be beaten badly, which means if we depend on spin, its going to be more difficult for us to win matches, god help us.

Nadim
November 2, 2012, 05:08 PM
Sunny ekhon bounce marbo...hooooreeeey!!!

Ar shahadat ekhon over over e batsman marbe :fire:
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Blackberry)