debut: 7/11/03
4,547 runs
[b]What if cricket had a graveyard? What would be some of the tactics, ideas, and rules interred there? What would be some of the techniques and approaches that were no longer useful and had been left behind in some quiet field, never to be revisited again?
For sure there’d be a tombstone for the bodyline technique. Devised to quell the relentless run-making of Australian Don Bradman, it had an eventful but brief existence before being discouraged as a tactic and made redundant by the passage of laws limiting field placements and intimidatory bowling. And though we have seen frightful, short-pitched bowling over the years, bodyline, as it was conceived prior to England’s 1932-33 tour of Australia, was excised from the game.
The back-foot no-ball rule would have a spot there as well. Laid to rest in 1962, chances of it being resurrected are slim, despite the best efforts of the likes of Bradman and Richie Benaud, while they were still with us, and Ian Chappell.
There should be, in this mythical mausoleum, a headstone reserved for the leg-bye law. It is one of the game’s most ludicrous regulations. What could be the justification for penalising the bowler and the fielding side for scoring a moral victory over the batter by striking his person while he attempted to play a shot or tried to take evasive action. It is unfair, and law 26, the portion that deals with leg-byes, should be repealed.
Perhaps the nightwatchman tactic should be lying there as well. Why was it ever a good idea to send in the tail-ender to protect the recognised batter with close-of-play approaching? With opposition bowlers going full tilt, knowing they’ll be putting their feet up soon, who is more likely to survive, the tail-ender or the top order batter?[/b]
Jamaica Observer
For sure there’d be a tombstone for the bodyline technique. Devised to quell the relentless run-making of Australian Don Bradman, it had an eventful but brief existence before being discouraged as a tactic and made redundant by the passage of laws limiting field placements and intimidatory bowling. And though we have seen frightful, short-pitched bowling over the years, bodyline, as it was conceived prior to England’s 1932-33 tour of Australia, was excised from the game.
The back-foot no-ball rule would have a spot there as well. Laid to rest in 1962, chances of it being resurrected are slim, despite the best efforts of the likes of Bradman and Richie Benaud, while they were still with us, and Ian Chappell.
There should be, in this mythical mausoleum, a headstone reserved for the leg-bye law. It is one of the game’s most ludicrous regulations. What could be the justification for penalising the bowler and the fielding side for scoring a moral victory over the batter by striking his person while he attempted to play a shot or tried to take evasive action. It is unfair, and law 26, the portion that deals with leg-byes, should be repealed.
Perhaps the nightwatchman tactic should be lying there as well. Why was it ever a good idea to send in the tail-ender to protect the recognised batter with close-of-play approaching? With opposition bowlers going full tilt, knowing they’ll be putting their feet up soon, who is more likely to survive, the tail-ender or the top order batter?[/b]
Jamaica Observer
