I'll try my best not to sound like a sour australian - but the whole substitute fielding thing during the ashes did get up my nose. It wasn't so much the wickets effected by the substitutes, but more so the flaunting of the rules by England - and the obvious advantage it gave their bowlers. I think some new laws should be introduced to combat this immediately.
Firstly, you choose your best 11 for the game, and a 12th man. When one of your 11 goes down with an injury or a niggle, the 12th man comes on to replace that player. The only time a 13th or 14th man can come on, is if other players go down - but can't come on before the 12th man. And they shouldn't be coming off because they have just bowled a 10 over spell and need a rest - there needs to be an injury - a decision that needs to be made the umpires. If a player has a niggle that warrents leaving the ground, then surely they aren't fit to come back on for the rest of the day. The player should have to wait until a drinks break, or one of the regular breaks to receive treatment. It's unfortunate if a player goes down during a match - but it is more than likely that the player wasn't 100% before the match - a risk the team has chosen to take.
Now I don't think anyone can argue against the fact that the england bowlers came off a hell of a lot after a long spell - they said that nature was calling - but I think it's obvious to everyone (including all of the english commentators) that a shower and massage was more likely what was going on. Is this in the spirit of the game? I don't think so - I think it borders on cheating. The players get ample breaks during the game to take a pee, so why couldn't they wait until the next drinks break? Why don't they all take a pee during the breaks so that there's no need to do so during the match - makes sense to me, but I guess it's obvious that this wasn't actually what they were doing.
It takes a lot of the skill out of captaining. A captain needs to judge how long a bowler is operating for - and he musn't let them over do it - and if he does, he must accept the fact that he's going to have one very tired fielder out there - and that he may need to rest the bowler for a fair while to recharge his batteries. Maybe he should then think about putting them in slips to give them a rest, realising that perhaps he's not the greatest pair of hands. There shouldn't be a get out of jail clause that says he can send this bowler into the change rooms to have a refreshing shower, change of kit and a nice leg massage - in the guise of a toilet break....while a specialist fielder is out there, who wasn't even named in the squad at the start of the test match, who is 3 times the fielder of the bowler who is in the midst of his 20 minute long pee (must have big bladders in england!). Unlike our dads army of bowlers, the english bowlers are relatively young and fit, surely fit enough to withstand a day of test cricket.
One thing that erked me was a comment by one of the english commentators - he basically said,knowing full well that what the english was doing was wrong, "if the england players can get away with it, why don't the aussies do the same thing?" He said it as if the australians were stupid not to do the same. Well it's simple...apart from being a breach of the rules, a touring party only brings over players that are likely to play in the test matches - so that more or less means the options you have available are top line batsmen or bowlers. It is impossible for the touring party to pluck a guy out of obscurity for a couple of hours a day for one test match - would look pretty suss if they flew over an absolute nobody (like pratt, and that other older fella) that would come on the field sporadically but never actually get a ball or bat in his hand.
Now correct me if i'm wrong, but the teams have to name a 14? man squad prior to the start of the test match. THe substitue fielder should only be allowed to come from this squad - If a team wants to include a specialist fielder, then they have to be fully prepared to play this fielder if one of their frontline bowlers steps on a ball on the morning of the 1st day.
Just my 2c, would be interested to hear from english fans and their take on things. I think it took the gloss off a fantastic series, as I don't think it was a completely even playing field. I doubt it had a significant affect on the results, but the fact it occured so often, does leave a bit of a sour taste in the mouth. I will be most interested to see how these english bowlers cope in the heat of the sub-continent. If the indians or pakis are smart - they should create a bit of fuss over this straight away. Will be more interesting to see what peripheral players make the touring party of the english side.
Firstly, you choose your best 11 for the game, and a 12th man. When one of your 11 goes down with an injury or a niggle, the 12th man comes on to replace that player. The only time a 13th or 14th man can come on, is if other players go down - but can't come on before the 12th man. And they shouldn't be coming off because they have just bowled a 10 over spell and need a rest - there needs to be an injury - a decision that needs to be made the umpires. If a player has a niggle that warrents leaving the ground, then surely they aren't fit to come back on for the rest of the day. The player should have to wait until a drinks break, or one of the regular breaks to receive treatment. It's unfortunate if a player goes down during a match - but it is more than likely that the player wasn't 100% before the match - a risk the team has chosen to take.
Now I don't think anyone can argue against the fact that the england bowlers came off a hell of a lot after a long spell - they said that nature was calling - but I think it's obvious to everyone (including all of the english commentators) that a shower and massage was more likely what was going on. Is this in the spirit of the game? I don't think so - I think it borders on cheating. The players get ample breaks during the game to take a pee, so why couldn't they wait until the next drinks break? Why don't they all take a pee during the breaks so that there's no need to do so during the match - makes sense to me, but I guess it's obvious that this wasn't actually what they were doing.
It takes a lot of the skill out of captaining. A captain needs to judge how long a bowler is operating for - and he musn't let them over do it - and if he does, he must accept the fact that he's going to have one very tired fielder out there - and that he may need to rest the bowler for a fair while to recharge his batteries. Maybe he should then think about putting them in slips to give them a rest, realising that perhaps he's not the greatest pair of hands. There shouldn't be a get out of jail clause that says he can send this bowler into the change rooms to have a refreshing shower, change of kit and a nice leg massage - in the guise of a toilet break....while a specialist fielder is out there, who wasn't even named in the squad at the start of the test match, who is 3 times the fielder of the bowler who is in the midst of his 20 minute long pee (must have big bladders in england!). Unlike our dads army of bowlers, the english bowlers are relatively young and fit, surely fit enough to withstand a day of test cricket.
One thing that erked me was a comment by one of the english commentators - he basically said,knowing full well that what the english was doing was wrong, "if the england players can get away with it, why don't the aussies do the same thing?" He said it as if the australians were stupid not to do the same. Well it's simple...apart from being a breach of the rules, a touring party only brings over players that are likely to play in the test matches - so that more or less means the options you have available are top line batsmen or bowlers. It is impossible for the touring party to pluck a guy out of obscurity for a couple of hours a day for one test match - would look pretty suss if they flew over an absolute nobody (like pratt, and that other older fella) that would come on the field sporadically but never actually get a ball or bat in his hand.
Now correct me if i'm wrong, but the teams have to name a 14? man squad prior to the start of the test match. THe substitue fielder should only be allowed to come from this squad - If a team wants to include a specialist fielder, then they have to be fully prepared to play this fielder if one of their frontline bowlers steps on a ball on the morning of the 1st day.
Just my 2c, would be interested to hear from english fans and their take on things. I think it took the gloss off a fantastic series, as I don't think it was a completely even playing field. I doubt it had a significant affect on the results, but the fact it occured so often, does leave a bit of a sour taste in the mouth. I will be most interested to see how these english bowlers cope in the heat of the sub-continent. If the indians or pakis are smart - they should create a bit of fuss over this straight away. Will be more interesting to see what peripheral players make the touring party of the english side.
