ODI Rules Change - Batting Team Choose Powerplay
- Thread starter irottev
- Start date
..
Cricketman
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Location
- USA
Crap, what a joke.
Why don't you just remove the entire bowling aspect of the game and have the batsman bat against the machine. That's basically what's happening now anyways.
Why don't you just remove the entire bowling aspect of the game and have the batsman bat against the machine. That's basically what's happening now anyways.
srikarr12
Club Cricketer
I think the batting teams will be the ones under pressure as they are the ones that are going to be making the call rather then someone else doing it for them. Once they make the call they have to make sure they have to utilise which puts them under pressure rather the bowling team.
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
And yet we're probably about to see more defensive fields between overs 10 and 20 than we've seen in the past 20 years.
Arunava
Club Captain
what i immediately felt was that the ICC guys felt the pressure from the shortest version aka T20, and tried to make this version more explosive. .but i have a feeling it wont work . .ODI's might die in few years or so ..with only Tests and T20's left in cricket, maybe i'm wrong.
I think more people should look at this evidence of the rule in action. Tassie thinks it works very well, let's embrace it, rather than slag it off. Oh, and let's not judge it on NZ vs Bangladesh!
sohum
Executive member
One-day cricket cricket has always had amendments. If there were no amendments, they'd still be playing in whites, batting 60-overs a side with no fielding restrictions. Claiming that all these changes is a new thing is a fallacy. OD cricket has always been an experimental form of the game.
Kev
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2004
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Could you save it for the final overs though? If you were chasing a total, I guess you'd have to take it earlier as you could reach your target before you've played the powerplay overs - (I take it they must be used). Could make winning the toss even more one sided.leggie said:
Don't like powerplays at the best of times and I don't like this idea at all. What was wrong with the system before powerplays were introduced? All they did was make it a bit more confusing for spectators (especially casual ones) and give them a stupid ass American sounding name. Whats next? "Hop Play" when all the fielders have to stand on one leg once the score reaches 111!
Last edited:
sohum
Executive member
Any smart side will take the powerplay when their best batsmen are still in. There's no use saving it and having numbers 8,9,10 and 11 to bat them out.
I think the general tactic will probably be to bat the first 15 of powerplays aggressively, then settle down and accumulate until perhaps the 35th-40th over to ensure you have a good total and batsmen still in. I don't see a point in taking it in the last 5 because the batsmen will go for it anyhow.
Some times sides might take it right away. If McCullum and Ryder were in blitzing it everywhere and were both still in. If you're a few wickets down it seems a risky time to do it, so far from the end. On the other hand, you have to make sure you accelerate in the final 10 overs, so taking it in the last 5 may mean you lose wickets just before the 45th over or something. New batsmen in etc.
Some teams might keep it for specific batsmen. If Symonds came out to bat, give him 3 or 4 overs to get himself in and then when he's feeling good, give the signal to the captain and take it then. Same for the likes of Oram, Yuvraj, Pietersen.
I think the general tactic will probably be to bat the first 15 of powerplays aggressively, then settle down and accumulate until perhaps the 35th-40th over to ensure you have a good total and batsmen still in. I don't see a point in taking it in the last 5 because the batsmen will go for it anyhow.
Some times sides might take it right away. If McCullum and Ryder were in blitzing it everywhere and were both still in. If you're a few wickets down it seems a risky time to do it, so far from the end. On the other hand, you have to make sure you accelerate in the final 10 overs, so taking it in the last 5 may mean you lose wickets just before the 45th over or something. New batsmen in etc.
Some teams might keep it for specific batsmen. If Symonds came out to bat, give him 3 or 4 overs to get himself in and then when he's feeling good, give the signal to the captain and take it then. Same for the likes of Oram, Yuvraj, Pietersen.
Last edited:
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
What I do keep wondering about is how seldom any of the innovations were used with any cunning and how it doesn't necessarily matter how smartly it can be used if it makes no difference. I mean the old Powerplay format could be used more interestingly, it's just that it wasn't.
I remember the game between Victoria and Tasmania in late 2006 as the most impressive use of a Powerplay in memory. The Vics had gotten a good start, about 3/100 in 20, but Ben Hilfenhaus caused a collapse in the middle and by the 40th were 8/157. Somehow, the tail managed to stay together and got to 200.
Tasmania also started nicely, by the end of the 2nd Powerplay they had 1/60 in 15 overs. Although not brutal, it was apparent if things kept going at that rate, they'd win comfortably. White, the Victorian captain, withheld the 3rd Powerplay. He took the fast bowlers out of the attack and sent in the medium pace of Moss and McDonald. They made it hard for Tas to find boundaries and with the apparent slowness of the MCG pitch, it forced them to be very patient. Victoria first got a little bit of luck with Ponting caught down the legside, but in the combined 11 over spell, Moss and McDonald bowled 2/30.
However, the opener Paine was remaining his namesake on 50 at the 30th over and although the run-rate was low, Tas only needed 100 in 20 overs and they had 7 wickets to use. White used this point to stage the 3rd Powerplay and brought the opening bowlers back. The sudden burst of pace and the attacking fields worked; 3 wickets fell for 17 runs. The dire lack of runs further forced Tasmania into risky singles and they lost 3 more wickets to run outs, finally bowled out for 145 in 43.1 overs.
Not only had Victoria defended a seemingly unsound total, but they had done so well that they gained a bonus point in the process.
I remember the game between Victoria and Tasmania in late 2006 as the most impressive use of a Powerplay in memory. The Vics had gotten a good start, about 3/100 in 20, but Ben Hilfenhaus caused a collapse in the middle and by the 40th were 8/157. Somehow, the tail managed to stay together and got to 200.
Tasmania also started nicely, by the end of the 2nd Powerplay they had 1/60 in 15 overs. Although not brutal, it was apparent if things kept going at that rate, they'd win comfortably. White, the Victorian captain, withheld the 3rd Powerplay. He took the fast bowlers out of the attack and sent in the medium pace of Moss and McDonald. They made it hard for Tas to find boundaries and with the apparent slowness of the MCG pitch, it forced them to be very patient. Victoria first got a little bit of luck with Ponting caught down the legside, but in the combined 11 over spell, Moss and McDonald bowled 2/30.
However, the opener Paine was remaining his namesake on 50 at the 30th over and although the run-rate was low, Tas only needed 100 in 20 overs and they had 7 wickets to use. White used this point to stage the 3rd Powerplay and brought the opening bowlers back. The sudden burst of pace and the attacking fields worked; 3 wickets fell for 17 runs. The dire lack of runs further forced Tasmania into risky singles and they lost 3 more wickets to run outs, finally bowled out for 145 in 43.1 overs.
Not only had Victoria defended a seemingly unsound total, but they had done so well that they gained a bonus point in the process.
