Reintroduction of the Substitute rule

[IanG]

It was a dog!

 

[War]

Y-O-Y-O-Y-O-Y do people want more batsmen and think it will improve a game?!?!? I enjoy watching tailenders bat, it's fun. I think of Gough, Lawrence and Daffy batting albeit often in losing causes. Does the game need more runs? If it does then it must be watched and run by more rons. Extra bowlers won't make much difference, if the four or five in the starting XI are the best then will the fifth or sixth best make a difference unless it is a spinner or something like that.

But personally I think cricket with XI is ideal, it makes tactics so much more important in team selection. Do you go with five bowlers or an extra batsman? Do you play none, one or two spinners? Do you pick the keeper on batting or keeping ability? Start putting subs in and you end up with an extra batsman more often than not as that't the only really obvious gain to be had and you can lose some of the tactical nuances (if that's the right word) and intrigue as sides have to make most of their own tactical decisions without any way out.

This is also why I do like ODIs as much if not more than Tests, having to choose the balance of the side to get through your 50 overs bowling and have enough batting depth. It also produces a result more often than not, isn't over in a blink of the eye or spoiled by luck or collapses, and when televised there is more cricket than ads which by ITV4's coverage of Disney India 3 is not likely true of T20 (I usually change channels at the first swing of the 4 that signals the start of the ads)

Agreed with the highlighted very much. Thats why i have suggested it only be used in T20s given thats not proper cricket - thats just exhibition cricket, that could/should be used to attract other nations to cricket.

The rule would not be used in ODIs or tests.

 

[War]

South Africa news: Significant changes to MTN40 tournament | South Africa Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

Although its disgraceful that local boards are taking the leading in adjusting & experimenting in 50 over cricket, before the ICC does it internationally. The SACB doing basically in the current domestic season what i suggested this rule should be:

Unlike the last time substitutes were used, the starting eleven does not have to be named before the toss. Only the squad of 13 has to be named, allowing certain players to play specialist roles.

 

[sifter132]

The sub is potentially a fun idea, but it's hard to know where to put it. T20 is the least serious of the formats, but it's also doing the best, so the need for change isn't really there.

I personally think ODI cricket would be the place to put it, as long as they make the changes all at once and commit to a decent length period where the rules would be set in stone eg. after the 2011 World Cup and commit the new rules for 4 years until the 2015 WC.

I see the future as a split innings format like in Australia, 2 x 20 over slots. And you'd have 2 subs like the new SA rules, a 2 man bench if you like. One would be a batsman who could be used while batting - as a 'pinch hitter', and the other while fielding, as a replacement bowler - like a 'bullpen', so if you aren't happy with how one of your bowlers is going he can be replaced by a specialist.

It all sounds a bit basebally I know, which will make some of you recoil in horror, but each sub could have good strategic implications. One problem with split innings games is that teams shut up shop just before the mid-point. A good pinch hitter rule could stop that from happening. And allowing a bowler who is getting smashed to be replaced would be a tough call for any captain to make, and would give the fans something else to predict, speculate on and complain about

I also like the idea of raising the over limit in T20s. Not sure I'd make it unlimited, but 5 or maybe 6 overs max wouldn't hurt too much. It would make for better cricket I think.

 

[Biggy]

IF anything it might work in T20 but I would hate to see a 'sub' rule brought in. XI is perfct, I hate this 12 a side (11 for batting, 11 for fielding) Ryobi Cup business atm.

 

[Brook]

A better rule would be 5 overs max per bowler, then you could have more quality bowling and batting.

 

[Themer]

South Africa news: Significant changes to MTN40 tournament | South Africa Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

No not want.

The substitution rule just will not working in Cricket and it takes away something from the game than adding.

I like seeing teams have to bowl players who can bowl and bat a bit. It gives the batsmen a chance to attack and free their arms.

 

[aussie1st]

Just not cricket when you have subs, other sports are built around subs but not cricket. They can throw it into T20 but ODI and Test need to stay with the traditional 11 players.

 

[BKB1991]

Cricket really needs no change atm. Cricket is probably at its healthiest stage for quite some time, so tweaking it is just fixing something that is not broken.

 

[Themer]

Had the Pakistan thing not just happened I'd probably agree. That however sort of leaves a cloud at the moment.

 

[War]

Just not cricket when you have subs, other sports are built around subs but not cricket. They can throw it into T20 but ODI and Test need to stay with the traditional 11 players.

Basically my point. Although i'd be willing to throw it into ODIs as well. But definately it wont touch test cricket.