The ICC has been deliberating Rule Changes once again and decided to continue with the Toss. They also, in principle, agreed to take more 'stringent action' against Personal abuse and Ball Tampering.
The latter is a joke, as this is being left to the discretion of the Match Referee, and we know the track record and bias of most Match Referees. If they had only shown some spine and taken stringent action in the past against perpetual offenders like Australians, we would not be in such a sorry state of situation now.
There is a palpable disinclination to stamp out on bad behavior. Tennis faced this situation 25 years ago, took proactive steps and we haven't heard of boorish McEnroe/Nastase type behavior since, except for an odd crackpot like Kyrgios. But then he has not been allowed to get away with his tantrums. Players know that if they cross the line, they will have to face severe consequences. And Tennis players are much higher paid than Cricketers.
ICC has not shown the will to clamp down on sledging and bad behavior. Both don't have a place in ANY modern sport.
The solution is simple. Switch on Stump Microphones. Make it available to Match Referee all the time. If a player so much as says one bad word or directs a conversation against the batsmen, throw the book, ban him and his Captain for One Year, impose a stiff fine on the Board, and individual players that should not be less than 6 months earnings for them. And then see the results.
Regarding the Toss, I might have another option. Taking the Toss away and giving the option to the visitor is a no brainer. Instead, why not have two slips in a bowl, one written 'Batting', other 'Fielding' and the Visiting Captain given the option to choose one. This gives both the teams a fair 50-50 option, unlike the toss, where the winning captain further has an option to choose batting or fielding.
The ICC has still not found a way to sort out the 'No Ball' situation. No Balls are rarely called, and unless a wicket falls, no balls are not checked for at all. This is ridiculous. I had given a solution to this in an earlier post. You can read it here
We are still no where close to making the shortened versions more of a battle between bat and ball.
The absurd leg side wide has to go. We have a ridiculous situation where the ball is just a mm outside leg stump and is called a wide. The bowlers should get a bit more leeway. Similarly, the offside wide line has to be brought closer to the stumps.
We are still seeing bats becoming lighter and stronger, while the ball has remained the same. Added to this the boundaries have become smaller and smaller. We are killing the finger spinners. In the recently concluded IPL, not a single finger spinner could succeed, not even left arm finger spinners. All the successful spinners were wrist spinners. Even those finger spinners who played were more keen on pushing the ball through than resorting to flight and dip. Once boundaries go back to 80 yards, they stand a better chance of succeeding and displaying their wares.
Another option could be to restrict the number of batsmen who can bat in a T 20. If a bowler can be restricted to bowl only 4 overs, why should the batting team be allowed to have all the 11 batsmen bat. It should be limited to 7, with Teams getting all out if they lose 6 wickets. This shall force the batsmen to take less risks, and would also give an opportunity for the bowler to be more attacking.
Any takers?
