Too much innovation will kill the game
The first season of IPL held in India was a runaway success. TV ratings were promising, stadiums were packed, advertisers loved it and it was hot property with marketers. IPL-2 showed that the crowds would come, whether a match between Mumbai and Rajasthan was held in Mumbai or Cape Town.
Advertisers would follow wherever the IPL bandwagon went. “IPL has entertainment value, as it is unpredictable, fast-paced and riveting,” says Shailendra Singh, MD, Percept India Limited. On paper, the IPL looks a winner.
But scratch the surface and you can see the cracks. In a subtle criticism of IPL, former India captain Rahul Dravid recently said that youngsters today lack passion for Test cricket.
A sweetly timed straight drive on a fast bouncy pitches of Australia is feast to watch. Isn’t it ? Sound of a bat when blazing fast ball is knocked off to the four. Close miss of ball from stumps and how about amazing swings and reverse swings? Batting in the breezy cold air where bowler seems like a daemon and fielding seems world’s most difficult job. These lines are soon to become a part of Utopian society.
The new Mongoose, Overs slashed from 50 to 20, Strategic breaks, cheerleaders and continues the list of innovations devised in the new game of cricket. Specially the mongoose is a perfect example of how cricket is turning into batsmen game and nightmare for bowlers. The present market situation has forced the game on the side of batsmen. How long will spectators hold on to this form of game is cause of concern. The game is against bowlers. Shaving off the grass from the pitch to reduce the pace and bounce would certainly corroborate this statement. Though it is exciting right now but in long term it is going to hurt the game. People enjoy the clash between bat and the ball. Unless there is a level playing field for both of them, the game would lose its fizzle soon. Major reason for this is lopsided innovations. Why isn’t there something innovated like a ball swinging twice the one we use these days or something like a ball that is bouncy? Let’s call it a luck of batsmen. Eventually spectators are going to lose interest in the game.
I am not trying to criticize the new form of cricket, but the cricket is indeed losing it heavenly touch. Let there be equal spirits between batsmen and bowler so that the spirit of the game goes beyond money, fame and publicity and strike the chord within.
Two years ago when the Indian Premier League (IPL) was launched amid fanfare, its organizers were clear that they didn’t want something that was just a local phenomenon. They wanted a global brand, perhaps not in the league of the English Premier League or the National Football League, but close. There were enough skeptics, however, both on the cricketing as well as business front, who raised doubts at the sums of money being thrown around for team ownership and players, for ad rates and TV rights.
The argument made to support these innovations is that people want high-scoring match and death chasing finishes. This isn’t true. We, as a spectator want a good content between bat and the ball. If these newly introduced rules and new bats like mongoose are to disturb the balance of the game, ICC must step in and freeze the game.
On the other hand it is not totally true the mongoose or new bats with bigger sweet spot will hamper the bowling. Rather in a sense it is challenging for the bowlers to be more disciplined and straight. If you bowl in the wrong areas you are going to get punished. Sachin scoring 200 shows that how a batsmen can still dominate bowling attack. I am sure player like Sachin can dominate the game with walking stick as well.
Now it depends on the lens through which we are trying to see the new form of cricket. But it is surely disturbing the balance of the game and this should not continue. I, you and everyone will anyway enjoy the game of cricket because we love this game the way we love our lives.
Ok! See what people have said on this story: “Too much innovation will kill the game”
What's your opinion on this story?Leave a Reply
|
|
Advertisement
Photo Gallery
Cant agree more with u ameya….the game is increasingly getting in favor of the batsmen….but sometimes i feel the quality of bowling is also deteriorating…..a gud bowler is a gud in any format of the game….we are not producing enough Curtly Ambrose’s and Glenn Mcgrath these days….and the reason for that is the bowlers these days just look to restrict the runs rather than being aggressive and look for wickets….there is a drastic change in the attitudes of the bowlers….m sure if smeone like a Wasim akram would have played T20, the batsmen would have had a tough time even on flat pitches!!
(Quote)
Yes, I agree that cricket is not able to produce bowlers like Akram, Waqar, Ambross, Walsh et al. But that does not give discount to innovate only for batsmen right? If we observe, neither quality of batsmen is up to the mark. What do you think about this imbalance?
(Quote)
that brings us to the debatable point; should ball tampering be legalized??
(Quote)
Abhijeet legalizing a ball tampering will be an extreme step, the more feasible can be allowing 2 bouncers per over or dismiss a free hit for over stepping. It’s too harsh.
yes T20 is slightly tilted in batsmen favor. But it’s true that a good bowler is good bowler in any format of game and at the moment there is minuscule of them. On the other hand I will not buy an argument that there is lack of quality of batsmen too.There are many, I will not get into that here. And yes this format gives an equal opportunity to bowlers as well. Bowlers will always have a chance to get rid of batsmen as they constantly look for scoring shots. How often do you see a side losing 5 or more wickets inside 20 overs in ODI or test. It’s not that unfair at all we are yet to come to the terms of this format.
Talking about innovations – this format is still a young one but it has brought in many positives. one there is increase in number of test matches with a result… Now we rarely wait for 5 days to know that there can not be a winner. Second we witness new shots like DIL-Scoop and use of different kind of slower balls on frequent basis.
(Quote)
@ Aniket: Legalizing ball tampering might not be an extreme step provided there are some rules built around it….like ball tampering should be allowed only under the observation of an umpire and there should be some standards built around it….applying saliva or sweat on the ball is also a kind of tampering which was allowed by the authorities…so y not take it a bit further??…it will only enhance the interest of the spectators….there is nothing more interesting than an even contest between the bat and the ball…it can be started as an experiment maybe…
(Quote)
I do not subscribe to view that using sweat is a tempering with ball. It is only meant to maintain the shine of a ball so that it can swing. Nothign else. Tempering is negative side of it Abhijeet. As rightly said by Aniket, they can allow 2 bouncers per over. Even free hit concept. Isnt that too harsh? If this is so then there has to be equal punishment for batsmen if he misses more than 3 balls in an over.
But then, debate is endless, the thing is IPL has brought good as well as bad points. Here I just meant to talk about level playing field for both of them. Neither one should have advantage over the other.
Ameya
(Quote)
there is another silly rule in cricket which we have been seeing since ages; leg byes. I dont understand the concept of leg byes. The bowler beats the batsman and the ball hits on the pads…and the batsman can still take advantage of dat…dats silly…it is cruel for the bowlers to see the bat being beaten and still batsmen running twos and 3s or even boundaries…coming to tampering…nething which changes the physical condition of ball is tampering…so applying saliva or sweat is a form of tampering authorized by the governing body….
(Quote)
(Quote)
No! That simply retains the shine. It does not changes the form of ball in anyway.
(Quote)
it not only helps in retaining the shine but also helps in making one side of the ball heavier which later helps in reverse swing…..n if is used just for maintaing the shine then y not use vaseline or something else for the shine…according to u even applying vaseline should not be called tampering as it is just used to maintain the shine of the ball…:)
i know it is a very debatable topic…but good to hear your thoughts…what do u feel about abolishing the leg byes….imagine a bowler bowling a perfect in-swinging yorker, hitting the toe of the batsman but still the batsman gets four for it; cruel isn’t it?..
(Quote)
Normal swing is achieved by maintaining laminar boundary layer air-flow on the shiny side whilst creating turbulent flow on the seam side. So this means, by using sweat, the shine that is maintained increases the flow of air there by causing ball to reverse swing. Now, using Vaseline is an artificial way of achieving it. See, usually batsmen prefer large blade bats. Why? to generate more stroke. Then you must be knowing that whenever you get a new bat, you do not directly go and use it. You oil the bat. There is always a small hole present at the bottom of the english willow. This is not present in kashmir willow. And that is precisely used for increasing the stroke. Then you work on that bat to generate more stroke and then only you use the bat. If batsmen are allowed to temper so much with the bat, bowlers are just using saliva or sweat. That’s justified right?
Even i was the opening batsman when I used to play for Maharashtra 
I was just talking abt the unbiased level. No offense meant brother 
(Quote)
About your views on leg byes, yes I too feel that is not good option and really ICC should think about removing this rule. That’s real cruel on bowler’s side.
(Quote)
hehe….dat was nice info….but u got me wrong…m not against bowlers using saliva or sweat….nor m advocating ball tampering….m just trying to bring out various possibilities in the game….a nice discussion though….hope to c more such discussions…
(Quote)
(Quote)
Yeah that’s one heck of a discussion. Gald to know your thoughts on this.
Ameya
(Quote)