Oh shit......test cricket is f*cked

If rain or bad light stops play so be it. I'm only talking about penalising slow play. And not with fines. That worked well with McEnroe.

"Abuse of racquet, Mr McEnroe that's five grand."

"Fine talk to my accountant and we'll take it out of the $500,000 I'm being paid to carry the bloody thing."

So what's wrong with turning the floodlights on to ensure completion of the allocated overs in the day?
Within reason of course!
Most test venues are equipped with them - so why not use them.

No problems with that, merls. Only scheduling starts in the afternoon, which may bring in more of the working crowd, would destroy the essence of test cricket. Personally, I don't think it'll get past the testing stage, tbh.

They should actually think of increasing one day in places like Lahore, etc where more than half the overs are lost due to fog.

Merlin wrote:floodlights seems the best answer.

And in grounds without floodlights they can burn effigies when it starts getting dark

Even on the grounds with floodlights they have come off for bad light

Zat wrote:That's complicated.

Just put up a countdown clock at the ground for the bowler to have started his run up by. If the batsman's not ready then, too bad. If the bowler's late, then one run penalty every delivery he's late. Allow a longer countdown if the batsmen change ends. And perhaps a captain's time out once per over, where an extra 30 seconds can ge given to change field placings.

And Richie Benaud's suggestion that only the bowler is allowed to shine the ball would be worth a try. It'll get the ball back to him faster.

The countdown isn't a bad suggestion, but it needs more work. Do you have the same countdown for spinners and fast bowlers? If so, do you limit the number of times a captain can use the "longer countdown" throughout the innings?

I don't think my plan is complicated. It just lays things out in strict detail to make sure the rules are clear and enforcable. At the moment we have regulations on over-rates, but they're so weak with so many concessions that they are effectively useless.

In layman's terms my suggested plan is:

"Bowl 17 overs per hour, with time off for stoppages just like in football. You are penalised 10 runs for every over you are short. You won't start to be penalised until after four hours - so you've got plenty of time to get your act in order".

For the batting team it's:

"Get a move on or you risk being given out. Don't try to cheat the system - if you deliberately try to slow the over-rate down then we'll just give the fielding side more time to bowl their overs."

Obviously, you can't put those sentences in the law book, but that's the gist of it.

As long as the ICC does something constructive, I don't care what it is.

If it were to happen, which it won't, I think the clock would have to be the same for all bowlers. If the spinners get through a bit quicker, then so much the better for the fans IMO. The number of overs in the day is supposed to be a 'minimum' FFS.

I think the captain should be limited to one 'longer countdown' per over, on a use it or lose it basis, so he can't faff around with field changes all the time.

I can't work out why there are so many fewer overs in a day compared to days of yore. Sure there's a TV commercial between every over, but there would've been about the same time between overs back then anyway.

I disagree with this reduction of test days to make it more exciting, or whatever it is the the ICC thinks will happen.

ICC's is something of a straw man argument. Sure we all want Tests to be 'more exciting' - who doesn't? I want ODIs to be 'more exciting', 20:20s to be 'more exciting'. I want my Starbucks coffee to be 'more exciting', FFS.

But how about also looking at the entire portfolio that's cricket? What about reducing the number of ODIs? What about fewer useless tournaments? How about making the pitches so that they favour the batsmen less? Why only make changes to Tests?

By suggesting changes (4 days) that will find favour with at least a few Test fans, they are making a highly selective argument that ignores other key issues. I worry that in the long term ICC will end up sacrificing Tests for shorter versions of the game.

Some people have said that they could favour a 4 day game if they increased the number of overs per day. But with all the volume of cricket that's going on, how will that impact bowlers in terms of fitness?

I would support a 4 day Test if, along with this change, they also made other changes to that game, and not just in Test cricket.

Until then this proposed 'reform' is a Trojan horse far as I am concerned. F*ck 'em all.