Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
gilly11
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 1014
Karma: -9 (+5/-14)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Rule changes.
Any clubs putting any rule changes forward?
Think the deadline is the end of the month.
Would like to see a small change in the points myself.
Still seven for a win
Leave the bowling points the same
and the first innings batting the same,
Only change would be team batting second gets batting points for scoring at 2,3,4 an over same as team batting first.
Total points on offer 13.
Might make clubs improve the standard of wickets.
Also make captains think a bit more in the second inns.
Do we take risks and get full batting pointe, and maybe give the opposition a wicket or two, or just play safe and sneak home but loose a batting point or two.
Only an idea, are there any other.
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 8:42 am
|
Send Email to gilly11
Send PM to gilly11
|
howard benson
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 321
Karma: -3 (+2/-5)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Rule changes........
....... get rid of the eight o'clock finish
palace shield is overs cricket so no end time needed
the only reason anyone would waste time is to try and get an unfinished game, if that isn't possible there would be no point in wasting time - less so if there was a penalty for taking too long to bowl the overs
end time could be two hours 49 minutes - 45 overs at 16 overs an hour - after second innings starts with penalty for taking too long
in leagues that have this system the overs are usually bowled in time and very few penalties are needed
this would avoid the situation, which happened a couple of years ago when a freckleton against vernons match was incomplete with, i think, two overs to go at 7:30
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 9:14 am
|
Send Email to howard benson
Send PM to howard benson
|
TCCvoice
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 03-2007
Posts: 591
Karma: -7 (+3/-10)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
Agree with both of them especially the points.
I can't understand why we would want the points system so tight...
Teams not winining a game all season staying up?!?!
Current format can see teams getting well and truely hammered and getting more points then some team losing a hard fought tight game?!?
7 points for a win is too little. MAke it 10 plus the bonus points and it would be alot better...
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 10:10 am
|
Send Email to TCCvoice
Send PM to TCCvoice
|
gilly11
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 1014
Karma: -9 (+5/-14)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
The reason I think bonus points should be seperate is,
If a club prepares a poor wicket week in week out it has an advantage.
If you only score 80 then have a quality bowler who bowls out the opposition for 70 you get full points.
If you have a top batting track week in week out, and you score 250 -3 every week and your bowlers find it hard to get wickets you only get 7 points.
Under my idea both winning sides would get 10pts out of 13.
One side gets its batting bonus points but not its bowling and the other gets its bowling but no batting.
At the moment I think the rules favour side with poor wickets.
Also if you bowl a side out for 80 on a bad track then your batters go out and bat superbly and you knock them off in 20 overs you get the batting points, your batters have earned.
I think it would just level out good and bad tracks.
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 10:26 am
|
Send Email to gilly11
Send PM to gilly11
|
Sachin Lara
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 04-2006
Posts: 249
Karma: -6 (+0/-6)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
Gilly are you on strike again ??? Your thinking an awful lot ! 
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 10:38 am
|
Send Email to Sachin Lara
Send PM to Sachin Lara
|
jonny evs
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2007
Location: Longridge CC
Posts: 28
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
personally...i think the restriction on young bowlers should be relaxed if not abolished.
im 17 and i can only bowl 6 overs in 1 spell...to me, that doesnt seem fair.
i also think the batting points issue is a good idea 
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 11:23 am
|
Send Email to jonny evs
Send PM to jonny evs
MSN
|
GutReaction
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 06-2006
Posts: 563
Karma: 1 (+7/-6)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
Gilly, good point well made.
Johnny Evs, it's not a League Rule but an English Cricket Board Rule. Nothing the Palace Shield can do about it I'm afraid but it is stupid in my humble opinion as each teenager is different and matures at different ages physically. There are some damn big strong 14 /15 year olds about who could bowl many more overs with no ill effect short or long term.
Last edited by GutReaction, 20/Aug/2007, 11:30 am
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 11:28 am
|
Send Email to GutReaction
Send PM to GutReaction
|
vindz
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2007
Location: Harris Park CC
Posts: 232
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
quote:
jonny evs wrote:
personally...i think the restriction on young bowlers should be relaxed if not abolished.
im 17 and i can only bowl 6 overs in 1 spell...to me, that doesnt seem fair.
i also think the batting points issue is a good idea
I agree completely, but as other people have said, it's an ECB rule, nowt to do with Palace Shield. I'd love it to change tho - 1 of my openers is only 15, therefore by the time he's really starting to hit his rhythm, its time for him to come off!!! Am sure there are many other clubs / players affected by this, and indeed, very frustrated by this...
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 11:42 am
|
Send Email to vindz
Send PM to vindz
|
CodSkip
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: Fleetwood CC
Posts: 946
Karma: -1 (+17/-18)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
ooh good, a rules changes thread
Good points about the bowlers, but as its an ECB rule its pretty much a dead duck. That said, it is only a fast bowling directive, so a "slowy" can bowl as many as they like.
Regarding points, it's virtually impossible to please all the people all the time, a very difficult matter to get right. However, that said, the points made about getting the same for a "poor" win as opposed to a "good" win is spot on.
I still go back to my original comment of many moons ago, that a win is a win and you should get the set amount for obtaining one. However, the manner of the performance should be equally rewarded and that means awarding batting AND bowling points to BOTH sides in BOTH innings, so as the original poster said, a maximum of 13 points for a win, 6 for a defeat, if teams had both bowled out the opposition and scored at the top run rate.
If it was a low scoring/low wicket affair, the score could theoretically be 7 - 0.
The differential is the same, 7 points, but because the teams scored lower (possibly because of a poor track) they don't get as many points.
Of course, this may mean that boundaries might start shrinking, but that's down to clubs choices I guess and as long as pitch size regs are met, then can anyone complain?
Of course you could just say, "it's overs cricket" and forget bonus points altogether and have four for a win, two for a tie, one for a NR and zip for a defeat and use NRR to sort out any ties.
Whatever you do, it'll please some and upset others.
The rule change I'd really like to see, especially in the light of the inclement summer we've suffered, is the one where a side bats first and gets 200 odd from 45 overs, then it rains at tea and the side batting second only gets 25 overs to knock them off. Ridiculous! Surely the side batting second should only have to get a reduced target??????
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 12:38 pm
|
Send Email to CodSkip
Send PM to CodSkip
|
jonny evs
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2007
Location: Longridge CC
Posts: 28
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Rule changes.
 nightmare
thanks for your replies GutReaction, vindz and CodSkip.
Dam ECB and there stupid rules 
|
|
20/Aug/2007, 1:51 pm
|
Send Email to jonny evs
Send PM to jonny evs
MSN
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Powered by AkBBS 0.9.5b - Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
Click here to get your own free message board
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 25/Nov/2009, 5:18 am
|
|
|
