What's new

A solution for rain affected T20 matches: Have a Super-Over or a Bowl Out

Major

Test Star
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Runs
36,152
Post of the Week
7
Cricket is probably the only sport that cannot be played when there is rain pouring down. The whole game has to be put on waiting till rain ends before cut off time. DLS is a great system of calculation but it can only be applied for a result when minimum 5 overs are bowled in t20.

The Issue
If rain pours down with no over being bowled, the whole game gets abandoned with each side sharing points. That sharing points later on causes problem for the whole group as a team that played and lost games cannot qualify for the semis with 4 points, while a team that also lost same number of games ends up going forward due to a 1 point advantage due to a no result match.

Results are required


Why Other methods are not applicable
Often people suggest that we should have reserve days where the match can be played the next day, or have a reserve week where the tournaments rained matches could be played at covered stadium or different city. While other suggestions are move the match at the last minute.

The issue is these solutions may look good, but they are expensive. If organizers do a cost benefit analysis, they will probably lose more money. As there is stadium rent involved for reserving a stadium. Equipment moving cost rises and set up time and cost takes time for equipment and pitch.

Another thing is that people book dont only book match tickets, they also book hotel and travelling tickets for games, so you cant shift games at the last moment as this can affect the whole entertainment industry and many stakeholders get affected by this and wont be happy.

Roof stadiums are too expensive to build

Why not just play in the rain?
This is also another solution that gets suggested, but the issue with this is that Cricket is a different sport. When it rains down, the equipment faces ware and tare like bats and gloves are ruined. Pitch becomes dangerous to play as a wet pitch means that there will be uneven bounce and can be dangerous for the batsman and it can be dangerous for the bowler when landing at his delivery stride.

The solution:
Either a Super Over or a Bowl Out (in the rain).

Super Over
To employ a Super Over in the rain, a cricket ground has about 5-8 pitches. If rain is forecasted, matting could be deployed on one of the pitches. Have the normal game scheduled on the cricket pitch, but if there is going to be a no result(where DLS is not gonna be used), than have a toss after the cut off time and both sides play 1 over each with Super Over rules on the reserved matting pitch.

The matting will help protect both the batsman and bowler. The batsman won't have to deal with uneven bounce due to dampness and bowler won't be slipping upon landing in the rain. Rest of the fielders can field in the rain.

This would be cost effective aswell, as instead of reserving a stadium, you are reserving just a pitch. Fans can also go home happy that they saw a result.

Bowl Out
A Bowl Out also works to. The advantage of a Bowl Out in the rain is that the batter and the fielders dont have to risk playing in the rain. Fielders can get injured in the outfield on slipping and batsman will always have the fear of the ungripped bowl coming in as a beamer or uneven bounce of the pitch.

In a bowl out, you only need to bowl. If Bowlers need to be protected than matting on the pitch can be used aswell.



I believe its important to have a result instead of just sharing points.
 
Last edited:
In most washout scenarios there was no possibility of even one over. If the number of washout increases there will be questions.
 
Bowl outs are incredibly ridiculous. There is a reason they were removed.

Agreed with Super over as bare minimum though. No result means a far inferior team gets a shared point when more than likely they would lose.
 
Bowl outs are incredibly ridiculous. There is a reason they were removed.

Agreed with Super over as bare minimum though. No result means a far inferior team gets a shared point when more than likely they would lose.

bowl outs are ridiculous, but if its raining and the reason for not even playing a one over match is that its too dangerous than to remove the danger you can have a bowl out.

Teams bowler accuracy gets checked this way.

Now a penalty shootout doesnt really show a football team's strength, yet smaller teams try to draw the game to get it to that point and fluke a win through shoot outs.

Thing is, result needs to come. Results matter, sharing of points shouldn't happen
 
bowl outs are ridiculous, but if its raining and the reason for not even playing a one over match is that its too dangerous than to remove the danger you can have a bowl out.

Teams bowler accuracy gets checked this way.

Now a penalty shootout doesnt really show a football team's strength, yet smaller teams try to draw the game to get it to that point and fluke a win through shoot outs.

Thing is, result needs to come. Results matter, sharing of points shouldn't happen

I agree a result needs to come. But if it comes down to bowl out, I’d rather have no result.

Think of 2007 t20 WC. Dhoni had Sehwag and Uthappa practice for bowl outs the whole tournament just in case they had to do one. Them beating out guys like Gul etc in a bowl out is a complete joke. In a proper victory there has to be some display of skill to show that one side is superior to the other. A super over accomplishes that while being representative of the whole game of cricket. There is batting, bowling and fielding.

A bowl out does not. It’s not even cricket at that point. It’s darts. Any random who has been practicing hitting the stumps regardless of any other bowling skill can accomplish that and even beat out front line international class bowlers. It shows absolutely nothing.
 
I agree a result needs to come. But if it comes down to bowl out, I’d rather have no result.

Think of 2007 t20 WC. Dhoni had Sehwag and Uthappa practice for bowl outs the whole tournament just in case they had to do one. Them beating out guys like Gul etc in a bowl out is a complete joke. In a proper victory there has to be some display of skill to show that one side is superior to the other. A super over accomplishes that while being representative of the whole game of cricket. There is batting, bowling and fielding.

A bowl out does not. It’s not even cricket at that point. It’s darts. Any random who has been practicing hitting the stumps regardless of any other bowling skill can accomplish that and even beat out front line international class bowlers. It shows absolutely nothing.
i read the interviews with regards to that.

You have to give credit to India because they were practicing before hand, Pakistan never did. India did practice by bowling to a simple stump, and when Pakistan did decide to practice 5 mins before it, they were bowling to all three stumps.

Bowling a legal delivery with accuracy is a skill, and for that you need to practice. I think that would still be better than just having a no result.

You Know, Pakistan can be thrown out of the world cup only because of the rain abandoning few games. Its not justified
 
I agree a result needs to come. But if it comes down to bowl out, I’d rather have no result.

Think of 2007 t20 WC. Dhoni had Sehwag and Uthappa practice for bowl outs the whole tournament just in case they had to do one. Them beating out guys like Gul etc in a bowl out is a complete joke. In a proper victory there has to be some display of skill to show that one side is superior to the other. A super over accomplishes that while being representative of the whole game of cricket. There is batting, bowling and fielding.

A bowl out does not. It’s not even cricket at that point. It’s darts. Any random who has been practicing hitting the stumps regardless of any other bowling skill can accomplish that and even beat out front line international class bowlers. It shows absolutely nothing.

What does a penalty shoot out in football prove?
 
Two different games, two different contexts.

but again a penalty shootout doesnt show the teams skill. Many times the weaker team won on penalty shoot out.

They do it for the result
 
Horrible idea.

A penalty shootout is done after a game is DRAWN after 120 minutes.

Meaning a game is already played and fair chances have been given to both teams.

This is not the case in cricket where the game is not even played.
 
Horrible idea.

A penalty shootout is done after a game is DRAWN after 120 minutes.

Meaning a game is already played and fair chances have been given to both teams.

This is not the case in cricket where the game is not even played.

So a team that has a chance to go to semi finals should lose out just because of rain.

The purpose isn't to be just for the sake. The purpose is to have some kind of result so that 2 points can be given
 
So a team that has a chance to go to semi finals should lose out just because of rain.

The purpose isn't to be just for the sake. The purpose is to have some kind of result so that 2 points can be given

It does not matter if one team's chances get affected by rain or not. As long as the rules are consistent and same for everyone and agreed upon at the start of the tournament - nothing else should matter.
 
I think current system is fine for group stages.

Super Over should happen during knockout games.
 
It does not matter if one team's chances get affected by rain or not. As long as the rules are consistent and same for everyone and agreed upon at the start of the tournament - nothing else should matter.

Why does it not matter?
South Africa couldn't get 2 points due to the last game and if today's game also washes out, South Africa losses a total of 2 points out of 4.

Now with 2 less points if South Africa doesn't make semis while som other team does, isn't that unfair to them?

It does matter that weather is affecting one teams progress that has worked hard to reach here.

This is why results need to be made through such ways than
 
Why does it not matter?
South Africa couldn't get 2 points due to the last game and if today's game also washes out, South Africa losses a total of 2 points out of 4.

Now with 2 less points if South Africa doesn't make semis while som other team does, isn't that unfair to them?

It does matter that weather is affecting one teams progress that has worked hard to reach here.

This is why results need to be made through such ways than

You're logic is against how probability works.

pre-game probability is 50% for either team - either win or loss, irrespective of skill level. If rain causes a washout, the points are split.

It would be unfair to have the team that is favorites to win the contest be awarded two points without even playing the game and giving the opportunity to the lesser ranked team.
 
You're logic is against how probability works.

pre-game probability is 50% for either team - either win or loss, irrespective of skill level. If rain causes a washout, the points are split.

It would be unfair to have the team that is favorites to win the contest be awarded two points without even playing the game and giving the opportunity to the lesser ranked team.

Im not saying favourite to win should get points. No where did i said that, i just gave an example.

My point is, why not get a result through the two options mention
 
Yaar a t20 lasts for 3 hours.

Is it impossible to reserve 3 hours in the following days for a washed out game? Doesnt even have to be the immediate next day.

Obviously it has to be planned properly.

It's fine even if it isnt broadcasted Live as long as the match takes place properly. Better than a complete washout.
 
These are modern day professional athletes who train as if they are going to a war. I think T20 games should continue in the rain unless the pitch is heavily flooded.
 
These are modern day professional athletes who train as if they are going to a war. I think T20 games should continue in the rain unless the pitch is heavily flooded.

The pitch would turn into mud.
 
Dumb alternative, 1 over to decide this ****..have a reserve day or accept bad luck. Have a kushti match then
 
I think the concept of Super Over is widely misunderstood here, a super over is more of a tie breaker to decide a winner AFTER 40 overs of game couldn't separate the two sides. So it is like giving one extra over to allow the sides to be seperated, which is fair enough.

What OP is suggesting is to have "1 over constitutes" a game situation and play in rain, mud, lake whatever, to somehow give 2 points to some team. I mean the mere thought of it is hilarious.

Why you raise valid points about reserve day and change of venue not being possible and the need to have a winner, what I would rather suggest is for the ICC to at least be flexible with the time.

Very often we see forecast clear in the day but raining from evening or vice versa, in such cases, we can shift the games by 2-3 hours (this can be done a day in advance looking at the forecast, and is very practical in a T20 format) to ensure we get a game and there is no issue of reserve day Or venue change.

At least this will save a lot of games (ofcourse not all) from complete washout situation
 
Back
Top