What's new

Increasing number of balls per over to make Test cricket exciting?

Y

yasir

T20I Debutant
Joined
Apr 14, 2007
Runs
7,133
Post of the Week
2
There are lot of proposals to improve and or speed up test cricket. I have not seen much discussion on one such, so I want to brought that up, increase the number of balls per over from 6 or 8/10, this can help speed up the test cricket.

Why Change number of balls per over?

One of the key to success of test Cricket is giving more leverage or opportunity of attack to bowlers. Many times we see, a batsman is setup by bowler, but he gets away because over got changed, pressure is released.

This can be specially true in testing conditions (both for pacers and spinners). Batsmen would not like to face a 10 ball over from a bowler in rhythm. Also, this will cause more collapses specially lower order, night watchman, end of session scenarios etc, when they have to see off not 6 but 10 balls.

One concern is that it can have toll on bowler, I believe more balls per over is less straining then same number of balls divided into more overs, in general. As a bowler you hate to a break when you have setup the batsman.

One can make things even more interesting, is but have variable length overs, bowling Captain can choose to change number of balls per over at different time or overs window, like PP in ODI. That can get complicate and stats nerd would not like that, but I am all for making game interesting and exciting and less on bureaucracy. Contest is more important than stats.

Thoughts??
 
There are a couple of very simple ways to make Test cricket more interesting.

The basic problem of Test cricket is that it goes on for too long. It takes the bowlers too long to get the batsmen out. There are two solutions for this problem:

1) Reduce the width of the cricket back from 4.25 inches to 3.75 inches or 4 inches.

2) Only 8 batsmen of a team bat, an innings is over when there are 7 wickets down.

The above solutions are the most effective way to reduce the time it takes for a Test match to get over, without changing the nature of the game.
 
2 posts in the thread and both insane and wont ever in a million years happen.

Making Test cricket exciting is very simple and requires three things.

1) A league system so matches mean something
2) Enforce over rates. Teams bowling 12 overs an hour is a joke. Can easily fit in 90 odd overs in a day.
3) Decent pitches that balance bat and ball.

Boom, done. No need for nonsensical ideas like 8 batsmen or 10 ball overs.
 
The biggest problem hurting cricket are the pathetic pitches being ditched out and the huge difference between bat and ball.
 
Test cricket needs context. More marquee series. People around the world watch The Ashes because it is a rivalry and has history. A set series between India v Pakistan would be a great boost for test cricket.

Currently, teams are playing way too many random series at random times that serve no purpose.
 
Napa said:
There are a couple of very simple ways to make Test cricket more interesting.

The basic problem of Test cricket is that it goes on for too long. It takes the bowlers too long to get the batsmen out. There are two solutions for this problem:

1) Reduce the width of the cricket back from 4.25 inches to 3.75 inches or 4 inches.

2) Only 8 batsmen of a team bat, an innings is over when there are 7 wickets down.

The above solutions are the most effective way to reduce the time it takes for a Test match to get over, without changing the nature of the game.
Click to expand...

Going on too long is not the problem, the problem is that matches aren't competitive enough.

We need fairer pitches, 300 should be par, anything more than that should be deemed a poor bowling performance.
 
8 ball overs were used in AUS till 1978 I believe. And Packer's WSC used 8 balls as well. In terms of balls played, 8 ball over is the best solution, as I calculated the impact for a 6 hours play time.

It's the changing ends that costs maximum time in cricket, because of fielders', umpires positioning and batsmen' pep talks. At an average I calculated a standard 6 balls takes about 2.5 minutes (It varies - Shoaib took 4.5 minutes sometimes while I have seen Hooper finishing one over in 58 seconds), but that change overs costs from 1.0 to 2.5 minutes (If there is an adjustment in sight screen). At an average, these days team's bowl 13-14 overs' per hour, unless two spinners are bowling in tandem, that's about 40 minutes for bowling, 18 minutes for change ends and 2.5 for drinks (5 minutes for a session).

For a 6:00 hours day, they bowl about 84 overs (504 balls) these days for around 220-225 minutes and 125-120 minutes for change ends and 15 minutes for drinks. Making it 8 balls overs, that 504 balls means 63 overs - straight that's a savings of 20 X 1.25/1.5 = 25-30 minutes, which is equivalent to may be another 4/5 8 balls overs. Which suggests, 8 balls over might allow teams to bowl 67 overs (90, 6 ball overs), just in time. Ian Chappel was crazy about over rate (he believed AUS was the best team and they should win every match, if time is there, therefore his effort was to bowl as many overs as possible) - with 4 pacers (DK, Thompson, Max Walker & Gilmore), his team sometimes bowled 72, 8 balls overs in bang 6 hours - that's 96, 6 ball overs with DK Lillee bowling 25, 8 ball overs in a day!!!! I believe they used 60 overs mark for the change of 2nd ball (That's equal to 80, 6 balls overs).

However, this had few issues -
1. It's extremely stressful for fast bowlers, not everyone was or is (will never be) DK Lillee. I read Imran regarding his SCG 1976 Test, where he bowled 47, 8 balls overs in 3 days - he wrote that, throughout his career, he never felt so much drained, it's just that he was beating batsmen & PAK was winning the Test, he kept on running, otherwise he would have resigned by Day 2!!!! Add 1 no ball, that's 9 balls in one go - don't think any modern hero with gold gym body can take that. In 1968-69 season, 20 years old DK Lillee, sometimes bowled 25, 8 balls over in a day on hard, scratchy WACA ground for Western Australia at full throttle, that made him the greatest ever intimidator, even in his 5th spell of the day - gold gym won't develop that personality or tenacity.

2. Cricket stats will be distorted - for maidens. DK Lillee had very few maidens to his credit, because of the runs he conceded on 7th & 8th ball.
3. For broadcasting, 8 balls overs means less air time for Shahrukh Khan and MSD and ......
4. Tail ender's average will go down - ** Chandrashekhar, normally didn't last full overs, if he had to face all 6 balls, make it 8 ......

Personally, I like 8 balls overs, because I still believe it's a man's game. 72, 8 ball overs/day for a 5 Day Tests, and 35 (or 40, I like 35), 8 ball overs for ODI - bring it on.

Only problem is, they'll have to name it Eagle (F15), for the greatest invention in cricket since WG Grace .....
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION], [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]s - comments please
 
Donal Cozzie said:
2 posts in the thread and both insane and wont ever in a million years happen.

Making Test cricket exciting is very simple and requires three things.

1) A league system so matches mean something
2) Enforce over rates. Teams bowling 12 overs an hour is a joke. Can easily fit in 90 odd overs in a day.
3) Decent pitches that balance bat and ball.

Boom, done. No need for nonsensical ideas like 8 batsmen or 10 ball overs.
Click to expand...

Instead of hyperventilating, why don't you explain why 8 batsmen (one of my ideas) is "nonsensical".

Solutions like "decent pitches" are easier said than done. Countries will always want pitches that give their teams an advantage when they play at home.

Also, making the bat narrower would also solve the problem of too long innings. Definitely an out of the box idea, but one that would work.
 
Best way to fix test cricket imho is to scrap it all together. It does not fit into the modern world. People got stuffs to do, can't sit around for 1 week trying to watch a test match.
 
Get the pitches right and the tests will become more exciting. India vs. Australia in Bangalore was as exciting as any cricket match and then when we had that dead pitch in Ranchi in the next test, the two teams produced a boring contest. Similarly, India vs SL was surprisingly fun to watch in Kolkata and then, as the pitches became flat, it became what we thought it would. Pitches have a huge say.
 
light said:
Best way to fix test cricket imho is to scrap it all together. It does not fit into the modern world. People got stuffs to do, can't sit around for 1 week trying to watch a test match.
Click to expand...

Players also have stuffs to do (I mean play). Even today most players take pride in playing Test Cricket! That's the best "time pass" they can have! Well people of today (modern world) can use a tablet/smartphone for 24 hours together! Not that earth started to rotate faster/hours got shorter!
 
Napa said:
Instead of hyperventilating, why don't you explain why 8 batsmen (one of my ideas) is "nonsensical".

Solutions like "decent pitches" are easier said than done. Countries will always want pitches that give their teams an advantage when they play at home.

Also, making the bat narrower would also solve the problem of too long innings. Definitely an out of the box idea, but one that would work.
Click to expand...

Because having 8 batsmen makes no sense, achieves nothing and last I checked cricket is an 11 a side sport.

You say test crickets problem is its "too long". If thats your opinion then its like me saying T20's are "too short" and should allow every team have 14 players and 100 overs a side. You completely misunderstood the purpose of the format and the format itself and in an attempt to fix it proposed a ludicrous idea that violates the sports rules.

Sure why not cut international football to 5 a side lasting 30 minutes while you're doing it.

And no, balanced pitches are actually not difficult to make. I know because test cricket generally had them for about a century
 
Donal Cozzie said:
Because having 8 batsmen makes no sense, achieves nothing and last I checked cricket is an 11 a side sport.

You say test crickets problem is its "too long". If thats your opinion then its like me saying T20's are "too short" and should allow every team have 14 players and 100 overs a side. You completely misunderstood the purpose of the format and the format itself and in an attempt to fix it proposed a ludicrous idea that violates the sports rules.

Sure why not cut international football to 5 a side lasting 30 minutes while you're doing it.

And no, balanced pitches are actually not difficult to make. I know because test cricket generally had them for about a century
Click to expand...

Agree with you. Plus i would also want visiting side to decide what to do.
 
International players makes bank because of the fans, not the other way around, if you didn't realize this by now. If no one is watching, no broadcaster will be broadcasting, regadrless off if you are scoring 200's or taking 5fers. Supply/Demand.

And your theory behind 24H is not valid. Technically if you take sleep into avg, its more like 16-18h and then comes work/school/other important stuffs. All in all, no one sits around for a test match and watches it for 40h. That's one week of paycheck right there ...
 
there is only one way to make cricket interesting

make bowling friendly pitches

when we see forty wickets fall in five days

we will never see a draw

we will see exciting results

situation will twist after every session

we will see drama in each day
 
The fundamental problem here is people simply prefer to watch cricket where the batsman wants to or has to attack rather than one where he wants to or has to defend.

The incentive structure of Test cricket promotes defensive batting.

This is on top of the fundamental point that assuming the nature of the contest is interesting (which in Tests it often isn't), people want to actually watch a game and not snippets of it.

Only T20 makes this an easy possibility for the majority of fans which is why it's the most popular format.
 
MMHS said:
8 ball overs were used in AUS till 1978 I believe. And Packer's WSC used 8 balls as well. In terms of balls played, 8 ball over is the best solution, as I calculated the impact for a 6 hours play time.

It's the changing ends that costs maximum time in cricket, because of fielders', umpires positioning and batsmen' pep talks. At an average I calculated a standard 6 balls takes about 2.5 minutes (It varies - Shoaib took 4.5 minutes sometimes while I have seen Hooper finishing one over in 58 seconds), but that change overs costs from 1.0 to 2.5 minutes (If there is an adjustment in sight screen). At an average, these days team's bowl 13-14 overs' per hour, unless two spinners are bowling in tandem, that's about 40 minutes for bowling, 18 minutes for change ends and 2.5 for drinks (5 minutes for a session).

For a 6:00 hours day, they bowl about 84 overs (504 balls) these days for around 220-225 minutes and 125-120 minutes for change ends and 15 minutes for drinks. Making it 8 balls overs, that 504 balls means 63 overs - straight that's a savings of 20 X 1.25/1.5 = 25-30 minutes, which is equivalent to may be another 4/5 8 balls overs. Which suggests, 8 balls over might allow teams to bowl 67 overs (90, 6 ball overs), just in time. Ian Chappel was crazy about over rate (he believed AUS was the best team and they should win every match, if time is there, therefore his effort was to bowl as many overs as possible) - with 4 pacers (DK, Thompson, Max Walker & Gilmore), his team sometimes bowled 72, 8 balls overs in bang 6 hours - that's 96, 6 ball overs with DK Lillee bowling 25, 8 ball overs in a day!!!! I believe they used 60 overs mark for the change of 2nd ball (That's equal to 80, 6 balls overs).

However, this had few issues -
1. It's extremely stressful for fast bowlers, not everyone was or is (will never be) DK Lillee. I read Imran regarding his SCG 1976 Test, where he bowled 47, 8 balls overs in 3 days - he wrote that, throughout his career, he never felt so much drained, it's just that he was beating batsmen & PAK was winning the Test, he kept on running, otherwise he would have resigned by Day 2!!!! Add 1 no ball, that's 9 balls in one go - don't think any modern hero with gold gym body can take that. In 1968-69 season, 20 years old DK Lillee, sometimes bowled 25, 8 balls over in a day on hard, scratchy WACA ground for Western Australia at full throttle, that made him the greatest ever intimidator, even in his 5th spell of the day - gold gym won't develop that personality or tenacity.

2. Cricket stats will be distorted - for maidens. DK Lillee had very few maidens to his credit, because of the runs he conceded on 7th & 8th ball.
3. For broadcasting, 8 balls overs means less air time for Shahrukh Khan and MSD and ......
4. Tail ender's average will go down - ** Chandrashekhar, normally didn't last full overs, if he had to face all 6 balls, make it 8 ......

Personally, I like 8 balls overs, because I still believe it's a man's game. 72, 8 ball overs/day for a 5 Day Tests, and 35 (or 40, I like 35), 8 ball overs for ODI - bring it on.

Only problem is, they'll have to name it Eagle (F15), for the greatest invention in cricket since WG Grace .....

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION], [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]s - comments please
Click to expand...

Agree with that. 8 ball overs allow more drama too. A bowler on top has 2 more balls to dismiss a batsman or a batsman 2 more balls to punish.
 
This would be unnecessary and wouldn't fill the intended purpose either. No one is watching the 5 day format because each over had a couple more deliveries.
 
The only way to make test cricket more interesting is by ending it
 
Ahmad Shah said:
there is only one way to make cricket interesting

make bowling friendly pitches

when we see forty wickets fall in five days

we will never see a draw

we will see exciting results

situation will twist after every session

we will see drama in each day
Click to expand...
Actually last few years we have record percentage of results in history of Test Cricket.most of the draws happened in the 70s 80s than now.
 
What's with this unhealthy obsession to make test cricket interesting? Nobody watches test cricket outside Eng/Aus because it's boring. Eng/Aus viewers care because it's a national heritage and part of culture. Even then it's a commercial failure that's bleeding money for cricket boards.

You can't make something interesting that has no place in 21st century. Let test cricket die naturally as it is.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
What's with this unhealthy obsession to make test cricket interesting? Nobody watches test cricket outside Eng/Aus because it's boring. Eng/Aus viewers care because it's a national heritage and part of culture. Even then it's a commercial failure that's bleeding money for cricket boards.

You can't make something interesting that has no place in 21st century. Let test cricket die naturally as it is.
Click to expand...

Test cricket is already interesting enough atleast for home teams. 21st century men work less hours if anything unless you are in IT slogging for some overseas company. Besides even in those days Test cricket was followed on a daily basis not ball by ball by everybody. This 21st century talk is total **.
 
CricketCartoons said:
Toss should be done away with, and the visiting team should decide whether to bat or bowl.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Biggest problem with Tests nowadays is too much home domination.

I'd also consider ICC contracted groundsmen to prepare the pitches to avoid excess home advantage.
 
Princejain191 said:
Get the pitches right and the tests will become more exciting. India vs. Australia in Bangalore was as exciting as any cricket match and then when we had that dead pitch in Ranchi in the next test, the two teams produced a boring contest. Similarly, India vs SL was surprisingly fun to watch in Kolkata and then, as the pitches became flat, it became what we thought it would. Pitches have a huge say.
Click to expand...

Also agree with this - bowler friendly pitches act as a leveller and ensures underdogs have a better chance of winning as Pakistan found out to their detriment against Ireland in 2007.

On flat pitches, weak bowling attacks like SL, WI, BAN outside Asia or ZIM, or teams whose bowlers are ill-suited to overseas conditions like ENG, get plundered which is no fun to watch.
 
Bring back 6 bouncers per over and see all the averages come down.
 
Donal Cozzie said:
2 posts in the thread and both insane and wont ever in a million years happen.

Making Test cricket exciting is very simple and requires three things.

1) A league system so matches mean something
2) Enforce over rates. Teams bowling 12 overs an hour is a joke. Can easily fit in 90 odd overs in a day.
3) Decent pitches that balance bat and ball.

Boom, done. No need for nonsensical ideas like 8 batsmen or 10 ball overs.
Click to expand...

The first point is the biggest thing and it's something that I keep bringing up over and over again. People don't really care about bilateral ODIs and T20s either, but they do tune in for the ICC tournaments because those games have something to play for beyond ranking points that nobody understands.

Make a proper league and it becomes easier for fans to understand what effect each test/series has on the table. This Test championship rubbish doesn't do a damn thing, because it relies on the same rankings system that we use currently and it still operates on an unbalanced schedule.

Everybody needs to play everybody else on a regular basis, which will never happen because of money. Australia/England won't sacrifice Ashes tests in order to play more against New Zealand and Pakistan, India will never agree to play Pakistan.

So the end result will be test cricket continues to die while administrators cry and do nothing to fix the problem beyond a one off 'championship' game at Lords which is the equivalent of putting on a single band-aid to treat a leg that's been chopped off.
 
yasir said:
There are lot of proposals to improve and or speed up test cricket. I have not seen much discussion on one such, so I want to brought that up, increase the number of balls per over from 6 or 8/10, this can help speed up the test cricket.

Why Change number of balls per over?

One of the key to success of test Cricket is giving more leverage or opportunity of attack to bowlers. Many times we see, a batsman is setup by bowler, but he gets away because over got changed, pressure is released.

This can be specially true in testing conditions (both for pacers and spinners). Batsmen would not like to face a 10 ball over from a bowler in rhythm. Also, this will cause more collapses specially lower order, night watchman, end of session scenarios etc, when they have to see off not 6 but 10 balls.

One concern is that it can have toll on bowler, I believe more balls per over is less straining then same number of balls divided into more overs, in general. As a bowler you hate to a break when you have setup the batsman.

One can make things even more interesting, is but have variable length overs, bowling Captain can choose to change number of balls per over at different time or overs window, like PP in ODI. That can get complicate and stats nerd would not like that, but I am all for making game interesting and exciting and less on bureaucracy. Contest is more important than stats.

Thoughts??
Click to expand...

6 balls an over is cricket, it is history, it's always been 6 balls an over.

No idea what made you even suggest such a thing.
 
LegendAli said:
6 balls an over is cricket, it is history, it's always been 6 balls an over.

No idea what made you even suggest such a thing.
Click to expand...

That's not true. It's probably been 6 balls an over during your lifetime but that wasn't always the case.

Depending on the time and the host nation, an over in test cricket could have been anything from 4-8 balls.
 
Some of the things suggested in this thread are ridiculous. Its not hard to make changes to improve the popularity:


1. 2 Tier league system (6 teams). Relegation for bottom team. League played over 2 years, and each team plays the other 5 home and away 3 times, ie 15 tests a year.

2. The league system needs a football points system. 1 point for a draw, and 3 points for a win. Will add to the excitement.

3. All matches Day & Night. No one has time anymore. I don't care if conditions are tricky. We need that to draw attention. To make things more challenging for the batsmen.

4. Change to 4 days, with 100 overs played. Introduce fines for not completing 15 overs an hour. Speed up the game.

I do believe India is adding to the difficulty of making something like this work. They opposed the relegation system. They're probably the reason each time doesn't have to play everyone (To Avoid Pakistan).


Finally, and the biggest change:

- ICC takes charge of the league and sells all rights. All money earned should be shared like the English Premier League system. 50% equally shared, and the other 50% shared as per position in the league.

Easy.
 
Big Mac said:
That's not true. It's probably been 6 balls an over during your lifetime but that wasn't always the case.

Depending on the time and the host nation, an over in test cricket could have been anything from 4-8 balls.
Click to expand...

During my lifetime?

How old are you?
 
jnaveen1980 said:
Test cricket is already interesting enough atleast for home teams. 21st century men work less hours if anything unless you are in IT slogging for some overseas company. Besides even in those days Test cricket was followed on a daily basis not ball by ball by everybody. This 21st century talk is total **.
Click to expand...

Did you not consider how many entertainment options we have now compared to 1880s? People have social media, youtube, videogames, movie theatre and tons of other ways to entertain themselves. You think teenagers outside England and Australia who're on their smartphones 24/7 have the attention span for a 5 day game? Please don't kid yourself
 
LegendAli said:
Both of you would at least have some ground if you were actually older than me. :stokes
Click to expand...

You are factually wrong. That is the key point. I am in my mid 50s so doubt you are senior to me. In any case even if you are 80 you are wrong here. Pride is an evil.
 
Not to mention that if you are that much older than I am, then you would remember test matches with 8 balls per over which makes your claim that "it's always been 6 balls an over" all the more embarrassing.
 
LegendAli said:
6 balls an over is cricket, it is history, it's always been 6 balls an over.

No idea what made you even suggest such a thing.
Click to expand...

Factually incorrect.

Test cricket until the year 1980 basically followed the number of balls that the first class structure of the country the match was played in. Pakistan, Australia, NewZealand, South Africa all had at, a point in time, overs that consisted of different number of deliveries. 4,6 or 8.

Only after 1979/80, did Test cricket standardize the number of balls to 6 per over and it has been like so ever since. Anyone who witnessed matches during the 70s, late 60s would've experience these games first hand.
 
There's no fixing it, the format is dead in most countries and cannot draw.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
Did you not consider how many entertainment options we have now compared to 1880s? People have social media, youtube, videogames, movie theatre and tons of other ways to entertain themselves. You think teenagers outside England and Australia who're on their smartphones 24/7 have the attention span for a 5 day game? Please don't kid yourself
Click to expand...

Do you seriously believe people were listening to commentary ball by ball all 5 days/ I grew up in the 80s. Didn't do that.If anything i watch wide range of netflix series from mindhunter to stranger things. Every goddman series. I watch all the movies. I still find time to folow cricket. There was no cricinfo back then. We have now. So i follow better now than in the 80s. If someone have such a short attention span he could not have possibly been a cricket fan. He just pretends to be a cricket fan.
 
jnaveen1980 said:
do you seriously believe people were listening to commentary ball by ball all 5 days/ i grew up in the 80s. Didn't do that.if anything i watch wide range of netflix series from mindhunter to stranger things. Every goddman series. I watch all the movies. I still find time to folow cricket. There was no cricinfo back then. We have now. So i follow better now than in the 80s. if someone have such a short attention span he could not have possibly been a cricket fan. He just pretends to be a cricket fan.
Click to expand...

nail.......head......hammer......very hard!!
 
Chief Destroyer said:
Test cricket needs context. More marquee series. People around the world watch The Ashes because it is a rivalry and has history. A set series between India v Pakistan would be a great boost for test cricket.

Currently, teams are playing way too many random series at random times that serve no purpose.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, I have mentioned it many times else where, one of the key reason test cricket is dyingin Asia, because team with history, skill and passion does not play against each other for 15 years. Pak Vs India was/is premium test product for Asian audience, if they don't play each other, test cricket has no future...

Imagine if WC is in AUS or SA and they both don't play, what will be the point of WC when the teams that are champion of the conditions don't play, it dilute the product to a great degree...
 
Probably I did not emphasis it in the OP, that more number of balls per overs really goes well when conditions are either even or supporting bowlers, on flat conditions this would be counter productive...
 
jnaveen1980 said:
Do you seriously believe people were listening to commentary ball by ball all 5 days/ I grew up in the 80s. Didn't do that.If anything i watch wide range of netflix series from mindhunter to stranger things. Every goddman series. I watch all the movies. I still find time to folow cricket. There was no cricinfo back then. We have now. So i follow better now than in the 80s. If someone have such a short attention span he could not have possibly been a cricket fan. He just pretends to be a cricket fan.
Click to expand...

Too bad nobody outside Eng and Aus are cricket fans then, why do you think websites keep publishing articles on 'cricket is dying' every 2 months? If those don't ring a bell to you, what about the empty photos of grounds during test matches? Ignorance is bliss
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
Proposal of single-ball rule after 25 Overs in ODIs – Will it work?
Replies
7
Views
349
Hellion
H
M
Is scoring at around 6.5 runs per over on a perfect batting strip against weakened bowling a huge achievement?
Replies
76
Views
2K
topspin
topspin
M
Defining Talent: Are Pakistan's junior-level selectors missing the mark?
Replies
17
Views
700
Bewal Express
B
hassan918
Historic first Test: Pakistan vs West Indies sets record as shortest completed match in Pakistan
Replies
43
Views
1K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Mainul
Why are three different types of cricket balls being used in Test cricket?
Replies
24
Views
1K
Floater
F
Back
Top