Rules that can help to take the Toss advantage out of the equation

[Rana]

I think the ICC is too fixated on making the game more and more difficult for bowlers with the field restrictions, powerplays and penalties. What are the ICC doing to tackle this major issue in the game which completely makes it predictable and stressful for fans?

The Toss in Dubai has proven to be an absolute farce! It’s ridiculous how a side batting second is pretty much 99.9% guaranteed to win the game. Similarly, there are formats and venues across the world where the Toss decides the result straight away. There are also venues where batting under lights (ODI) proves to be a major disadvantage.

My humble suggestion in order to eradicate at least some of the major disadvantage to the side that unfortunately loses a toss:

-Both team captains are expected to hand in a team sheet to the match referee at the time of the Toss. However, the captain that loses the toss should be allowed a 10 minute window in which he can make changes to his named team sheet from the squad that he has available. This way he can pick the extra bowler, bowlers or batter, batters that will help him deal with the situation. The winning captain should not be allowed to change the XI that he has handed in.

If we are always making rules such as one more fielder inside the circle for missing deadlines, or for two new balls just for the sake of it. I don’t see why we cannot have this innovation in the game?

 

[Technics 1210]

5 matches in the Asia Cup have gone down to the wire, literally within last 3 balls.

AC 2022 has firmly dispelled the myth that batting second is a 99.99% chance of winning, if anything, in the tournament, chance of winning batting second is nearly 50/50.

 

[Rana]

5 matches in the Asia Cup have gone down to the wire, literally within last 3 balls.

AC 2022 has firmly dispelled the myth that batting second is a 99.99% chance of winning, if anything, in the tournament, chance of winning batting second is nearly 50/50.

Besides the Hong Kong game with India

All teams batting second in Dubai have won. Nothing has been dispelled

 

[Technics 1210]

Besides the Hong Kong game with India

All teams batting second in Dubai have won. Nothing has been dispelled

No read what I wrote again.

Both Pak games vs India were won within 2 balls of final over.

Both Sri Lanka games vs India and Afghanistan were won within last over.

With such close margin wins, a team batting second is no where near 99.99% chance of winning, it's much lower than your claim.

 

[Rana]

No read what I wrote again.

Both Pak games vs India were won within 2 balls of final over.

Both Sri Lanka games vs India and Afghanistan were won within last over.

With such close margin wins, a team batting second is no where near 99.99% chance of winning, it's much lower than your claim.

I think it is at 99.9% because psychologically, a team chasing knows that the match is in the bag. Even when the situation is tense, they know that a bad over or a few lusty blows will be enough to get them back on track. It happened every time in this Asia cup and World Cup

It’s a no brainier to not bowl first no matter what in Dubai

 

[Marooned]

Well we used to defend anything at Dubai. What changed?

I don't think the premise is well established. I would love us to bowl second at Dubai while having atleast 175 on board.

 

[Technics 1210]

Chasing is psychologically easier because a team knows what target to aim at.

In the last T20 WC, a team batting second would win most of the time simply because of the dew factor which made bowling more difficult in second innings.

In this Asia Cup there has been next to no dew, not that I have seen or heard.

This is why the matches in this Asia Cup are going to the wire, compared with the last World Cup at the same venue.

 

[Marooned]

Take the last game for eg. It was swinging but Indian bowlers couldn't strike upfront.
I honestly think we would've defended it.

 

[produke]

No read what I wrote again.

Both Pak games vs India were won within 2 balls of final over.

Both Sri Lanka games vs India and Afghanistan were won within last over.

With such close margin wins, a team batting second is no where near 99.99% chance of winning, it's much lower than your claim.

There is more to it than that, such as when wickets fell and wickets in hand during last over, etc.

 

[Rana]

Chasing is psychologically easier because a team knows what target to aim at.

In the last T20 WC, a team batting second would win most of the time simply because of the dew factor which made bowling more difficult in second innings.

In this Asia Cup there has been next to no dew, not that I have seen or heard.

This is why the matches in this Asia Cup are going to the wire, compared with the last World Cup at the same venue.

It is not just restricted to this Asia cup or last year’s World Cup

Batting first in the 2019 World Cup almost certainly guaranteed victory as well. England were luck to not have to get 6/7 off the last ball let alone 2 because of Ben Stoke’s extra runs.

The Toss IMO is having too much influence on the result and I just don’t think it makes the game fair because this devalues actual cricket ability and actual cricket superiority

 

[Technics 1210]

It is not just restricted to this Asia cup or last year’s World Cup

Batting first in the 2019 World Cup almost certainly guaranteed victory as well. England were luck to not have to get 6/7 off the last ball let alone 2 because of Ben Stoke’s extra runs.

The Toss IMO is having too much influence on the result and I just don’t think it makes the game fair because this devalues actual cricket ability and actual cricket superiority

All things equal, I think the advantage of batting second in white ball cricket is simply knowing what target has to be chased which allows batsmen to plan their innings, compared to batting first where a target is not known. This is excluding changes in conditions such as dew factor.

On to the toss, one team has to bat first obviously and the toss is the fairest way to decide. Perhaps best out of 3 would make it even more fairer.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

It is not just restricted to this Asia cup or last year’s World Cup

Batting first in the 2019 World Cup almost certainly guaranteed victory as well. England were luck to not have to get 6/7 off the last ball let alone 2 because of Ben Stoke’s extra runs.

The Toss IMO is having too much influence on the result and I just don’t think it makes the game fair because this devalues actual cricket ability and actual cricket superiority

The toss has always given an advantage in all formats of cricket. It's just the nature of the sport . Cricket pitches are always slightly changing due to the weather conditions etc. You can't control it beyond a point .

In fact, the unpredictability/luck factor is what makes tournaments exciting.
Everybody pooh-poohed Australia's WT20 win last year because they won the toss in the knockouts but they have been at tge receiving end too. Dew screwed them in the 1996 World Cup final.

 

[Rana]

The ICC changed its World Cup format in order to have all teams play each other once with the top four going through to the semis

All franchise league’s opt for the eliminator format in order to decide the true winner of the league

These are efforts made in order to establish that the actual winner is a team that has not fluked its way into the semis or final just because they were better on the day against a far superior opponent.

If these efforts can be made to determine a true winner, why not the same effort is being made to make the Toss irrelevant?

 

[Technics 1210]

Round robin format doesn't remove the fluke factor. It is highly probably that a team can win the toss 7 out of 9 times and bat first.

A possibility in a World Cup, all teams play each other, twice. Once batting first, and then second, at the same designated venue and time.

It would be a logistical nightmare though.

 

[ammar_merry]

Why would ICC change rules for 1 ground.

 

[Rana]

Why would ICC change rules for 1 ground.

Read the opening post

I never said just for one ground

 

[Babeikh]

I like the idea. Perhaps they can bring in a sunstitute for the 2nd innings if they lose the toss rather than just name a different team.

 

[NishanKonar]

This is actually a good idea. Something which I will advocate

In white ball cricket - toss is becoming very critical factor especially in Asia. Its now nearly impossible to defend under lights !

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

The match between Pakistan and Afghanistan shows it is not that easy to chase targets.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

No one blamed the toss today?

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

This is actually a good idea. Something which I will advocate

In white ball cricket - toss is becoming very critical factor especially in Asia. Its now nearly impossible to defend under lights !

Just because it is becoming difficult for some some teams to defend because of their weak bowling attacks we should change the rules. Waah. How about they improve their batting so that they can post a total which they can defend with their bowling instead?

 

[jnaveen1980]

Apart from this and couple of other games, 19 out 19 won by chasing side.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

This is actually a good idea. Something which I will advocate

In white ball cricket - toss is becoming very critical factor especially in Asia. Its now nearly impossible to defend under lights !

The effect of lights and dew is something to be considered. No bowling attack seems to be able to defend under lights . Having said that , what organizers can do is either play these games an hour and a half later or much earlier to make conditions more even.

 

[Gayle_Force]

I am all for making changes to take toss out of the equation but I don’t know how changing teams after losing the toss benefits the team. If anything I anticipate it may create much more confusion in the captain’s mind and in the dugout. Like a player being in limbo until the toss is completed can’t possibly be good for his confidence.

 

[Bewal Express]

we needed double headed coins

 

[pakistani pride]

LOL people just looking for excuses. First of all India for example had a below par total vs SL.

Even then they had to win that match. SL was like 5 down with still many to get.

It was poor execution.

Also vs Pak their batting flopped and they were 10 to 15 runs short.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

LOL people just looking for excuses. First of all India for example had a below par total vs SL.

Even then they had to win that match. SL was like 5 down with still many to get.

It was poor execution.

Also vs Pak their batting flopped and they were 10 to 15 runs short.

Exactly. These toss excuses are pretty lame. A good team knows to win in every situation and toss should be the last excuse for them after poor batting, fielding and catching. How can you blame toss for Arshdeep dropping a catch or Pant/Sky playing poor innings?

 

[Sachin136]

Just don't play in the UAE.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Just don't play in the UAE.

Why? There was no dew in Asia Cup.

 

[Babeikh]

It's not excuses. It is a fact. The stats don't lie. If it was 55-45, 60-40, even 65-35 to the side chasing you could say 'yes there was poor execution' but it is so overwhelmingly tilted in favour of chasing that the match is basically 90% decided by the flip of a coin - not to say there won't be exceptions or the odd anomaly, of course there will. That isn't right. The game should be decided by the cricket not by an advantage that is out of the hands of the cricketers.

So something needs to be thought of and the OP idea is a good place to start.

 

[docteurmanish]

Well said sir .

I watched the games and ball comes on nicely under lights . Sri Lankan batters look like England t20 batters under lights - truth is they have been the weakest Asian team and they made through against india . 9/10 times india will win .

See the match and note how easy the batters could play india under lights . Stats don’t lie . T20 cricket - margins of win and loss are small . 10 percent easement in conditions can tilt the game ur way anyday

 

[Gayle_Force]

Well said sir .

I watched the games and ball comes on nicely under lights . Sri Lankan batters look like England t20 batters under lights - truth is they have been the weakest Asian team and they made through against india . 9/10 times india will win .

See the match and note how easy the batters could play india under lights . Stats don’t lie . T20 cricket - margins of win and loss are small . 10 percent easement in conditions can tilt the game ur way anyday

So the pitch was bad in the first innings when Rohit was going all guns blazing? I understand stats but we have also have eyes, there have only been a couple of one sided games and in most one sided games the team batting first won the match. It is not a win toss win match situation at most the team batting second has a slight advantage. India was easily on track to make 190-200 in both games vs Pak and SriLanka but they played poorly in the second half of their innings.

 

[zarak]

Besides the Hong Kong game with India

All teams batting second in Dubai have won. Nothing has been dispelled

When it comes down to one ball it's hard to say it was an advantage. India could have beaten us and we could have easily beaten them.

 

[zarak]

Well said sir .
I watched the games and ball comes on nicely under lights . Sri Lankan batters look like England t20 batters under lights - truth is they have been the weakest Asian team and they made through against india . 9/10 times india will win .

See the match and note how easy the batters could play india under lights . Stats don’t lie . T20 cricket - margins of win and loss are small . 10 percent easement in conditions can tilt the game ur way anyday

The ball swings under lights too. It's up to the team to make the most. Champion teams do not rely on the toss. India was good enough to beat them batting first.

I hope Pakistan bats first and wins the final

 

[BunnyRabbit]

Well rule means every team will have to follow it at any venue at any time the match is being played.

Can't just make a rule exclusively for t20is played in UAE.

For example chasing in SL is more difficult apparently.

So variations will exist all the time.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

If pak vs sl and finals are also won by teams chasing then there is no point having matches in UAE

 

[Rana]

Well rule means every team will have to follow it at any venue at any time the match is being played.

Can't just make a rule exclusively for t20is played in UAE.

For example chasing in SL is more difficult apparently.

So variations will exist all the time.

I clearly mentioned in OP that it has to be a universal rule

Dubai isn’t the only weird venue in the world

ICC introduced the Supersub rule in 2006, there is nothing wrong in reintroducing it now with changes

The issue with the initial rule was that you were allowed only one sub and you could not change your team after the toss as I have suggested. I remember there was one game where England named an XI against Pakistan (in Rawal Pindi I believe) and as soon as they lost the toss and were asked to field, they applied the supersub rule and dropped a batsman into a bowler. Had they batted second, they would have changed a bowler into a batsman.

The rule was good but it needs tweaking.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Some of the fans here are acting like sore losers. Taking all the credit away from those teams that actually care about Asia Cup and are performing well in it.

 

[Gayle_Force]

I clearly mentioned in OP that it has to be a universal rule

Dubai isn’t the only weird venue in the world

ICC introduced the Supersub rule in 2006, there is nothing wrong in reintroducing it now with changes

The issue with the initial rule was that you were allowed only one sub and you could not change your team after the toss as I have suggested. I remember there was one game where England named an XI against Pakistan (in Rawal Pindi I believe) and as soon as they lost the toss and were asked to field, they applied the supersub rule and dropped a batsman into a bowler. Had they batted second, they would have changed a bowler into a batsman.

The rule was good but it needs tweaking.

Yea but how does the idea you mentioned in your OP and the rule in this post help the scenario? Wouldn’t teams just make their first XI based on the assumption that they will win the toss? Hence whatever advantage from winning the toss will still remain?

 

[sam_ahm]

I think we've had some very close games and Toss hasn't been that much of a factor. I agree it was last year at the WC, but not now.

In T20s, chasing is generally easier unless you are chasing some above or near 200, because a team batting 2nd knows the target and generally the pitch won't deteriorate much in just 20 overs of the first innings, in fact if anything, it will become better for batting.

In ODIs it is different, there could be some early movement which helps team bowling first at the same time the pitch can deteriorate by the 2nd innings which helps the team bowling second as well. Also there is plenty of time in 50 over cricket which brings a lot more aspects into play.

In T20s teams batting 2nd will win more often than not.

 

[CalculatedRisk]

Here are some methods I found:

https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2...uld-give-each-side-coin-equal-weight-the-spin

https://wisden.com/stories/long-roo...-franklin-pushes-crickets-sealed-envelope/amp

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/...-is-the-fair-thing-to-do-1277744?platform=amp

 

[skhanmac]

why not play during the day? obviously playing under lights in dubai (considering the dew factor) benefits the side batting second.

 

[CalculatedRisk]

why not play during the day? obviously playing under lights in dubai (considering the dew factor) benefits the side batting second.

Tv ratings matter.

 

[MenInG]

Former Team India head coach Ravi Shastri has said that the introduction of super-sub rule can prove to be a "gamechanger" for the shortest format of the game. In a first of its kind, Legends League Cricket (LLC) introduced a super-sub rule as the tournament kicked off with a special benefit match between India Maharajas and Team World Giants at the Eden Gardens on Friday. The unique rule states that one "super substitute" will be available for each team which they can use after the completion of 10 overs in any inning of the match.

However, the teams have to announce the name of these "super sub" players before the start of the game.

Legends League Cricket Match Commissioner Ravi Shastri feels that the introduction of this rule could be a game changer. With the game evolving every year, the former India coach says that the rule might be used in international cricket in the future.

"I see this game evolving all the time. Who knows tomorrow it might be something that's used even at the international level. Don't be surprised because this is one format that can evolve, especially in tournaments like these where you are not bound by certain rules. You can create your own rules in tournaments like these or even in the IPL, or Big Bash. If you want to experiment or try something new, this is the place to do it," the former India allrounder said in Kolkata on Friday.

NDTV

 

[MenInG]

BCCI is looking to introduce its Impact Player rule, which will allow teams to use one tactical substitute in each match in the IPL, after it is smoothly implemented in the domestic men's T20 tournament, the Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy (SMAT), which will begin on October 11. The BCCI clarified the idea of its Impact Player rule, which would let teams deploy one tactical substitute every game, in an email to its state associations.

As per media report, the BCCI has been eager to introduce the tactical substitute in the IPL for the past few years but has decided it would be wise to do so in the SMAT first.

If all goes as planned, the Impact Player replacement will appear in IPL 2023.

"With the ever-growing popularity of T20 cricket, it is imperative that we look at introducing new dimensions which will make this format more attractive and interesting not only for our viewers but also the participating teams from a strategic viewpoint. The BCCI would like to introduce the concept of 'IMPACT PLAYER' wherein participating teams could replace one member of its playing XI during a T20 match based on the context of the game," the BCCI's email said.

Along with the starting eleven, teams will name four substitutes in their team sheet at the toss and use one of the four during the match.

The player will be able to bat and bowl his full allotted number of overs and can replace any starting XI player at any time up until the completion of the 14th over of either innings. The Impact Player rule has a broad tactical range, and there are no actual limitations on the role he can perform. If the team only utilises 11 batters, the Impact Player, for instance, can take the place of a hitter who has already been dismissed and still get to bat. He could also take the place of a bowler who has already bowled a few overs and still get to complete his four-over allotment.

Comparing the Impact Player rule to other tactical-substitute methods that have been tested elsewhere, it offers more tactical freedom. In the ODI Supersub system that was in existence in 2005 and 2006, the Supersub's duty coincided with that of the player he replaced, which meant he could only bowl the remaining overs from the replacement player's quota and could not bat if the original player had already been dismissed.

The X-Factor rule, which is in effect in the BBL in Australia, permits teams to substitute a member of their starting XI at the halfway point of the first innings (the ten-over mark in a complete T20 game), provided that the replacement player has not yet batted or bowled more than one over.

The regulation might lessen the effect of the toss. For instance, a team has the chance to improve its bowling arsenal for the challenge of bowling second when it loses the toss and the dew settles in. Similar to this, the club hitting second may add a batter to its lineup if the pitch is turning square. The decision will also assist teams in minimising the effects of a player suffering an injury during the contest.

With two exceptions: if a batting side sends in the Impact Player at the fall of a wicket or if the fielding team substitutes the Impact Player for an injured fielder in the middle of an over, the Impact Player can only be introduced at the end of an over and not during it.

The player who was replaced cannot play again, not even as a replacement outfield.

A bowler who has bowled two beamers in an over and is suspended can be substituted by the Impact Player, but that player is not permitted to bowl.

Will shortened games permit teams to use an Impact Player?

Yes, but not if the contest is cut short to fewer than 10 overs on each side due to a delayed start. With a sliding cut-off point, the Impact Player can be introduced if the planned number of overs each inning is greater than ten. For instance, in a game of 17 overs on each side, the Impact Player may enter the field before the 13th over of either inning has been completed. He can enter before the end of the ninth over in an 11-overs-aside match.

Regardless of how many overs are reduced, both teams can deploy an Impact Player if the game starts as a full T20 game and the side batting first has faced at least 10 overs when play is stopped.

The second team may still use its Impact Player if the match is altered so that one team has already used its Impact Player but the second innings is still longer than ten overs, for example, before the end of the seventh over in a nine-over innings or before the end of the third over in a five-over inning.

 

[Madplayer]

I remember Tendulkar had once suggested playing 4 innings of 25 overs each in ODIs to minimize the impact of toss, test style. He was ridiculed by everybody and their dog

I guess the only thing you could do is make better pitches.

 

[happydavy]

I remember Tendulkar had once suggested playing 4 innings of 25 overs each in ODIs to minimize the impact of toss, test style. He was ridiculed by everybody and their dog

I guess the only thing you could do is make better pitches.

He did suggest the idea in 2009 and no one significant ever ridiculed his idea. ICC headed by Dave Richardson in those days even promised to experiment with this format for a few matches in south africa. The thing where it got stuck, and for the right reasons, was that it was turning out to be 2 back to back 25 overs game, gelled into a single game and that made no sense. Tendulkar's concern though was very valid, he had said that 75% of odi games results can be predicted just after the toss.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

I remember that super sub rule and really liked it at that time. It helped India a lot at that time and gave our team the flexibility because we didn't have any genuine allrounder at that time.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Don't like this super sub rule one bit . They should ban concussion substitutes as well.

There used to be a chemical sprayed on certain grounds where there was heavy dew. Not sure what happened to that. I remember it being used particularly in the Mohali SF which was another ridiculously easy place to chase under lights.

 

[Madplayer]

He did suggest the idea in 2009 and no one significant ever ridiculed his idea. ICC headed by Dave Richardson in those days even promised to experiment with this format for a few matches in south africa. The thing where it got stuck, and for the right reasons, was that it was turning out to be 2 back to back 25 overs game, gelled into a single game and that made no sense. Tendulkar's concern though was very valid, he had said that 75% of odi games results can be predicted just after the toss.

His concern was valid but the suggestion was never going to fly. Apart from the reason you mentioned, it would have also further lengthened the duration of the game.

 

[Gayle_Force]

I remember that super sub rule and really liked it at that time. It helped India a lot at that time and gave our team the flexibility because we didn't have any genuine allrounder at that time.

Yea effectively this rule penalizes all rounders as teams will have no need for them.

 

[Madplayer]

I think the team that loses the toss should be given 3-5 extra overs of powerplay.

 

[sweep_shot]

I think Sri Lanka have proven in the Asia Cup final that toss advantage is simply a lame excuse.

Good teams should be able to win in any situation.