Should the #1 ranked batsman in Tests / ODIs / T20s receive an extra review when batting?

[msb314]

In order to reward the no. 1 ranked batsman in any format - I would propose rewarding him with an extra review in addition to the the numbwe of reviews that his team gets.

I.e. if Kohli is the no. 1 ranked ODI batsman and India have 2 reviews to use in an ODI game - then Kohli would be eligibile to use a total of 3 reviews (provided none of other batsman have used a review).

If someone else has already used the 2 team reviews - this reward system would guarantee the no. 1 ranked batsman one review to use when he is batting.

Of course this would only apply if DRS is available for the game lol.

Thoughts?

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

You have literally butchered the concept of fair play bro.

 

[msb314]

You have literally butchered the concept of fair play bro.

Not really.

Reviews rarely affect the context of a game and it is means to award a batsman by giving him another chance to correct an umpire's mistake - all at the cost of his hardwork and perseverance to reach no. 1 rankings!

 

[CanadianG00se]

You have literally butchered the concept of fair play bro.

This.

 

[Syed1]

How do you come up with these ideas?

 

[Mamba Red]

No it's fine the way it is.

 

[msb314]

How do you come up with these ideas?

It is pretty simple - you should get rewarded for performing to world class levels and becoming the best in the world.

Lets face it - team and player rankings are useless... No one give a crap about them - not even the players themselves. The only "prize" in cricket is winning the WC, thats it!

Atleast incentivizing rankings will give more meaning to them.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Rankings change every week.Everyone who is on the playing field should be equal.

What next,a runner for every batsman aged 30+?An extra fielder in the second innings if the team batting first scores 300+?

You come up with some weird ideas man.

 

[msb314]

Rankings change every week.Everyone who is on the playing field should be equal.

What next,a runner for every batsman aged 30+?An extra fielder in the second innings if the team batting first scores 300+?

You come up with some weird ideas man.

ODI and Test batting rankings change once every few months.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

ODI and Test batting rankings change once every few months.

Okay.Still doesn’t change the point that every player on the field should be equal.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

This is so weird, the rule is so arbitrary.

 

[Savage]

This thread shows why cricket is a batsman's game

 

[Mr.Q]

You come to PP when you’re bored, don’t you?

 

[daytrader]

Why? ��

Would only get harder to dethrone the #1.

 

[hadi123]

No. Part of being a good batsman should be knowing when/when not to take reviews.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Should also get 100 runs added to his tally when he turns up for batting.

 

[UN talkz]

And if someone scores a six of No.1 bowler; he will get only 2 runs

 

[Buffet]

Eh, let's not make more WG grace.

 

[munda_khi]

what about no. 1 bowler.

 

[PakSarZameen]

what about no. 1 bowler.

Can bowl 3 no-balls without getting a free hit

 

[JaDed]

No they already get extra money for the same.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Who are these people? Where have they come from? Where do they get these ideas from? In short "kehna kya chahte ho bhai?"

 

[Hasan123]

No.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Never do you ever

Please never come up with such ideas again. Consider it a gentle warning my brother. Your bhaijaan. Thanks.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Who said player rankings are useless? When you compare any two bowlers or batsmen, they always come into play. Besides, don't you think it is an accomplishment for a player to be ranked #1 in the world?

 

[moghul]

Most of the time we have good discussion threads , but once in a while we have one like this .

 

[Mamoon]

The problem with this idea is that it is going to open a can of worms. What about the number ranked bowler or the number one ranked all-rounder? If we to do the same across other sports, would the likes of Messi and Ronaldo get extra goals because they have won multiple Ballon d'Ors etc?

I do agree that the number one ranked players deserve more recognition, but once you step onto the pitch, the rankings should not be affecting the outcome.

Nonetheless, I appreciate the fact that you like to think out of the box and come up with creative ideas. Please ignore the people who are criticizing you, because neither do have the intelligence to come up with new ideas, they also don't have the guts to step forward because of potential criticism.

Remember - every great idea that shaped the world was deemed stupid by people of no caliber, and no great man has ever managed to escape criticism. If the masses don't agree with you and do not like you, it means that you are speaking the truth.

 

[Buffet]

Who said player rankings are useless? When you compare any two bowlers or batsmen, they always come into play. Besides, don't you think it is an accomplishment for a player to be ranked #1 in the world?

For hyping non-performance you do have to ignore ranking.

 

[The_Odd_One]

For hyping non-performance you do have to ignore ranking.

To add if I may. One does not attain #1 ranking overnight. It takes consistent good performance against the best of your time. It is just a confirmation that you indeed are the best in the world. It would be pretty satisfying to me if I were ranked #1 at something in the whole world.

 

[Buffet]

To add if I may. One does not attain #1 ranking overnight. It takes consistent good performance against the best of your time. It is just a confirmation that you indeed are the best in the world. It would be pretty satisfying to me if I were ranked #1 at something in the whole world.

It was just a lighthearted comment and not directed at anyone.

 

[msb314]

This is so weird, the rule is so arbitrary.

What is arbitrary about it?

 

[msb314]

This thread shows why cricket is a batsman's game

Not quite.

I was going to propose a similar reward mechanism for the no. 1 ranked bowler.

IMO - no. 1 ranked player deserves some sort of reward

 

[msb314]

Why? ��

Would only get harder to dethrone the #1.

Maybe but that is part of the challenge. A no. 1 ranked player should be rewarded for his excellence.

Also - one extra review rarely has context in the grand scheme of things. If a batsman is lucky - he may go on to play a great innings with the help of an overturned review but I doubt it will have a big impact on the frequency of changes in the no. 1 rankings.

 

[msb314]

No. Part of being a good batsman should be knowing when/when not to take reviews.

That is true but in such a reward scheme - the decision of a batsman choosing or not choosing to take a review is rendered mute if he is plumb out. If the review is overturned - it will ensure the "correct" decision is made in the context of the game.

Not only that but I think it is unfair if a batsman has run out of reviews and is then given wrongly out. Atleast this mechanism will ensure such injustice will not happen to the no. 1 ranked batsman. Some may debate that is an unfair advantage but IMO that is a well deserved reward for his hard work

 

[msb314]

Should also get 100 runs added to his tally when he turns up for batting.

And if someone scores a six of No.1 bowler; he will get only 2 runs

That is definitely not what I am implying.

You cannot award a batsman extra "runs" or a bowler extra "wickets" because that is too unfair and also renders statistics and records meaningless because then not all runs will have equal value.

However, I think an extra review is appropriate and a good reward

 

[msb314]

Eh, let's not make more WG grace.

What do you mean?

 

[msb314]

what about no. 1 bowler.

Can bowl 3 no-balls without getting a free hit

I was going to make a separate thread about it soon but I can discuss it here

Some ideas that I have in mind:

1) The no. 1 bowler bowling a no ball will only get penalized with an extra ball and NOT an extra run and free hit as it currently is.

2) The no. 1 bowler can bowl up to 2 bouncers in an over instead of the usual 1.

3) The no. 1 bowler only needs to have 4 fielders inside the ring during the PP overs - instead of the usual 5.

 

[msb314]

Who are these people? Where have they come from? Where do they get these ideas from? In short "kehna kya chahte ho bhai?"

I come from desi parents just like you do!

"Kehna kya chahte ho?" In short - I want to reward batsman for reaching the no. 1 ranking

 

[msb314]

Never do you ever

Please never come up with such ideas again. Consider it a gentle warning my brother. Your bhaijaan. Thanks.

Why not?

 

[msb314]

No.

Why not?

 

[msb314]

Who said player rankings are useless? When you compare any two bowlers or batsmen, they always come into play. Besides, don't you think it is an accomplishment for a player to be ranked #1 in the world?

Rankings are rarely discussed in commentary and in the media? The only thing most analysts bring up is stats of players which are far more well known.

I know Kohli is the no. 1 ranked ODI batsman because it is fairly obvious and I know Babar is the no. 1 ranked T20 batsman because he is Pakistan

For Tests and the rankings for bowlers and all-rounders - I have no clue... Part of the reason is not enough recognition is given. I wouldn't be surprised if the players themselves don't know lol.

Atleast such a reward will bring rankings into discussion when players are playing and commentators are discussion why he has an extra review It will bring added motivation for a player to achieve no. 1 ranking.

 

[msb314]

Most of the time we have good discussion threads , but once in a while we have one like this .

Lets make a deal.

How about you make a thread and I will judge if it is a "good discussion" or "one like this"?

 

[msb314]

To add if I may. One does not attain #1 ranking overnight. It takes consistent good performance against the best of your time. It is just a confirmation that you indeed are the best in the world. It would be pretty satisfying to me if I were ranked #1 at something in the whole world.

Refer to post 42 - i briefly touched on this topic

 

[msb314]

The problem with this idea is that it is going to open a can of worms. What about the number ranked bowler or the number one ranked all-rounder? If we to do the same across other sports, would the likes of Messi and Ronaldo get extra goals because they have won multiple Ballon d'Ors etc?

I do agree that the number one ranked players deserve more recognition, but once you step onto the pitch, the rankings should not be affecting the outcome.

Nonetheless, I appreciate the fact that you like to think out of the box and come up with creative ideas. Please ignore the people who are criticizing you, because neither do have the intelligence to come up with new ideas, they also don't have the guts to step forward because of potential criticism.

Remember - every great idea that shaped the world was deemed stupid by people of no caliber, and no great man has ever managed to escape criticism. If the masses don't agree with you and do not like you, it means that you are speaking the truth.

First of all - special thank you for your kind works and encouragement! Greatly appreciated

Extra "goals" will be like extra runs or wickets and that will be considered too unfair to the opposition and will render stats and achievements useless since not all runs and wickets will not have equal value.

The extra review is a subtle reward that will rarely impact the outcome of a game. If a team complains about an extra review that got overturned - then they are clutching at straws since they did not do enough of a good job to dismiss the batsman lawfully. Some already argue that reviews should be not be limited in the first place so as to give everyone a fair chance to overturn a incorrect decision

With regards to the a reward system for no. 1 ranked bowler - here are some of the things that I propose:

1) The no. 1 bowler bowling a no ball will only get penalized with an extra ball and NOT an extra run and free hit as it currently is.

2) The no. 1 bowler can bowl up to 2 bouncers in an over instead of the usual 1.

3) The no. 1 bowler only needs to have 4 fielders inside the ring during the PP overs - instead of the usual 5.

All of the above will help in some way without an unfair advantage like "extra wickets"

Just my $0.02

 

[msb314]

No they already get extra money for the same.

Really?

Do they get financial reward for being no. 1? Do you have a source?

 

[JaDed]

Really?

Do they get financial reward for being no. 1? Do you have a source?

Actually my bad I thought you meant team,so don't think so,unless the board gives A grade contract.

 

[CobraRules]

It's an innovative idea. But why do you want the incentives for No.1 bowler and No. 1 all rounder to be different from the batsman? They can also have extra review for bowling or batting.

 

[CobraRules]

The major complication will be that Cricket is a team sport. There should not be much efforts by ICC to admire individuals. It is already being done by providing a players ranking which is non existent in other team sports. Is there any rankings for Best Forward, Mid fielders, Defence, Goalkeepers in soccer?

Besides, Too much admiration for individuals may hamper the team spirit. Players will play for their personal glory to top the players ranking.
A Test opener will be a disadvantaged player. A LOI Top order player may play for ratings.

Instead of Individuals, the performance of an individual in winning a match should only matter. And they are already being rewarded monetarily with Player of Match awards.

 

[hadi123]

That is true but in such a reward scheme - the decision of a batsman choosing or not choosing to take a review is rendered mute if he is plumb out. If the review is overturned - it will ensure the "correct" decision is made in the context of the game.

Not only that but I think it is unfair if a batsman has run out of reviews and is then given wrongly out. Atleast this mechanism will ensure such injustice will not happen to the no. 1 ranked batsman. Some may debate that is an unfair advantage but IMO that is a well deserved reward for his hard work

I don't think it's that unfair. Teams need to learn when to take the review and when not to. Cricket is team sport after all, not individuals.

 

[Kohli The King of Chase]

This is like a teacher giving extra marks to a student who already gets 90 and intentionally failing the students who are at the border line.


This is like the rich becoming richer and the poor, poorer.

Typical desi mentality

No wonder CORRUPTION is at it's peak here in the Indian sub continent.

You have reference, get a job. You have money, win a case. You have power, grab the land. You have # 1 ranking, get an extra review

 

[JaDed]

This is like a teacher giving extra marks to a student who already gets 90 and intentionally failing the students who are at the border line.


This is like the rich becoming richer and the poor, poorer.

Typical desi mentality

No wonder CORRUPTION is at it's peak here in the Indian sub continent.

You have reference, get a job. You have money, win a case. You have power, grab the land. You have # 1 ranking, get an extra review

Don't take out your frustrations on this thread, it's only an idea to reward someone for having #1 ranking,where they worked hard to get there ,not their children or anything you can counter it and move on ,also corruption is different from anything you have mentioned in second paragraph, Capitalism and developed countries work on references as well.

 

[Azeem Zafar]

How do you guys even come up with these absurd ideas.

 

[Finisher]

Does the bowler get any reward for getting the number 1 Batsman out?

 

[Kohli The King of Chase]

Don't take out your frustrations on this thread, it's only an idea to reward someone for having #1 ranking,where they worked hard to get there ,not their children or anything you can counter it and move on ,also corruption is different from anything you have mentioned in second paragraph, Capitalism and developed countries work on references as well.

References are good, but not for undeserving ones.

Yeah, I am frustrated by corruption, and I don't want to see that in cricket as well.

Oh, I don't have much to comment, when you are lacking in English language.

 

[Syed1]

Does the bowler get any reward for getting the number 1 Batsman out?

New idea... If you get the number one bat out, the non-striking batsman is also automatically out.

 

[JaDed]

References are good, but not for undeserving ones.

Yeah, I am frustrated by corruption, and I don't want to see that in cricket as well.

Oh, I don't have much to comment, when you are lacking in English language.

Er What?

 

[DeadBall]

Kind of on the same theme but when T20 will have totally removed Tests and ODIs in the near future, they could have a free hit kind of rule where the best batsman (to be determined before the match) could have two lives.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Rankings are rarely discussed in commentary and in the media? The only thing most analysts bring up is stats of players which are far more well known.

I know Kohli is the no. 1 ranked ODI batsman because it is fairly obvious and I know Babar is the no. 1 ranked T20 batsman because he is Pakistan

For Tests and the rankings for bowlers and all-rounders - I have no clue... Part of the reason is not enough recognition is given. I wouldn't be surprised if the players themselves don't know lol.

Atleast such a reward will bring rankings into discussion when players are playing and commentators are discussion why he has an extra review It will bring added motivation for a player to achieve no. 1 ranking.

Satisfaction is for the player himself. It is a big deal to be #1 in something in the whole world. I do not like the idea of giving any on-field advantage. However, they may be rewarded by their individual boards in the form of a bonus perhaps.