The match score shouldn't be any consideration - if the batsmen are that good, a match can have 700 runs. But, what I wish is a contest between sides batting first & second - 350 or 150 runs doesn't bother me, as long as the match is in active contest till 95th over at least. In 1994, SRL failed by 4 runs chasing 333 against WI - in current context, that was like 450 vs 445; but that was a wonderful contest; in WC2015, AUS-NZ 1st match was also a wonderful contest.
Problem is, the game is based on contest between bat & ball - if one side is given undue favor, it distorts the balance of the game; which often results into one sided contest. Obviously, teams also have to match - for example, last ENG-PAK match, in a bowling context could have ended as ENG 256/9, PAK 170/10 - the gap is still same, around 35%, because the contestant are not remotely close.
GOOD POINT. PAKISTAN HAS JUST NOT BEEN ABLE TO MATCH ENGLAND IN ODI'S IN RECENT YEARS. EVEN WHEN WE WERE A GOOD ODI SIDE IN THE 90'S, WE USED TO STRUGGLE AGAINST ENGLAND IN ENGLAND.
How we can restore the balance of the game - again, it's not about high score or low score? In most sports, I have seen, in the rule of the game, they keep some scope for both internal contestants (in Cricket's contest batsman vs bowler) to make a come back, of fight back. We need to bring that strategic scopes for both sides back in this game, so that you can make a come back - otherwise it becomes a one sided flood gate. In cricket's case, we have to bring scopes to bowling side to make a come back, because the game odds are favouring the batting skills (nothing wrong in that).
TRUE, WHO WANTS TO BE A BOWLER NOWADAYS
To do that, we have to bring some rules, that actually allows bowlers (or fielding side) to catch you off-guard. Batsmen can enjoy their luxury, but they must not get away with mistakes. Corruption is a system starts, when offenders can get out of jail after committing a crime. In that regard, I would like to see the following changes in the game -
1. Minimum boundary length of 75 metres, where ever possible, & the spirit should be as longer boundary as possible. AGAIN, I am not against hitting SIX, but I want to give the "strategic scope" to bowlers - I am flighting/pitching up the ball, with modern bat/gear buddy (batsman) you can loft me to crowd 85 metres away; but, but don't mistime or miscue it, you won't get away with that.
NOT PRACTICAL SPECIALLY IN COUNTRIES LIKE NZ. SOME STADIUMS ARE JUST SMALL AND CANT ACCOMMODATE BIG BOUNDARIES.
2. Standard power play like 90s without any regulation of catching fielder - after 15 overs, 4 fielders in side through out. Option is given to the Captain - if you wish, you can keep catching fielders (again, that's the "Strategic scope"), but it can't be forced. Great attaching Captains keep slip even in 45th over, but there is no point forcing teams to occupy a short fine leg & a short 3rd men within 15 metres, when batsmen are banging on belters - it's just making a 7 men fielding unit.
SORRY BUT I DONT THINK IF THE ABOVE WILL CHANGE THINGS MUCH
3. Change in Free hit rule (ideally the No ball as well, but that I can take) - No free hit for foot fault. Bowler is punished enough by conceding 1 extra ball & 1 extra run at least, on top of that he won't get the batsman out. Free hit is allowed only in case of beemers bowled.
I ACTUALLY LIKE THE FREE HIT RULE. THESE PLAYERS HAVE BECOME MILLIONAIRES PLAYING CRICKET. NO BALLS ARE A NUISANCE AND WASTES EVERYBODY'S TIME. BOWLERS NEED TO PRACTISE HARD AND ENSURE THEY DONT OVERSTEP THE LINE.
4. Freedom of bouncer - ideally no restriction, as long as it's below shoulders. But, may be we can restrict it to max 3 per over but not more than 2 against one batsman. That one extra bouncer is the surprise element, which'll restrain many modern Vivs charging down after one short ball is bowled. I LIKE THIS RULE. MAX 3 BOUNCERS IS GOOD AS IT WILL ENCOURAGE BATSMEN TO PLAY THE HOOK AND PULL MORE OFTEN. GOSH I CANT REMEMBER LAST TIME I SAW A HOOK STROKE IN AN ODI. THESE DILSCOOPES AND BUTLER SCOOPES ARE DAMN UGLY.
That's it.
It's hypothetical, but for a standard score of 350 these days, my hunch is, against identical context, if No. 1 is applied, score'll come down to straight around 280 level. Lots of modern greats won't slog sweep, reverse sweep, hit across line/spin, hook/pull on cramped front-foot, charge down the track even with Titanium made bat, if Change 1. is made. It's a bit too easy if I know that my gate keeper won't inform my wife .......
If 1 & 2 is applied, it'll come down to 265 level
If 1, 2 & 3 is applied, may be around 260 level. Not many No balls are bowled these days for obvious reason; BUT, BUT, if a fast bowler is allowed to land his front foot with a little damage of just about 1 run (& that's it), a lot of modern MAESTROS 'll find that the rub of a leather piece is not that nice.
If 1, 2, 3 & 4 is allowed, the same score would come down to 250 level. This'll help the batsmen as well, because they'll learn to avoid short balls & play around it. Viv said that, for his security, he never put on helmet (so that he isn't in false security), which I agree. Rule 4, eventually can help increasing runs for better batsmen as they'll take the advantage of ill directed short balls.
I don't mind playing on ABSOLUTE BELTERS on LIGHTNING OUT FIELDS - please, please, please implement just 1, 3 & 4; then bring the flattest of roads with slick AstroTurf outfield for modern greats & allow them to show their "capability" with titanium made, fibre optic stringed bats against a perfectly flighted leg spin or a good length late out-swing, bowled at military medium pace of say 128km, from someone like "medium pacer" Kapil Dev, bowling with a white, machine sewn, Kookaburra.
I don't mind using 1 new ball each from both ends - all that glitters is not gold. I would really, really like to see how Modern maestros fancy Was-Waq, Ambi-Bish, Mac-Flem, Don-Pol, Lille-Pas, Immi-Sarfu, Marsh-Hold, Had-Chat, Both-Will.... even Kukku-Binney; bowling with 2 brand white things from both ends, when the stage is set by MMHS, someone who passionately love this game without thinking financial benefit.
I THINK TWO NEW BALLS HAS KILLED REVERSE SWING. ALSO WE NEED TO CONSIDER ALLOWING BOWLERS TO BEND THEIR ARMS TO 20 DEGREES WHICH WILL POSSIBLY BRING BACK THE DOOSRA INTO PLAY.
Would really like to have comments on this - missed my lunch today for this silly staff.
)
