'World Cup showed imbalance between bat and ball'
Iain O'Brien and Ajit Agarkar discuss some of the recommended changes to playing conditions in one-day cricket made by the ICC Cricket Committee
ESPNcricinfo staff
20-May-2015
At its recent meeting in Mumbai, the ICC Cricket Committee headed by Anil Kumble recommended some changes to the playing conditions that govern one-day cricket. Discussions were also held on matters such as the balance between bat and ball, day-night Test cricket, the durability of the white ball and the size of bats and boundaries. ESPNcricinfo experts, former New Zealand bowler Iain O'Brien and former India bowler Ajit Agarkar examined the issues in detail.
On allowing five fielders outside the 30-yard circle for the last ten overs and removing the batting Powerplay.
Iain O'Brien: The two catchers rule is interesting but I don't have issues with it. I think attacking captains will still keep those men in. The five fielders in the last ten overs was always going to happen. The batting Powerplay was anyway mostly taken in the 36th over. So, it doesn't change much. They all seem pretty obvious ones to me.
Iain O'Brien: The two catchers rule is interesting but I don't have issues with it. I think attacking captains will still keep those men in. The five fielders in the last ten overs was always going to happen. The batting Powerplay was anyway mostly taken in the 36th over. So, it doesn't change much. They all seem pretty obvious ones to me.
On the last ten overs skewing the balance between bat and ball.
Ajit Agarkar: The World Cup was played in Australia and New Zealand where you expect help for the bowlers. Despite that, with the two new balls, the run rate in the last ten overs has gone up. Every captain has said that you need five fielders outside the ring. I would have wanted them do it for the other 40 overs as well. Now with four fielders outside the ring, those 30 middle overs are like a Powerplay. Reverse swing has gone out of the game and the big bats have hampered bowlers.
Ajit Agarkar: The World Cup was played in Australia and New Zealand where you expect help for the bowlers. Despite that, with the two new balls, the run rate in the last ten overs has gone up. Every captain has said that you need five fielders outside the ring. I would have wanted them do it for the other 40 overs as well. Now with four fielders outside the ring, those 30 middle overs are like a Powerplay. Reverse swing has gone out of the game and the big bats have hampered bowlers.
On making it a more level playing field for the bowlers
O'Brien: We want a level playing field. The low-scoring games were some of the most interesting games in the World Cup where scores could be chased or teams at least had a chance of chasing scores. The games which had over a 100 runs scored in the last ten overs were not close games because such scores rarely get chased. Two new balls is a massive thing for me. I suggested a change where you have two new balls for 35 overs and use one of those two balls for the rest of the 15 overs. It gives the bowler a chance of reverse swing and evens out the contest.
O'Brien: We want a level playing field. The low-scoring games were some of the most interesting games in the World Cup where scores could be chased or teams at least had a chance of chasing scores. The games which had over a 100 runs scored in the last ten overs were not close games because such scores rarely get chased. Two new balls is a massive thing for me. I suggested a change where you have two new balls for 35 overs and use one of those two balls for the rest of the 15 overs. It gives the bowler a chance of reverse swing and evens out the contest.
On free-hits for all no balls
Agarkar: It is silly to be honest. You can understand it for front-foot no-balls because it was brought in to increase discipline but to have it for all no-balls does not make sense as you're expecting the bowler to be 100% accurate which is not possible. Even with high full tosses you get banned after two such deliveries, so it is a strange decision. No bowler tries to bowl a beamer intentionally. With the two new balls, the ball does not dip sometimes and you end up bowling a full toss. I don't really like that rule.
Agarkar: It is silly to be honest. You can understand it for front-foot no-balls because it was brought in to increase discipline but to have it for all no-balls does not make sense as you're expecting the bowler to be 100% accurate which is not possible. Even with high full tosses you get banned after two such deliveries, so it is a strange decision. No bowler tries to bowl a beamer intentionally. With the two new balls, the ball does not dip sometimes and you end up bowling a full toss. I don't really like that rule.
O'Brien: If a batsman makes a mistake and a catch is dropped, he is not penalised. So, why penalise the bowler for a small mistake? The front foot one is okay but what about no balls where an extra fielder is outside the circle or when you knock over the bails at the non-strikers end in your action. It is reducing the bowler to being a machine.
On a more prominent seam on the white ball
Agarkar: Even if you alter the ball, you have to find one that lasts for the duration of the innings. It is very vague and I don't think there is an issue with the existing balls. You don't want a ball which is hooping all over the place.
O'Brien: I think it has got more to do with readdressing the balance between bat and ball.
Agarkar: Even if you alter the ball, you have to find one that lasts for the duration of the innings. It is very vague and I don't think there is an issue with the existing balls. You don't want a ball which is hooping all over the place.
O'Brien: I think it has got more to do with readdressing the balance between bat and ball.
On the size of the bats and the boundaries
Agarkar: The size of the boundaries has to be the biggest they can possible be. You can also have a thicker outfield to slow down the outfield. At the moment, it is a boundary the moment the ball beats the fielder in the ring.
O'Brien: I have no issues with the size of the bat. I have an issue with bats that have two pieces of wood which are not supposed to be there. That has made a big difference.
Agarkar: The size of the boundaries has to be the biggest they can possible be. You can also have a thicker outfield to slow down the outfield. At the moment, it is a boundary the moment the ball beats the fielder in the ring.
O'Brien: I have no issues with the size of the bat. I have an issue with bats that have two pieces of wood which are not supposed to be there. That has made a big difference.
On playing Test cricket in 'evening hours'
O'Brien: I'm not a fan of it, the pink ball is not up to it. It goes soft very quickly and does not bounce which stops the seam movement.
Agarkar: I played a Ranji trophy final under lights which was bizarre. We used two white balls with the option of taking a new ball every 40 overs and a compulsory change after 50 overs. The scores were 630 and 590. The ball is a big concern.
O'Brien: I'm not a fan of it, the pink ball is not up to it. It goes soft very quickly and does not bounce which stops the seam movement.
Agarkar: I played a Ranji trophy final under lights which was bizarre. We used two white balls with the option of taking a new ball every 40 overs and a compulsory change after 50 overs. The scores were 630 and 590. The ball is a big concern.