The Line-belongs-to-the-Batsmen overstepping rule is Anti Fast Bowlers

[Ram]

Need to get this off my chest..

 

The bowlers union need to protest this stupid rule.. Does anyone realize how hard it is for a human  - specifically of the fast bowler variety - to run in from 20m away at an average speed of 10-12 mph, stick your landing on a very constricted piece of real estate, release a 5.5 ounce projectile at the precise moment so that it lands in a desired location on a 22 yard strip, while also focusing on the wrist position at release AND keep keep half an eye on what the batsmen is doing?!

 

And oh btw you have to do all of the above within a third of a second (or less). 

 

If the intent of the no ball rule is to ensure there is a minimum distance between the batsmen and bowler - which is fair - for Pete's sake can we atleast give the poor bowlers the width of the crease line as margin of error? Basically - if you have any part of your foot on or behind the line at the time of landing, it is a legal delivery.. if you overstep the line completely - it is a no-ball...

 

 

[WeStMiDz]

The rules are the rules, everybody is aware of it. With hard work, discipline and smart training methods you can avoid such basic errors. See the example of the England team recently who went a remarkable stretch of time without bowling a single no ball.

[Ram]

47 minutes ago, WeStMiDz said:

The rules are the rules, everybody is aware of it. With hard work, discipline and smart training methods you can avoid such basic errors. See the example of the England team recently who went a remarkable stretch of time without bowling a single no ball.

If you give the fast bowlers the crease line, you could potentially unlock 3-5% extra effort/pace, which is good for world cricket. 

[SK_IH]

i agree in bowlers's case line should belong to the bowlers. 

[Vilander]

Bowlers should imagine a line inside the line and aim for it. Its just a loss for couple of km I think Ishant does not want it so oversteps

[goose]

moving the limit from the rear edge of the bowling crease to the front edge is arbitrary. if you feel strongly that the distance between bat and bowler should be be reduced then say so.

[Ram]

46 minutes ago, goose said:

moving the limit from the rear edge of the bowling crease to the front edge is arbitrary. if you feel strongly that the distance between bat and bowler should be be reduced then say so.

Its not about the distance.. As an amateur medium pacer myself, almost all of my run is consumed thinking about my front foot landing as opposed to focusing on the delivery I want to bowl.. Obviously - The Pros will have much better muscle memory than I do and it would not be as big of a problem.. However, the essence of my point is this - We should unshackle our fast bowler friends and enable them to focus all of their energies/momentum on delivering the most penetrative delivery, as opposed to worrying about where they land their foot. I would not even mind if we changed the no ball rule completely so that the only condition for a legal delivery is that bowlers' back leg must land at some spot between the front and back crease lines. We can scientifically prove that the batsmen is at no greater dis-advantage if the point of release is 22 yards or 21.7 yards.. 

 

P.S; On similar lines - We should completely abolish running. Batsmen dont need to be endurance athletes. They just need to be able to See Ball - Hit Ball. 

[goose]

I know what you mean but there has to be a line (pun intended) and wherever that line is players will push it

[fineleg]

1 hour ago, Ram said:

 

P.S; On similar lines - We should completely abolish running. They just need to be able to See Ball - Hit Ball. 

sriram, seriously? This makes this thread a joke!

Edited December 11, 2018 by fineleg

[goose]

to hell with running!

[CSK Fan]

No running, we need more bellies for more strength in shots

[CSK Fan]

I would like to know what % of the no balls are marginal, ie. where the foot is on the line and not beyond. I am suspecting not that many

[mancalledsting]

need to end up with a line somewhere eventually 

[sandeep]

7 hours ago, Ram said:

Need to get this off my chest..

 

The bowlers union need to protest this stupid rule.. Does anyone realize how hard it is for a human  - specifically of the fast bowler variety - to run in from 20m away at an average speed of 10-12 mph, stick your landing on a very constricted piece of real estate, release a 5.5 ounce projectile at the precise moment so that it lands in a desired location on a 22 yard strip, while also focusing on the wrist position at release AND keep keep half an eye on what the batsmen is doing?!

 

And oh btw you have to do all of the above within a third of a second (or less). 

 

If the intent of the no ball rule is to ensure there is a minimum distance between the batsmen and bowler - which is fair - for Pete's sake can we atleast give the poor bowlers the width of the crease line as margin of error? Basically - if you have any part of your foot on or behind the line at the time of landing, it is a legal delivery.. if you overstep the line completely - it is a no-ball...

 

 

Calm yo tits.  Will you post a similar rant if the bowler then misses the line by a few milimeters?  The line is there.  Whether the final line is a few ticks this way or that shouldn't make a difference. A mistake is a mistake.  

[Sachinism]

Sorry your post doesn't make sense. 

You draw a line somewhere and you don't cross it.

 

In this case it's the back of crease. As a bowler, you can stay anywhere behind it and be fine. But if you choose to get on the edge of it, that's at their prerogative. 

[Ram]

2 hours ago, fineleg said:

sriram, seriously? This makes this thread a joke!

Not really. If I want to see people run, I will tune into the track events at Olympics. 

 

Cricket is about Ball Versus Bat, not How much energy a batsmen has left to face the next ball after running 3 runs.. 

[Ram]

1 hour ago, Sachinism said:

Sorry your post doesn't make sense. 

You draw a line somewhere and you don't cross it.

 

In this case it's the back of crease. As a bowler, you can stay anywhere behind it and be fine. But if you choose to get on the edge of it, that's at their prerogative. 

I dont think I have been able to clearly articulate my thoughts here so far.. I know you have played your fair share of cricket.. How much energy do you think you would able to expend at the time of your delivery stride if your only constraint is that you have land your back foot within the two crease lines.. It essentially gives you a landing zone that is almost a metre long, as opposed to 1.5 inch think line that the  bowlers have to work with today..

[zen]

One has to draw the line somewhere, which is what the drawn line is

 

the line belongs to the umpire 

Edited December 11, 2018 by zen

[Sachinism]

45 minutes ago, Ram said:

I dont think I have been able to clearly articulate my thoughts here so far.. I know you have played your fair share of cricket.. How much energy do you think you would able to expend at the time of your delivery stride if your only constraint is that you have land your back foot within the two crease lines.. It essentially gives you a landing zone that is almost a metre long, as opposed to 1.5 inch think line that the  bowlers have to work with today..

The thing is, your delivery stride is generally fairly consistent. There shouldn't be a huge change in that stride, as you do it over and over in training and in matches over the years. 

 

You're not wrong that it would make it easier; gives an inch back to the bowler. But there is a real simple remedy, start a 1/4" further behind than usual. It's a risk-reward thing. 

The real issue is bowlers trying to make use of every millimetre available to them, where margin of error becomes extremely small. A similar thing will happen with your proposal, over time bowlers will look to make use of every millimetre available and begin breaching that on occasion.

 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

The current rules are fair when seen as a big picture. Who does the crease-line belong to ? The batting side or the bowling side ? The answer is BOTH. 
This is why when it comes to no-balls, the line belongs to the batsman but when it comes to run-outs, the line belongs to the fielding side.