G_B_ Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 well for starters the bowler will bowl pies. if the batsman missed he will fire one down leg side or bowl a no ball getting the runsinstead the bowler can bowl wides , no balls to bulk up that score
Sachin=GOD Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 This wouldn't work unless the captain is also involved. a bowler only has to convince the Captain to let him bowl within the 1st six overs and then he could bowl badly to give away lots of runs.
someone Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 well for starters the bowler will bowl pies. What exactly is bowling pies or so "loose" deliveries? Each batsman has different strengths and each batsman treats each ball differently. Good balls can go for runs as does poor balls for wickets These cricketers did not bowl no-balls and wides, so to say that they cheated by bowling poorly to give away runs. That hardly makes any sense.
asterix Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 What exactly is bowling pies or so "loose" deliveries? Each batsman has different strengths and each batsman treats each ball differently. Good balls can go for runs as does poor balls for wickets These cricketers did not bowl no-balls and wides, so to say that they cheated by bowling poorly to give away runs. That hardly makes any sense. Bowling length ball on middle or leg is a good start for pies...
someone Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 Bowling length ball on middle or leg is a good start for pies... If you think so, let's just investigate every bowler as every body does that. Look, bowling bad or going away for some runs can never be the reason to label players as cheaters.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 What exactly is bowling pies or so "loose" deliveries? Each batsman has different strengths and each batsman treats each ball differently. Good balls can go for runs as does poor balls for wickets These cricketers did not bowl no-balls and wides, so to say that they cheated by bowling poorly to give away runs. That hardly makes any sense. you set the field for a particular kind of bowling and the don't bowl that way - that will be advantageous to the batsmen.
asterix Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 If you think so, let's just investigate every bowler as every body does that. Look, bowling bad or going away for some runs can never be the reason to label players as cheaters. I agree... But the investigators only have the remit to investigate that only... They are not allowed to investigate more blatant one like match losing noballs, back to back 3 drop catches, batsmen failing to score 14 runs in 12 balls, many umpiring decisions and teams not appealing for run outs...
rkt.india Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 I agree... But the investigators only have the remit to investigate that only... They are not allowed to investigate more blatant one like match losing noballs' date=' [b']back to back 3 drop catches, batsmen failing to score 14 runs in 12 balls, many umpiring decisions and teams not appealing for run outs... Yes. Pakis dropped 5 catches of SRT in WC, something fishy.:nervous: England tied the match they were easily going to win against India chasing 338. Indian collapse against SA looked fishy too.:nervous: England losing to Ireland that too defending a big total. There cannot be more fishy match than that.
rageaddict Posted May 18, 2013 Posted May 18, 2013 Without bowling no balls or 5 wides, no bowler can deliberately give away more than 10 runs in an over. The batsman can get dismissed on the first ball of the over then which new batsman would want to attempt hitting 14 runs from 5 balls.
Recommended Posts