Building a roof in cricket stadiums (Best Solution?)

[Cricashfaq]

After the terrible weather in England during the Champions Trophy 2013. Lots and lots of matched had to shorten the game even the finals and even one of the game was called off which is a disadvantage for cricket's global growth and the game looks unfair I think building rooftops in places like England could help to proceed the game. These roofs can be used only when it is raining instead of shortening the match..

[Tendulkar_Bhai]

Yes it would but its not practical to build a proper retractable roof. Firstly you would change the conditions by blocking out heat/wind/moisture and possibly make it indoor like. Secondly it would bankrupt the ECB! If u c how long/much it cost to build wimbledon roof( £80m) centre court and such a small area cricket stadiums would cost $$$$$$. However when i was at match i was thinking why cant they have a big plastic cover rather than a proper roof?

[Cricashfaq]

Yes it would but its not practical to build a proper retractable roof. Firstly you would change the conditions by blocking out heat/wind/moisture and possibly make it indoor like. Secondly it would bankrupt the ECB! If u c how long/much it cost to build wimbledon roof( £80m) centre court and such a small area cricket stadiums would cost $$$$$$. However when i was at match i was thinking why cant they have a big plastic cover rather than a proper roof?

Big plastic cover? That would be environmentally restricted and what do you mean by big plastic cover?

[NareshK]

I think in cricket, too much importance is given to wet outfield. Look at Soccer for instance. Even when the field is completely drenched in rain, they continue playing and its a game which involves players continuously running and diving unlike cricket where you dont have to run around that much. If the pitch is covered up well and if its dry, they should take the field immediately. It would lead to some skidding and slipping on the outfield but players should get used to that. :dontknow:

[Lord]

I think in cricket, too much importance is given to wet outfield. Look at Soccer for instance. Even when the field is completely drenched in rain, they continue playing and its a game which involves players continuously running and diving unlike cricket where you dont have to run around that much. If the pitch is covered up well and if its dry, they should take the field immediately. It would lead to some skidding and slipping on the outfield but players should get used to that. :dontknow:

agree,I hate it when they go off at a drop of rain n come back when its completely stopped n ground is bone dry(which takes lot of time)

[Muloghonto]

I think in cricket, too much importance is given to wet outfield. Look at Soccer for instance. Even when the field is completely drenched in rain, they continue playing and its a game which involves players continuously running and diving unlike cricket where you dont have to run around that much. If the pitch is covered up well and if its dry, they should take the field immediately. It would lead to some skidding and slipping on the outfield but players should get used to that. :dontknow:

Err the ball is going to get super wet and then impact the pitch over time. Cant have the ball sloshing around the outfield every 2 outta six deliveries. Or after 40-50 overs of that, pitch will be totally different. As for retractable roof: its very expensive. A football field costs roughly $500 million to make fully functional and enclosed. That too, for short periods of time (football lasts 1-1.5 hours). Over long periods of time, the outfield & pitch will be totally different and impact the game too much. Playing conditions can deteriotate too when its an enclosed environment, particularly when its seriously raining outside. Any enclosure will make it very damp in the interior with that amount of ventilation of damp air comming in over the hours. But yeah, cost is the main thing. Even in India, it would cost 100-150 million per stadium to put a roof on it. Thats too much,really.

[Lord]

Err the ball is going to get super wet and then impact the pitch over time. Cant have the ball sloshing around the outfield every 2 outta six deliveries. Or after 40-50 overs of that, pitch will be totally different. As for retractable roof: its very expensive. A football field costs roughly $500 million to make fully functional and enclosed. That too, for short periods of time (football lasts 1-1.5 hours). Over long periods of time, the outfield & pitch will be totally different and impact the game too much. Playing conditions can deteriotate too when its an enclosed environment, particularly when its seriously raining outside. Any enclosure will make it very damp in the interior with that amount of ventilation of damp air comming in over the hours. But yeah, cost is the main thing. Even in India, it would cost 100-150 million per stadium to put a roof on it. Thats too much,really.

not too much to build on 2-3 stadiums.they make billions anyway

[G_B_]

yeah india should have 2-3 indoor stadiums. Yes there wont be much swing but its worth it

[NareshK]

Err the ball is going to get super wet and then impact the pitch over time. Cant have the ball sloshing around the outfield every 2 outta six deliveries. Or after 40-50 overs of that, pitch will be totally different.

Its still better than having no game at all. If you think like that, there are lots of advantages to teams batting first or bowling first depending on conditions in ODIs. The conditions which you refer to are similar to conditions when there is dew in the outfield. Why is game not stopped then and allowed to continue ? You have to take whatever conditions you get as part of the game and get on with it.