Cricket Reform: A New Zealand View

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28234, 23 March 1957, Page 5

Cricket Reform: A New Zealand View

A LL cricketers will be interested in the recommended reforms suggested by a sub-committee of the M.C.C., and it is important that they should be given careful consideration because, although they apply to English county matches only at the moment, their wider adoption become possible once they are operative within a selected grouping. The objective is the achievement of brighter cricket and the elimination of defensive batting and defensive bowling.

It is important to understand t clearly what is meant by brighter t cricket. Wl.at is intended is a t positive, attacking approach by bowlers and fieldsmen and en- . couragement for stroke-making by batsmen. Wild slogging is out of the question, and has no place in first-class cricket. The present unsatisfactory position is the aftermath of a reaction against the high scoring of the pre-war years and what were considered to be doped pitches which denied skilful bowlers any results from the application of their skill. L.B.W. Rule In order to restore some balance between bat and ball wickets were enlarged and the new l.b.w. rule introduced. At the same time there has been a tendency to produce pitches which would take spin, with the result that many test matches have been played in conditions which appear to have imposed considerable restraint upon batsmen and stroke-making. High scores are now the exception and batting averages have dropped considerably. The new l.b.w. rule,, together with favourable pitches has made the off-spin and in-swing bowler supreme. When the pitches have proved ; satisfactory for the batsmen these • types of bowlers have replied by • aiming at the leg-stump to a ’ packed leg-field. Outswing and leg- > break bowlers have become ex- > ceptional and their absence has < greatly cramped the making of

the most spectacular and enjoy-’ able strokes. It would sfeem that the M.C.C. sub-committee is groping towards some degree of discouragement of the off-spin and in-swing, bowler by limiting the number of leg-side fieldsmen, and presumably it hopes that leg-break and out-swing bowling will thereby become more prevalent. It seems a great pity to legislate against field placing, however, and thereby to limit tactical artistry. It would be far better to return to the old l.b.w. rule in order to restore a balance between the ball which moves into the batsman

and the ball which moves away from him. This seems a better method of achieving the imperative need for x restoring the importance of the out-swinger and the leg-break. Both Hutton and O’Reilly advocate this, Hutton directly and O’Reilly indirectly by his contention that a limited leg field would handicap the leg break on certain types of pitches. Most people watch cricket in order to appreciate the batting, not the bowling. But if batting is to be restored to favour a return to higher scoring is inevitable. At

.the same time better pitches will demand greater bowling skill, which means that such a player as Laker, good though he is, will not be able to produce better figures than his superiors as was the case in that unnatural series of 1956 test matches. Fast Pitches In producing better batting pitches it is imperative that they should be fast, so that strokemaking is assisted and both spin and fast bowlers can benefit from their best deliveries. Scoring would be quicker and the unplayable ball slightly more frequent. Pitches which break up on the first day of a first-class match make cricket farcical and the inability of test teams to produce more than 250 runs in an Innings creates a cautious approach to batting. This has helped to intensify the present problem. In addition, the suggested limitation of an innings to 85 overs may result in a large proportion of maidens becoming more important than wicket taking. A second look at the M.C.C.’s proposed reforms suggests the following revisions and retentions would be wise:— (1) No interference with field „ placing. (2) The return of the old l.b.w. p rule. r (4) Umpires be authorised and " empowered to take a firmer stand e against time wasting. This is an r excellent suggestion. ” <5) Pitches should be fast and y true and not liable to break up d until the match is well advanced, g (6) There is no need to limit the s. size of the boundary if stroke n making is encouraged. Such llmita>t tion might inflict penalty upon o the slow spin bowler who use n flight to deceive the batsman, it _ , Out-swing It is no accident that the finest J post-war test bowler, Lindwall, notwithstanding the use he made of the in-swinger, was and is primarily an out-swing bowler. It is also significant that Miller asserts that Tyson and Statham during their 1954-55 Australian tour began to assert a mastery over the Australian batting when they switched their attack from the leg stump to the off stump during the progress of the second test of that series. Negative leg stump bowling had produced a group of Australian test batsmen who tended to play across the line of flight. Cricket badly needs the restoration of the importance of one of its most difficult but technically satisfying arts —out-swing and leg-break bowling on wickets fast enough to encourage attacking methods and to compel stroke making.