Talk:Short form cricket

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Twenty/20 and bowler restrictions

I made an edit the other day that was subesequently reverted, concerning the restricting of bowlers to four overs each. I removed it from the "changes to the laws" section.

Having just looked at the copy of the laws maintained on the MCC website, then the claim is correct in a way: the laws of cricket does mention limited-over cricket, but it doesn't mention restricting bowlers in any way.

However, I'm standing by the intent of what I did: I removed it because, while the restriction of bowlers is commonplace in any competitive limited-overs match, it is *not* a defining feature of Twenty/20 cricket: indeed, any competitive limited-overs game I've ever come across has been played with a restriction on the number of bowlers, in order to force teams to use at least five bowlers during a match. This formula means that a competitive 20-over match will limit the bowlers to four overs each, because 4 x 5 = 20.

In my view, therefore, mentioning the four-over restriction in the "changes from the laws" section on the Twenty/20 suggests (especially to people who are unfamiliar with cricket) that it is the only 20-over competition in which the bowlers are restricted to four overs each, instead of it being the recognised standard.

Hig Hertenfleurst 18:12, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Firstly, sorry for reverting your change so aggressively - I should have dropped a note here. To respond: The section is quite clearly labelled as changes from the standard Laws of Cricket, and any restriction on the number of overs allowed to each bowler is such a change. The sections for Cricket Max and Sixes Cricket both also list explicitly the number of overs allowed to each bowler as a change from the Laws. To not list this detail would either deny the reader the knowledge that bowling is restricted in this way or (if the reader knows about) imply that it is part of the Laws of Cricket. Also, Pro Cricket does not follow the same restrictions - it uses a 20 over format with bowlers restricted to a maximum of 5 overs each, not 4 - so it cannot be said that all limited overs cricket uses a formula requiring 5 bowlers.

I think it may be a good idea to include in the introductory section a blanket statement saying that normally overs are restricted in some way. I'll have a go at adding this - please see what you think. --dmmaus 22:06, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It's a wonderful little semantical question, isn't it? The trouble (as I see it) with talking about over limits in general in short form cricket is that the limitation is not specific to short-form cricket, and that its natural home is in one-day cricket (I did add a brief sentence to this article to a while ago).

I've just had a great idea. I'll go back and lob something more substantial in one-day cricket that mentions the unusual limits in Pro Cricket. You take the bit about over limits back out of here, and modify the sentence in the Twenty/20 section to something like "bowlers are limited to 4 overs, which is the general standard for 20 over cricket, for more information on bowler limits see one-day cricket." Or possibly putting the "for more information about bowler limits" in the bit about Pro Cricket, mentioning it alongside the unusual rule. Maybe in both. Whichever looks better.

This removes the nagging feeling that the bit in short form cricket about over limits is out of place, while keeping the reference in the 20/20 section. Thoughts? Hig Hertenfleurst 23:53, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sounds workable to me. If you want to go ahead and do all this, please do. I'm just as happy leaving it how it is, really, and a bit busy, so I probably won't do it myself. --dmmaus 00:16, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket Max

It is actually a very short form of 2-innings a side cricket (i.e. 3, 4, or Test 5-day)