On restoring the balance between bat and ball

A batsman’s game... Virender Sehwag hammers a ball to the boundary during a Group B match between India and Pakistan in the Asia Cup.-AP

There is no doubt that the spectators relish watching the ball race to the boundary or disappear into the stands on a regular basis, but an overdose of anything will create ennui just about as quickly as T20 has gained in popularity.

The current edition of the Asia Cup has brought about certain aspects that are too obvious to be ignored. The successful chase in a group match by India against Pakistan with plenty of overs to spare goes to show that T20 has completely changed the mindset of the current generation.

While that is one way of looking at it, the other side of the coin is that cricket is gradually ceasing to be a contest between bat and ball. The keyword is “contest” here and after seeing the teams amass huge scores, the time has come for the administrators to think hard to ensure the game does not become a batsman’s diktat completely. There is no doubt that the spectators relish watching the ball race to the boundary or disappear into the stands on a regular basis, but an overdose of anything will create ennui just about as quickly as T20 has gained in popularity.

The Asia Cup coming in the wake of the Indian Premier League seems to have influenced the players into thinking that a score of 350 is possible on a regular basis. Coming back to the match between India and Pakistan, though Virender Sehwag and Suresh Raina deserve to be complimented for their excellent displays, one must try and see if the rules need a few modifications in order to restore the balance between bat and ball.

The pitches always grab one’s attention, but here again it will be difficult to produce a bouncy track, like the one at WACA, in the sub-continent. That being the case, the rules need to be revised to help give the bowlers something to stop the batsmen from pulverising them day in and day out.

One of the rules that can be tweaked a bit to give the bowlers some extra power is the bouncer. Currently, a bowler is allowed to bowl only one short-pitched delivery in an over and that too not head high. Violating this rule entails conceding an extra. So, once a bowler uses that restricted weapon off the first ball of his over, the batsmen feel secure enough to go on their front foot and smash the bowler right through the over.

The one bouncer per over rule deprives the bowlers the chance to set a batsman up. And with the pitches being unhelpful, the bowlers end up fighting a losing battle more often than not. Besides, if a team plays a couple of spinners in the XI, the number of bouncers bowled in an innings is reduced even further.

The one bouncer per over rule logically suggests that a side can bowl 50 short-pitched deliveries in an innings. That being the case, the side should be allowed to utilise those 50 short-pitched deliveries anytime during the innings subject to not more than three in an over.

It will be argued that one or two bouncers per over are allowed in Tests, but in limited overs cricket, the bowlers are forced to bowl at the batsmen due to stringent wide laws. The introduction of a free hit following a no-ball has added to the extraordinary demands that already exist for a bowler. With just about everything loaded in favour of the batsmen, the bowlers have to be given some avenue to make cricket a contest.

When the fielding side is allowed to bowl 50 short-pitched deliveries at random, it will give the bowlers some ammunition to utilise to the optimum. Seeing a fast bowler like Brett Lee or Dale Steyn conceding around six runs and over does not reflect the genuine abilities of the players. Agreed that the bowlers have to be able to adjust to different conditions, but the same applies to the batsmen as well. There will be quite a few batsmen who will probably change their approach if the restrictions on short-pitched deliveries are altered. The administrators have to realise that the 50-over format already faces a threat due to the enormous success of the T20 format and as such an extended run orgy over 50 overs will drive spectators away from the grounds sooner or later.

The public look for wholesome entertainment no doubt, but it is a proven fact that a movie does not draw crowds if the script is the same as in the earlier films. Hence a few changes have to be brought about to make the game interesting and thereby retain the interest of the people.

I am sure that the discerning public will love to see a keen contest even though the ball does not get to travel to the boundary too frequently. This happens only when there is enough assistance for the bowlers or if they are given more leeway by changing the rules pertaining to short-pitched delivery. I am positive that a hard-fought low scoring game (250-275 these days) can keep the spectators on the edge of their seats as much as an exciting T20 match can. It is imperative now for the administrators to not only preserve the existing bowlers but also ensure that youngsters take up bowling in the years to come. Otherwise, there is every possibility that the game will cease to fascinate the public due to the absence of a real contest. That is a contest between bat and ball.