5 rules in cricket that could be changed in the future

Ball hitting the wickets
Runs should not be allowed once the ball hits the stumps

Over the years, the game of cricket has evolved and many rules and regulations have undergone many changes. All these have been aimed at making the game more relevant to the audience and also to make the game more challenging for the players.

The MCC, which is responsible for formulating different rules, do take a stock of the existing regulations and if they so decide that the rules are not justified, they can modify it or even discard it. In the end, the game should take the priority, and then the interests of the audiences should be catered to.

However, in the current day and age, when cricket has evolved and has become more 'customer friendly' so to speak, there are few rules which could be looked into, and possibly modified. This will make the game even more engrossing for the audience and for the players.

Here, we take a look at 5 existing rules which are disconcerting, to say the least, and rules which should be modified, or perhaps be done away with.

#1 Ball hitting the wicket, and yet overthrows resulting

While, a batsman can very often get away with a reckless shot, a bowler can evade penalty off a very poor ball, the same cannot be said of a fielder, and mind you, he has not even committed a grave error.

We are talking about a fielder hurling the ball towards the stumps in an attempt to run the batsman out, the ball then collects the stumps, but ricochets and the batsmen are then entitled to gather extra runs.

While the purpose of awarding runs off an overthrow is pretty justified, there should be relook into runs being accumulated after the ball has hit the stumps. In many cases, it is a genuine effort of the fielder to run the batsman out, and if in the process the ball bounces off the stumps, there is absolutely no justice in extra runs being added to the account of the batsman.

Also, then the counter-argument will circle around unnecessary throws, and often around 'show of aggression'. For parity to be maintained, the extra runs, should not be added to the batsman's tally, but out it in extras. Make the batsman earn his run, the game is already titled in the favour of the people wielding the willow.

Taking it a step further, this rule can also be revoked, no easy runs on the offing for a genuine effort to get the batsman out.

#2 No run-out if the bat has crossed the crease

Ball crossing the line
The batsman should be deemed in if the bat crosses the line

The sight of a Glenn Maxwell leaping high in the air on the boundary, and then catching the ball and then parrying the ball back into the field of play is a sight to behold. It is deemed within the rules of the game, as the fielder has 'technically' not crossed the boundary ropes since he is airborne.

Now let us shift our focus back to the 22-yards in the centre. A batsman has tapped the ball to short cover and has taken off for a quick run, the fielder hits the stumps, and the batsman seems to have crossed the crease. However, on the slow motion replay, his bat is found to be still in the air, and the red light flashes, he is OUT!

Why not make the rule uniform, and if the bat has crossed the popping crease, irrespective of whether the bat is grounded or not, it should be not out. What matters is that he has made his ground. And so much time will be saved, time which goes into determining whether the bat is grounded or not.

#3 Fielder sliding into the boundary ropes but manages to keep the ball in play

Morgan sliding with the ball
Even if the fielder slides in with the ball, a boundary should not be allowed

Another rule, which could be looked into, is the one where a fielder patrolling the boundary ropes, slides in an effort to keep the ball in play, but in the process his body makes contact with the boundary skirting, and despite the fact that the ball is still in play, the verdict reads a boundary.

Now, this is unfair in two aspects. First, it takes away the brilliance of the fielder, and secondly so much time is taken away from the game. What should ideally matter is that ball has been kept in the field if play, irrespective of where the fielder is!

For instance, in Football, the ball has to be kept in play, and the position of the player does not matter. Modification might be the way to go!

#4 Umpire's call in DRS

Umpire's call
The review should not be lost, if it is an umpire’s call

The Decision Review System was originally put into place to do away with howlers, or decisions which were iffy. However, down the years with several modifications and updates, the system is boisterous enough to deal with several other decisions too.

Despite this, there are several other reservations which have to be looked into. The first one is the concept of 'umpire's call'. According to the latest ICC directive, half of the ball has to now hit a zone that includes the outside of off and leg stumps. This will no doubt be a massive relief for the captains, but yet there could be more revisions to it.

When a captain sends a decision upstairs to be reviewed, there should be fool proof evidence to take away the review from him, if his estimation is not spot on. This is not the case with an umpire's call. Although there is o denying, that the on-field umpires should be given precedence over the players, there is no justification for the rule which wipes off one review from the side appealing. This should be revoked, for if the umpire is right, the captain is also right to some extent.

The decision should go with the umpire, but the review should not be lost, as both parties are partially right.

#5 Like for like replacement before the match

Like for like replacement
The match referee should decide if any player suffers an external injury

Very often we find, more so in Test Cricket that a team is forced to play with only 10 players, as one of the players has been injured during the match, or just after the toss. Now, this is not fair on the part of the aggrieved team, as for no fault of theirs, they are reduced to 10 players.

Thus, the ICC and the MCC should hand over this responsibility to the match referee to decide if the player can be substituted, bearing in mind that the injury is an external one. Also, the player coming in should be in the same mould as the player injured.

Thus, if a genuine all-rounder is injured, an all-rounder should make the cut and not a batsman or a bowler. This will prevent teams from fudging injuries to take undue advantage of the rule.

Brand-new app in a brand-new avatar! Download CricRocket for fast cricket scores, rocket flicks, super notifications and much more! 🚀☄️

Quick Links