Over limit on younger bowlers bemusing....
We played in a hard fought game on Saturday which we ended up losing by 5 wickets, with the opposition chasing down 260odd with 2 overs to spare. We had a 16 year-old making his debut and he bowled brilliantly at the start, but had to come off after 6 overs. We then brought him back and he managed to get out Slinfold's overseas number 3 who would have made it a very comfortable win had he stayed in any longer.
With Slinfold needing 30ish off the last 4 overs, we were forced to take our 16 year-old out of the attack despite the fact he was bowling brilliantly, and our new bowler went for 20 off the over changing a very tight game to one where the opposition won relatively easily. The annoying thing is:
- what better opportunity to learn about bowling at the death for a young bowler, and yet we weren't able to give him the chance
- he'll happily bowl all night at nets....far more than 6 overs and without a break for bowling at the other end
So it seems to me the rule deprives youngsters of opportunities to advance their game and doesn't have the desired effect - to protect their bodies. Only some kind of bowling allowance that includes training could do that and clearly that would be idiotic.
Still, nice to play in a tight game, even if we did lose (again!).
7 comments:
More importantly, well batted!
I am not sure the ECB could do anything else, could they? I do not know the facts, but we must give the ECB the benefit of the doubt that they brought in this rule on medical advice. Clearly they cannot prevent over-bowling in practice, but is it not the adrenaline of a real-game situation that is most likely to result in injury?
I also don't agree that you couldn't bowl him at the death - this is just a timing issue. The decision must have been whether to bring him back immediately and gamble to get a wicket, or to keep him back a little longer so he could bowl right at the death. The latter could have been an option, as could taking him out of the attack immediately after removing the overseas no. 3.
I think the ECB are culpable of a lot, and I am sure I would have been equally frustrated, but at least there was a choice in the matter.
I don't doubt the ECB's motives - they are entirely positive I'm sure. No one wants youngsters to over-strain their bodies.
However, I'm suggesting there must be an alternative as the current approach has loads of problems with it - eg. a 16 year-old can bowl 3 spells of 6 overs per day, but 3 spells involves warming up 3 times rather than, say, bowling 2 longer spells that would mean more overs while truly loose.
I'm just glad that I wasn't ever affected by all the rules now in place about helmets and over limits. If someone had told me I couldn't bowl at the death in a tight game when I was the best bowler for the job, I may have been tempted to look elsewhere for entertainment on a Saturday.
Something that I do think the ECB need to be criticised for is their strange rules about "children" in changing rooms. Under 18s aren't officially allowed to change at the same time as the rest of the team, so our best two players on Saturday (one our bowler and the other 17 years old and scored 120 not out) are expected to change at a different time to us. I realise there is normally a smirk when someone starts with "in my day"(!!), but in my day if I'd been asked to change elsewhere when I played adult cricket all the way through my teens I wouldn't have felt part of the team and again would have questioned if it was worth playing as soon as other things competed for my time.
Grrrr!
Agreed does seem a crazy rule, given these 16 year olds are a lot fitter than the rest of us and seem to have far more energy as well. At the other end of the scale, I wonder if they will start to introduce an overs limit for veterans over the age of 55 - could be bad news for Mac & Mave!
I have to agree that it is totally stupid and illogical. I had a similar situation this season when I had to explain to a captain that a 16 year old bowler could not bowl any more overs because of his age. I explained that it was an ECB Directive but, when he asked why, I had to say "Because that is the way it is".
This is a clear case of age discrimination because I can assure you that under 19's are a good deal fitter that over 50's and there is no legislation for them....
good share, great article, very usefull for us...thank you
top [url=http://www.001casino.com/]free casino[/url] coincide the latest [url=http://www.casinolasvegass.com/]casino las vegas[/url] unshackled no deposit perk at the leading [url=http://www.baywatchcasino.com/]spare casino games
[/url].
Post a Comment