Supposing the changes are brought in,they will be-
1.The bowler will come running in and at the time of delivery will bowl from either of the two hands.
2.The bowler can also run in middle(that is directly behind the umpire)and bowl from any of two-Over the wicket or around the wicket,the decision being taken at the last moment.Though i can't see where the non-striker will be standing if this is allowed,maybe directly opposite to the place where a runner stands for an injured batsman while the crease has to be extended that long.
3.The option 2 causes a problem as any run out at non-striker's end cannot be given by the on-field umpire so it would be better if the non-striker stands in the umpire's position thus effectively removing the umpire at non-striker's end.
4.Now the non-striker obstructs the view of the batsman,so it would be better if the non-striker is also removed.Anyway what's the use of him,all he does is increase the probability of getting out and anyway at a time only one can bat.
Also Kevin Pietersen should be given an OBE for his innovations(that is introducing the baseball shot into international cricket) and bowlers should be wary of his future inventions like the following-
Instead of running after hitting,we can use the unicycle to score a run.
No comments:
Post a Comment