The Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the guardian of the laws of the game, is open to changing the rules for short bowling after a “global consultation” on the subject.
The MCC World Cricket Committee met recently via video conference to discuss issues facing the game.
“The committee has heard that the MCC will launch a global consultation on whether the law on short-term supply is appropriate for the modern game,” the commission said in a statement issued Monday.
“It is the duty of the MCC to ensure that the laws are applied in a safe manner, a point of view agreed in all sports.
“As concussion research in sports has increased significantly in recent years, it is appropriate for the MCC to continue to monitor short-field bowling laws, as it does with all other laws.
The committee, chaired by Mike Gating, which also includes Kumar Sangakara, Surav Ganguli and Shane Warne, stressed that it maintains a balance between bat and ball.
“There are important aspects that need to be taken into account in the consultation, namely the balance between bat and ball; whether the concussion should be recognized as a different injury to other sufferers; changes that are specific to certain sectors of the game – e.g. Cricket for teenagers and whether lower-ranking batsmen should be given additional protection than the law currently allows.
“The committee discussed the law and agreed that short-level bowling is a key part of the game, especially at the elite level. There was also a discussion about other aspects of the game at all levels that could reduce the risk of injury.
“They agreed to provide feedback during the consultation, which will begin with a study to be disseminated in March 2021 to the specific groups designated to participate in the exercise.”
No solution is expected before 2022. Short-field bowling, of which the bouncer is a part, has been a heated debate lately.
“The data must be collected by these stakeholders by the end of June 2021, after which the results will be discussed by various committees and subcommittees of the Club, as mentioned above, as well as by the International Cricket Council (ICC), during the second half of the year.
“The final proposal and recommendations, whether to change the law or not, will be taken by the MCC Committee in December 2021, with any decision to be published in early 2022.”
The committee also discussed the system for reviewing decisions, especially the “confusing” appeal of the judge.
The Committee discussed the use of the “Arbitrator’s Call” for decisions on LBW taken through the Decision Review System, which some members considered confusing to the viewing audience, especially when the same ball could be either Out
Not depending on the initial decision of the field judge.
“They thought it would be easier if the initial decision was ignored in a review and that there was a simple exit or not, without calling a judge.
The “hitting zone” of the stumps will still be preserved, which had to be hit with at least 50% of the ball to decide the out.
“If such a protocol is introduced, they believe that it should also include a reduction to one failed team review or the loss of the relevant review, regardless of the outcome.”
English spinner Jack Leach, who found himself at the end of the third unperturbed mistake on the day of the opening of the second test against India in Chennai, compared DRS to the referee of the video assistant football (VAR), saying that he was “still controversial”.
The MCC added: “Other members were pleased with the current system, feeling it important to preserve the human element of the field judge’s decision, which takes into account the ‘benefit of doubt’ that exists in arbitrators’ decisions. for many years. They felt that the supporters understood the concept of “Arbitrator’s Call”.
“MCC will share the various views with the ICC Cricket Committee.”
The Committee also considers that the same DRS technology should be used in general.
“The committee believes that the ICC should provide the same technology for all international cricket, instead of relying on the own agreements of the leading TV operators. It also believes that the TV judge should look at repetitions from a neutral point of view, instead of trying to see if there is evidence to overturn the decision on the spot.
“The Commission considers that the soft signal system works well for catches within the 30-yard field circle, but this catch near the border often leaves the referees unnoticed.
“It has been suggested that for such a catch, the field arbitrators may give” unnoticed “instructions to the television arbiter, rather than the clearer soft signal of Out or Not out.”