Twenty-20 not so perfect after all
Sambit Bal doesnt seem too impressed with the idea of Twenty-20
. He is critical of the fact that the game allows batsmen a distinct advantage
and credits bowlers who are content at just keeping the runrate low.
I think one option would be to have Twenty-20 games with 11 players but only six are allowed to bat, not all eleven. Allow a maximum of six overs per bowler, not five. This means there could be around two front-line bowlers and the rest of the eight overs could be shared by the part-timers. This reduces the impact of the batting team going berserk even when they are at 40/2 in 3 overs since now they only have three more wickets in hand and have to bat for another 17 overs. If the number of players was 11, they would merrily smack the ball around, safe in the knowledge that their batting arsenal hasnt yet padded up. In addition, allowing six overs per bowler means that there is an incentive for the team to have specialist bowlers rather than relying on part-timers. If you only allowed four overs per bowler, as the case is currently
, then that encourages teams to stack up their sides with batsmen and relying primarily on part-timers to do the bowling.