A ban is drastic
A decision to ban bouncers would be a perfect example of “throwing the baby out with the water” or in another words, an extreme reaction. First of all, in terms of probability, it is far less likely for a batsman to get critically injured by a bouncer than a participant in a more dangerous sport like boxing, car racing and extreme sports. Therefore, banning a bouncer in cricket is akin to asking a boxer not to hit the face or ban all these sports.
Secondly, the design and material used in manufacturing helmets may be improved further, to enhance the safety of the batsman. I don’t think the game should be robbed of the excitement of a bouncer where the bowler attempts to soften the batsman with a well directed bouncer, whereas a capable batsman enjoys hooking it over the head of square leg or fine leg for a four or a six.
From Mr Arish Ehsan
Dubai
Safety measures
Cricket with the advent of the Twenty20 form of the game has come a long way with five-day Test matches to an instant thrill cricket. With the changes in pattern, it has become a batsman dominated game wherein apart from a seldom few, the tactic is to just have the bat and ball contact – and swing really hard. It is all about technique - cricket is about hand-eye co-ordination and reflexes.
There have been instances wherein all the above mentioned has suffered in one way or the other. Some spectators like an adrenaline bursting fast bowler come in full throttle and bowl a lethal bouncer and others prefer a sturdy batsman at the crease who will charge down the track to a fast bowler making a mockery of his speed, line and length.
Better safety measures should be taken wherein the quality of helmets, pitch reports, physical stature of batsman and many other aspects as well.
Already there is one bouncer per over rule. And may I quickly add that a career span of a fast bowler is much shorter than any other role – I may get brick bats for such a statement, but I have seen a lot of them suffering from back, hamstring and foot injuries of late.
From Mr Hyder Ali Mirza
UAE
Bouncers bring out hostilities
With cricket being glorified since ages by its loyal fandom, I believe there won’t be any disagreement when it comes to protecting the players who bring the real shine to the sport. The older rules of reducing bouncers by hanging on the justification of ‘reduced commercial interest’ instead of ‘safeguarding players’ must have been the root cause of it wavering. Cricket Umpire, Harold Dennis, also known as “Dickie” Bird, and the like who encouraged this tactic must re-think their strategy of leaving it to the umpire to decide while the game is on. I seriously wonder the sheer ‘magic’ of their so-called decision of controlling the ball in action! One can’t expect all batsmen to clearly be ready for a bouncer and either go for the hook or safely duck. Somehow, hidden hostility between players and teams is being made legitimate through allowing bouncers. It’s high time that the authorities handle this issue with a tactical approach, safeguarding the best interests of the players.
From Ms Juby Jacob
Dubai
Risks regardless of helmets
Being a cricket tournament organiser myself, it’s always stressed in all the matches that a helmet is mandatory for the batsman, be it while facing a fast or spin bowler. But despite wearing a helmet, Phil Hughes was badly injured, so in my opinion bouncers should be banned altogether from cricket, as it can lead to serious injury or even death.
From a bowler’s point of view, it can be disappointing if bouncers are banned, but keeping in mind that cricket is a gentleman’s game and such unnecessary deliveries should not continue in the game.
From Mr Aju John
UAE
It’s enjoyed!
I had been playing cricket in my home country for the past five to seven years. Bouncers should not to be considered as a legitimate weapon, as it is one of beauties of this game. Even batsmen also enjoy playing bouncers, although they are scared.
Safety precautions are necessary for the players in this game. In the 1980s, Pakistan’s famous batsman, Javed Miandad was also hurt by a bouncer of an Australian bowler and at that time doctors had said that either Miandad will die or become brain dead. That time, it was his career we thought about in the initial stage, but later the world recognised his disability. It is true that time that Miandad did not wear a helmet. We cannot ban bouncers. Why were bouncers not banned when the fast bowlers only existed in Australia or the West Indies. Bouncers were restricted in the 1990s because Asian teams, especially Pakistan, had a lot of fast bowlers and Australia, England and the West Indies did not!
From Mr Tarek Jaffar
UAE
Endangering lives
A bouncer is nothing but an assault and can be dangerous. If you look at the history of cricket, we had Bodyline bowling in the earlier part of this century, where a bouncer was used as a weapon and not in true sportsmanship. Though there is protective gear to ward off bouncers, I feel personally that bouncers have to be avoided to minimise risk and injury. We can’t endanger the life of the sportsman.
From Mr Ranganatha Achar K.
Abu Dhabi
Shouldn’t be a problem
Banning bouncers is similar to cobras without venom. Already, the game of cricket is loaded heavily in favour of the batsman with the field restrictions in power plays. There should be no qualms about bowling a bouncer. Also, a batsman’s caliber is better appreciated when he can play any kind of delivery, bouncer included. When the batsman hooks the bouncer, batting prowess comes to the forefront. A batsman is better judged only when he can negotiate any kind of delivery. If a spinner turns the ball, obviously the pacer should bounce the same. Over a period, the batsmen are provided with multiple protective gears and guards and there is no scope for doing away with bouncers. Banning bouncers will be reduced to child’s play. There may be occasional injuries, but prescribing a ban is like suggesting that if a body is washed ashore on the beach, banning entry into the water. Banning bouncers is banning fast bowling. It will be a dent on the image of the bowling department, and of course, cricket itself!
From Mr C. S. Krishnamurthy
UAE
Difficult decision
The answer to whether bouncing should be banned is no and yes. Yes, it is a weapon for a fast bowler. However, this weapon does not always get him a wicket. It is mostly used to set up the batsman. It is generally the ball after this, which does the trick for the bowler. For example, it is followed by a length ball or the ‘Yorker’ and that is the one that gets the wicket. So why should it be banned? If it is, then it should be equally applied to all sorts of bowling, like leg spins.
The argument can be that the bouncer does physically endanger the batsman, unlike other deliveries. But, I think for that there are enough checks – there are umpires who monitor the unwanted use and there are rules to how many can be bowled in an over. Also, with time, the quality of the headgear has improved. Lastly, most of the wickets these days are not fast.
No, they should not be banned. Fast bowling and the skill to play them is an important ingredient of Test cricket and should be preserved. It also tests the real skill of a batsman.
From Mr Ghanshyam Vyas
UAE
Editors’ note: Is there a news report that you feel strongly about? Something that has to be addressed in the community and requires resolution? Email us on readers@ gulfnews.com. You can also post a comment on our Facebook page or tweet us @GNReaders.
