To find the Path, cricket has to stumble and innovate

So is the idea of gaining two dismissals with one ball, a caught behind and a run-out in a frantic run-chase for example, because it rewards initiative and flair. And the idea of testing out actions at the ICC Trophy is a very good beginning provided it has a strong ending. I know of a few bowlers around the world who would be nervous and they deserve to be. We need to go back to the old law which said that the arm must be totally straight after it rises above the shoulder. This whole business of a 14-degree bend and a 5-degree tolerance is like reading a recipe book that tells you to cut a 1.27cm piece of ginger or like buying 444 grams of bread.

I am not as convinced though by the idea of giving the umpires a ear-piece so that they can hear sounds from the stump microphone. It will help adjudicate on a very thin outside edge, or where two sounds are clearly heard. But it might create greater confusion when the sound is in fact of bat hitting ground or boot; or of the ball nicking the pad rather than the inside edge. In the commentary box we use a ear-piece that allows us to listen to the stump microphone output and several times our immediate reaction is that the batsman has got an edge when the replays show the sound came from somewhere else.

And I must confess to be pretty baffled by the experiment to allow batsmen to pick the 15 overs of field restrictions of their choice. I was under the impression that the thinking in cricket circles was towards the contrary; towards allowing the fielding captain that option. The Cricket Committee of the ICC must have a good reason for suggesting something that I suspect empowers batsmen even further. Maybe it had to do with teams being allowed to choose from 12, and therefore having five bowlers available. Maybe the idea was to enliven the middle overs. But I can visualise a vastly reduced role for the slow spinner and even more runs being scored overall.

I would be curious though, to know whether the batsman is allowed to pick an over of his choice for the field restrictions after checking which bowler is likely to bowl. If I was the fielding captain, I would like to reserve the right to change my bowler if the batsman calls for field restrictions. It complicates the game therefore. Allowing the fielding captain the same option would be easier and not quite as much in favour of the batsmen.

But unless sport innovates, and stumbles occasionally, it will never know where the path ahead lies. Cricket has to remain fresh as it has to remain competitive. The first of those two objectives is being encouragingly pursued, the second handled like it were an electric wire. Maybe it is because keeping the game fresh requires a cricketing perspective while keeping it competitive seems to require political decision-making. The first will always be more dignified.