Why do you ask the same question twice at the end?

Do you watch or play cricket?

First one was rhetorical HFL.

There you go again, firing on no cylinders again.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

No bouncers shouldn't be banned! Definitely not


Not sure you understand the purpose of a rhetorical question then. Or what one really is.

Seems he knows a pork pie when he sees one though HFL ................

Ahhh the joys of Wikipedia....

no, they most definitely should not be banned.

Re. the actual question.

I get the excitement a "bouncer" creates and what it potentially adds to the game, but as has been tragically illustrated it's also potentially lethal.

To chuck down a rock hard ball, as fast as you can, so that it makes the opponent duck/move or defend themselves, seems pretty reckless when you stop and think about it. Sport should be about enjoyment, with minimal risk (you'll never completely remove risk). But to effectively aim a missile at someone's head has no sense in my view, just to intimidate the opposition. There must be other ways surely?

I know cricket devotees will disagree - but surely you need no better evidence against it, than what's just happened. If "bouncers" were outlawed and removed from the game, then perhaps we'd not all be looking on in disbelief at the plight of a young cricket player. Such a waste - and totally avoidable.

So my answer is - they should most definitely be banned - or better protective headgear supplied ....

There must be hundreds of thousands of bouncers bowled at all levels of cricket all over the world each year.

It was a freak, tragic accident.

There shouldn't be any changes in the rules of the game, and only slight changes to the helmets that are used.

RIP Phil Hughes

If Luvr's Wikipedia information is correct that there have been 4 deaths from bouncers since 1870....144 years

When helmets have only recently come into the game.

I think it shows how much of a freak accident this was. Tragic but if we lived life with no risk then not very much would ever be achieved.

I doubt very much that any cricketer in the world would want the bouncer to be outlawed.

Marothon runners die a lot more often simply running. Should that be outlawed?

Taking the short ball out of cricket would ruin a lot of careers also. Not just those of fast hit the deck bowlers, but of batsmen who's strengths are off the back foot and playing big shots hooking. Then there's fielders such as Ian Bell who specialise at short leg who's roll would become redundant.

Not to mention that banning the short ball would dramatically increase the predictability of the delivery, allowing batters to move there feet sooner and get into position earlier, meaning much less chance of losing their wicket...this would lead to higher run totals, and a much higher percentage of test matches finishing in bore draws.

RIP Phil Hughes, but I am sure the last thing he would want as a result of this tragic freak incident is for it to possibly ruin the game of cricket.

HFL.

A rhetorical question is a question asked, but not aimed at any particular person/s, nor is it asked in looking for a response, other than by the person asking the rhetorical question, or using it when writing newspaper articles, books, other forms of written media or forum articles to come to, or make a point.

Please note how I wrote the two rhetorical questions side by side,

"So the question is, should bouncers in cricket be banned, are they a danger to players lives; obviously they are as some players have died from bouncers".

I hope that answers your question HFL.

I agree Jud, given the time span between the number of deaths from being hit by a cricket ball since 1870 would make it a freakish but tragic accident, however,

Sportology mentioned there were 5, the fifth being Daren Randall in South Africa, but the oneindia article mention 12, which seems to include some club matches.

The article says from injuries sustained while playing cricket, but I can only suspect most, if not all are ball related.

What should be noted is how close the dates are over recent years.

http://www.oneindia.com/sports/cricket/full-list-cricketers-who-died-injuries-on-the-field-1574791.html

Then there's what the SMH says.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/time-to-ban-the-bouncer-20141127-11une7.html

I think all up, it's an argument that can go round in circles for both sides, untill maybe someone else is unfortunate to die from a bouncer; either way, I think the various cricket authorities will be discussing it.

Luvr,

these are the two questions that I am talking about


Question A, should bouncers be banned from cricket.

Question B, should bouncers be allowed to stay in cricket.

Why on earth would you make question A rhetorical, to the ask the same question B?

stop trying to make yourself sound clever.

How often do you watch cricket btw?

I'm not a fan of cricket in any form. I do check the Yorkshire CCC progress/results.

Sad when anyone dies more so when so young and when simply doing their job. My deepest sympathies to his family.

Should there be a knee-jerk reaction to this accident? Absolutely not. If headgear can be improved further still to better protect players in light of this tragic event then yes, absolutely, go for it.

Should bouncers be banned? Don't think so. This was a tragic accident, nothing more.

I play to a pretty high level, as a batsman they shouldn't be banned. We should not be reacting to a freak accident, possibly some form of skull cap could be worn under the helmet to absorb a hit like that, helmet designs shouldn't change materially, you keep adding to the helmet and it restricts movement and agility which in itself is bloody dangerous when facing a decent pace.

HFL, the two questions below aren't rhetorical questions.

They are none rhetorical questions which require a response from those who choose to answer those questions, as written in plain english.

"Question A, should bouncers be banned from cricket.

Question B, should bouncers be allowed to stay in cricket.

Why on earth would you make question A rhetorical, to the ask the same question B?"

I think you've confused yourself H.

oh yeah,

I started playing cricket at school, and continued playing right through untill I left the army.

Luvr they are the two questions that I am asking why you asked the same wurst ion twice.

To which you told me the first one was rhetorical

AZA totally agree, I played at a decent level at school & up to being 20 but lost interest and just play some sundays and some mid-week games now.

The helmet is already a beast of a piece of kit, especially the new lightweight ones...that get tested using the bowling machines at 100mph.

Any major overhaul would make movement of the batsmen much more difficult, the head needs to be able to move in all directions also, so a full neck plate would be much more dangerous in my opinion.

This was a 1 in a million outcome to an every day action...driving a car is more dangerous...but everytime there is a car crash we don't make the wheels bigger or make the cars slower.

HFL, Luvr....come on lads

not the sort of thread to be petty with each other over nothing. Lets move on eh?!

Fair play Jud