Ambrose says ODIs may as well use bowling machines

I think we have to accpet that the balance is all wrong at the moment There are a few areas in which this could be changed 1 - the 4 fielders outside the circle, especially in the last 10 overs, this could be changed back to 5. At the moment the most damaging effect of this is the predictability of where the bowler will pitch the ball as suggested by the field placings 2 - the bat size; although I like seeing balls go a mile its not fair when mishits clear the rope by 20m, we dont have to go back to what they were, but some change is needed. Its a bit like the full body swimsuits that changed all the WRs in swimming a few yrs ago. 3 - Ropes as far back as possible, its embarrassing to turn up to a match and see the rope in 20-30m as used to happen in the bigbash. Just let the boundries be what they are 4 - Im interested in the idea of trimming the ODIs to 40vers per side, this would change the dynamic and shorten the game to something a bit more managable. 5 - the most important - CONTEXT. We ve seen that the knockout games bring with them pressure, the truth is that teams arent used to this pressure as they mainly play meaningless series; all QF innings (except NZ) brought a lower batting performance due to the pressure but it made it extremely interesting - we need context for ODI games

Curtly Ambrose is right. What we are seeing is not cricket. It is crap.

Hadlee's a still. What is wrong with that ed? Haven't you noticed the appalling and very personal comments about Watson, Warner and Warne, to name a few, that you allow...obviously not.

"Hadlee rated South African quick Dale Steyn and Black Caps new ball pair Tim Southee and Trent Boult as the best seamers at the tournament. When reminded that Australian Mitchell Starc leads the wicket tally, Hadlee conceded the left-armer warranted a rating alongside them." Southee and Boult have a long way to go before being equal to Starc as ODI bowlers.

Hadlee has basically re-iterated some of our discussions on here. The good bowlers can still prosper, it's the mediocre ones, or the "generally good" bowlers having a mediocre day that have problems. If the bowlers get it right they can still do really well. The margin for error has come down, but that's not a bad thing. I think the fact that we've seen bowlers like Starc, going for around 3 rpo in an innings of 300+, come on to bowl when the batsmen are smashing everyone else around and they can't do anything with him, shows that it's possible to do well with the ball, but you need to come out with your best, you need to have a plan and execute it well. In the past we've seen bowlers aiming for yorkers without the skill to hit the spot regularly because even knee high full-tosses weren't often getting punished. These days that knee high full toss will go over the fence. What that has meant is that for a bowler to bowl yorkers he actually has to be able to bowl yorkers. You can't get away with the "near enough" that used to be good enough. Go back and watch some of these matches where teams have hit 150 off the last 10 overs and I bet you see a lot of bad bowling! Bowlers need to know what the batsman is trying to do, know the balls that they will struggle to hit, the balls that have a good chance of getting a wicket and the balls that they really need to stay away from, and then they need to be able to execute with some level of accuracy. We are talking international level bowlers, they should be able to hit their spots with a lot more accuracy than many of them are managing at the moment. The few that do manage that are doing really well.

Unfortunately, if you made the requirement that all boundaries had to be at least 70 metres, you'd cut out a LOT of grounds. And for the ones that remain, most could only use one or two pitches in the centre square because as you get closer to the edge of the square you are going to have at least one boundary well below that. In some places you have the choice between playing at a small ground that can hold a good crowd, or nothing that can hold more than a few thousand people. It's not viable to make that sort of rule.

I think they'll change the regs to allow more fielders outside the circle as soon as this World Cup is over. Maybe two bowlers should get 12 overs instead of 10. Change the rule that calls for more than half of the ball has to hit the stumps/bails where the umpire says "not out" - you're out if the ball hits them, period. Get two incorrect reviews. Make the boundaries a minimum of 70m, if the ground dimensions aren't big enough, play somewhere else. Also, cut the number of Senators that Tasmania has down from 12 to two (same as the ACT and NT) so that people like the ex Corporal can't get a look in. Not sure how the last one relates to cricket but can Australia be taken seriously while she's there?

I reckon Curtley would go okay under current rules regardless.

When did Curtly get a knighthood? Knew about Duk Hedlee, Viv and the great Beefy. How about Sir Bull Lorry, Sir Shane Warne, Sir Joe the Cameraman, Sir Glenn Trimble. I know -- Sir Steve Smith, perfect, where's that Rabbott bloke.