In his latest instalment of Inside Track - Brian Murgatroyd presents his first impressions on changes in playing conditions for ODIs

by Brian Murgatroyd (22nd November 2012)

Maybe I am jumping the gun given there have been just a handful of rain-affected matches between Sri Lanka and New Zealand since the latest changes to the ICC playing conditions for One-Day Internationals took effect.

But on the evidence of what I have seen so far, I am already liking one change in particular – that amendment which states that during non-powerplay overs only four, rather than the previous five fielders are allowed outside the 30-yard circle.

What that means is one less fielder on the boundary and on that basis it is easy to portray it as another decision by the ICC loaded in favour of batsmen with bowlers now shorn of extra protection in the deep.

But is it really a hammer blow against bowlers after all, and against spinners in particular, as some might imagine? Certainly, on the evidence of those Sri Lanka – New Zealand matches, the answer appears to be no. Quite the opposite, in fact.

The change means two significant shifts from what was previously the status quo.

First, by forcing the bowling side to have an extra fielder inside the circle, it reduces the opportunity for batsmen simply to “milk” the opposition bowling with little or no risk. The safety-first, nudge-it-into-the-gaps mentality so common in the dull middle overs of a ODI will now have to give way to a more innovative and aggressive approach from the batting team.

The rewards for that approach are significant, with one less fielder on the fence, but so are the potential benefits for the bowling side as, by prompting the batsmen to take greater risks, there is also the increased potential for wickets to fall too. It looks like a nice balance to me.

But does the reduction of cover on the boundary mean the death of spinners? Again, it is early days, but I think the answer is no.

The same question was asked as Twenty20 cricket began to flourish as initial thoughts were that slow men, faced with shorter boundaries and bigger, flailing bats, would become canon-fodder in the shortest form of the game.

The reality, however, has been very different with pace off the ball very much a key component of success in Twenty20, and with the new field restrictions in play for ODIs, the same may well be true in that format too.

Certainly, in the ODIs in Sri Lanka, spinners Rangana Herath and Jeevan Mendis were among the most effective bowlers on either side and they appeared to have no difficulty at all in adapting to the change in regulations.

The truth of the matter is that the best bowlers, the most positive ones, have always thrived when opposition batsmen have looked to get after them. England’s Darren Gough, for example, always used to tell me he loved bowling at the death because although there was the potential to go for a few runs, there was also an increased likelihood of picking up wickets as batsmen looked to be more expansive. The same could well be true with these new regulations.

So, yes, it is early days in the life of these changes and we know from experience that the best-laid plans around the ICC table do not always translate very well once they are turned into reality – for example, does anyone remember the flirtation with the super sub?

Also, we will have a much better idea of how the new conditions are working once we reach the end of January, by which time most international teams will have played under them, in a wide variety of conditions.

But, for what it’s worth, first impressions for me at least are favourable. And if that change, along with the others that have been implemented, including the allowance for two bouncers per over, can enhance a format that is rich with the tradition of 10 World Cups and more than 40 years of action, facing as it is the very real threat of being squeezed out by the rise of Twenty20, then that has to be a very good thing indeed.

Discuss!