The Forgotten Art of Balance: Cricket’s Unhealthy Obsession with Runs

One of the enduring fallacies of the television era is the seductive belief that a high-scoring game equals good cricket. Commentators—many of them seasoned ex-cricketers—often perpetuate this notion, mistaking the volume of runs for the quality of the contest. This fixation has not only skewed the way pitches are prepared but has also undermined cricket’s most fundamental principle: the balance between bat and ball. Cricket, once revered for its nuanced battles, now teeters dangerously toward one-dimensionality. 

Pitches as Performers: An Unnatural Bias 

The modern cricket pitch has evolved into a stage designed for batsmen, curtailing the bowlers' room to manoeuvre. The issue isn’t restricted to the subcontinent; traditionally pace-friendly venues in Australia, England, South Africa, and New Zealand are also becoming increasingly docile. In recent years, the dominance of the bat has become so pronounced that even ordinary batsmen seem to thrive on tracks that pose little threat, artificially inflating the spectacle of run-scoring. 

This trend calls into question the essence of cricket as a contest. 

Greg Chappell once remarked that cricket is at its most compelling when the ball holds a slight edge. When bowlers are armed with tools to challenge batsmen, the game ascends from a mere scoring spree to a thrilling duel. Unfortunately, such encounters are becoming rare, replaced by flat pitches that turn matches into batting exhibitions. 

Rules in Favour of the Bat 

It isn’t just the pitches; even cricket’s evolving laws favour batsmen. The restrictions on bouncers provide a glaring example. In One Day Internationals (ODIs), only one bouncer is permitted per over, and in Tests, the limit is two. This dilutes the surprise factor - one of the fast bowler’s most potent weapons. Why, we must ask, should a batsman, cocooned by helmets and guards, not be subjected to six bouncers in an over? The intimidation of express pace is a part of cricket’s drama, and limiting it curbs the bowler’s ability to dictate terms.

The ODI powerplay further tilts the scales. Teams can activate a five-over batting powerplay at their discretion, typically in the final overs, where the field restrictions help batsmen plunder runs at will. Similarly, the rule mandating a change of ball after the 34th over—often at the batting side’s request—diminishes the spectacle of reverse swing, an art that thrives when an older ball is handled with finesse. These rules have eroded cricket’s depth, reducing it to a batsman’s game where the bowlers’ options are severely limited. 

A more equitable solution would be to introduce a second powerplay controlled by the fielding side, offering captains a chance to strategize and attack. Furthermore, the allowance of only four fielders outside the circle could be revised to five during certain periods, giving bowlers a fighting chance. If cricket is to regain its competitive edge, the rules must reflect a greater sense of fairness toward both disciplines. 

Defensive Bowling: A Lost Art 

Bowlers today are forced into survival mode, prioritizing containment over aggression. On lifeless tracks, the fastest of bowlers cut back on pace, banking on accuracy and economy rather than swing and fire. With dead pitches becoming the norm, the decline of fast bowling is unmistakable. What was once an art - a craft demanding both skill and heart—now often feels like a futile exercise. 

Scores of 400 are no longer rare. T20 cricket, with its relentless emphasis on hitting, has only exacerbated the problem. Fast bowlers look bereft of ideas on flat surfaces, reduced to cannon fodder for batsmen in a format that glorifies boundaries over battles. Even in ODIs and Tests, we see a disconcerting pattern: bowlers operate defensively from the outset, unwilling or unable to attack. 

Revisiting the True Beauty of Cricket 

As a cricket aficionado, I find more joy in watching Rahul Dravid’s masterful hundred at Jamaica in 2006 than Virender Sehwag’s explosive triple centuries on placid Indian wickets. Dravid’s innings was a meditation on survival and skill, played on a wicket that tested his technique and temperament at every turn. The Jamaica pitch was unpredictable—one ball kept low, the next reared unexpectedly—and Dravid’s knock was a testament to the kind of cricket that elevates the game. In contrast, Sehwag’s swashbuckling exploits, while dazzling, seemed almost inevitable on surfaces devoid of bite. 

Spectators may throng the stands to watch boundaries and sixes, but cricket’s charm lies just as much in the artistry of a well-directed bouncer or the thrill of a cartwheeling stump. These moments, too, are exhilarating, a reminder of cricket's essence as a contest between equals. Yet modern cricket, in its relentless pursuit of entertainment, seems to have forgotten this. The equation has become unbalanced, with the bat overwhelmingly favoured over the ball. 

Restoring the Balance 

If cricket is to retain its soul, the balance between bat and ball must be restored. Batsmen should earn their runs through effort and skill, not courtesy of featherbed wickets and lenient rules. Bowlers, too, must be given the tools to attack—not just in fleeting moments but throughout the game. Powerplays need recalibration, fielding restrictions reconsideration, and the undue bias against reverse swing eliminated. The art of fast bowling, once cricket’s most captivating spectacle, deserves a revival. 

Cricket should never be reduced to a monotonous parade of boundaries. It is, at its core, a contest of minds, skills, and wills—a game where patience, precision, and perseverance matter just as much as power. Only by ending the step-motherly treatment of bowlers and promoting competitive pitches can cricket rediscover its lost equilibrium. 

The essence of cricket lies not in excess but in the delicate balance between bat and ball. It is time we restore that balance - before the game becomes a hollow reflection of what it once was.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar