Multiple no-balls bowled by Indian spinners during the recent Test series against Sri Lanka drew significant criticism from former India captain Sunil Gavaskar. The issue of repeated overstepping at the crease became a focal point of discussion following the matches, with Gavaskar highlighting the need for urgent action to address the recurring problem.
Gavaskar expressed his concerns in detailed commentary, emphasising that bowlers have direct control over their actions at the crease. He stated that with modern measurement tools available to mark run-ups, there should be no valid excuse for overstepping the bowling crease. The former opener pointed out that taking guard and avoiding no-balls are among the few aspects of cricket entirely within a player’s control.
“The no-balls being bowled by the Indian bowlers came in for a fair bit of comment. This has to be looked at urgently because it can change the colour of the game. There are very few aspects of the game that are totally in the players’ control, and a batter taking guard and a bowler not bowling a no-ball are two such aspects. Players, when they come for interviews, talk about doing things within their control. Today, with a tape measure available to mark the run-up, there should be no excuses for overstepping the bowling crease,” Gavaskar wrote in his column Mid-Day.
Why Gavaskar rejected the free-hit solution?
India’s spin bowling coach had jokingly suggested that introducing free-hits in Test cricket might help deter no-balls. Gavaskar firmly rejected this proposal, arguing that such a change would make run-scoring easier for batters at a time when the game already favours batting through other restrictions. He pointed to existing rules that have already tilted the balance towards the batting side.
“The India team spinning coach jokingly said that giving a free hit after a no-ball might help in curbing the offence. Please, let’s not make scoring runs in Test cricket easier for batters with this penalty. As it is, with the restriction on bouncers to two in an over and the boundaries being brought in, run-making has become a little simpler,” Gavaskar wrote.
Gavaskar’s proposed fine structure and team discipline
Gavaskar proposed a financial approach to curb the recurring issue of no-balls instead. He suggested implementing fines that would increase with each repeated transgression, alongside a penalty for the bowling coach equivalent to half the player’s fine amount. According to his plan, the collected fines could be used to fund the team’s final dinner before players dispersed.
“Instead, how about a fine which gets doubled for every further transgression, plus half the amount of the fine for the bowling coach, too. The fines collected can be used for the final team dinner before the boys disperse,” Gavaskar wrote.
Beyond no-balls, Gavaskar outlined a broader framework for team discipline through financial penalties. He suggested that other on-field lapses, such as failing to back up for a throw, could also attract fines. Gavaskar recommended that the entire squad vote on whether to impose such penalties, turning the process into a team-bonding activity that could strengthen squad cohesion.
“There could be other fines too, for example, not backing up for a throw or something else not done on the field, which the whole team can vote on whether to impose or not. This can also be a fun activity and bond the team even more,” Gavaskar concluded.
Get every cricket updates! Follow Us: