Cramp - a rule change needed?

[thewrongun]

What do people think about players getting a runner when they have cramp? As this cricket blog points out it's a particular problem in the 50 over, but as they stand the rules don't seem to allow it (although it often happens). Should the rules be changed to explicitly state that anyone with cramp can have a runner? Or would that allow players who have come into a game carrying a knock to feign cramp and get a runner when they wouldn't usually be permitted one? I think the rule needs to be black and white one way or another. Thoughts?

 

[hattrick]

The cramp rule illustrates the beauty of the game. It needs the fielding captain to allow the batsman to have a runner. I have been critical of this in the past as cramping has been a problem that South Africa in the past. Players carrying an injury into a match should not be allowed at all in my opinion.. The question is how would you police this? Have the medical teams make a recommendation to the match referee and then he gets to make a decision. Keep the game as is

 

[Boris]

I don't like how the umpires are having to take everything into their hands. Cricket is unique because the two captains can agree on almost anything and it can happen. If the batsman needs a runner than the opposing captain makes the choice, and it's up to them to follow the spirit of the game and give him one if the batsman is within the limitations required, or even if he's not and the captain is just being nice. It shouldn't be up to the umpires to decide, much like the light rule, either the fielding captain or the batsmen should chose when to leave the field.

And since this is my opinion I will have to continue and say it is up to the players on the field at the time. The captains in both cases in that blog had their explanations as to why the agreed/refused to allow a runner, and in the end both can be considered sportsmanlike and acceptable. If a choice isn't, then the captain would be scrutinised by the public and media for not playing fair, which is bad for a cricket board's image and therefore bad to that captain's career.

Cramps are most often caused by the repetitive and hard movements, when you push your body, and with little hydration. Dehydration is more often than not the fault of the batsmen. If a batsman needs a drink, he can call for it between overs. There is no way an opposing captain is going to complain about that unless the batsman does it every over and holds the game up, and just think I'd prefer a small stoppage for a drink than a large stoppage for a cramp. They should get enough hydration at drinks breaks, the fall of wickets, at any stoppage and between overs every now and then if they need it, and conserve energy when they can. Therefore it is mostly a batsman's fault for getting a cramp, especially if it is due to bad fitness levels, and hence a captain has every right to say no to a runner. But in almost all cases, why wouldn't you? You might as well be nice, and there aren't too many captains that won't allow it.