A document which has come into the possession of CricketEurope indicates that further major changes to international cricket are possibly being plotted in the back rooms of Dubai.

Allegedly emanating from sources close to the ICC Cricket Committee, which has in the past been responsible for such improvements to playing conditions as variable power-plays, referral of front-foot no-ball calls to the third umpire and super-subs, the ideas for further measures are clearly aimed at making cricket more attractive to a global audience.

The document concludes: ‘We recommend

• use of a wind meter for ODIs and international Twenty20 matches

At any time that the wind velocity exceeds two meters per second, the value of a six as defined in Law 19.4 shall be amended to five if struck with the wind and seven if struck into the wind.

• introduction of weighted averages for bowling

It is evident that the significance of the dismissal of higher-order batsmen is considerably greater than that of tailenders, but the traditional manner of calculating bowling averages takes no account of this. This is clearly unsatisfactory, and it is therefore proposed to introduce an improved system. One possibility would be to multiply each wicket by the current batting average of the batsman dismissed, but in the interests of simplicity and transparency it would be preferable to make use of the weightings already established for the resource tables for the Duckworth/Lewis system for calculating the result of rain-interrupted one-day matches. Consideration should in due course be given to a similar weighting system for batting averages. Such measures would make batting and bowling averages almost as informative as the ratings tables we have introduced in recent years.

• introduction of a ratings table for fielders

Cricket was once a bowlers’ game, and has increasingly become a batsmen’s game. Is is not time for the fieldsmen to receive their share of the limelight? We propose the appointment of a jury for each Test match and ODI, who would apply an agreed system of weightings of catches taken, according to fielding positions, degree of difficulty etc. Similar weightings should be developed for run outs, taking into account distance from and angle to the stumps, etc. There should also be penalty points for dropped catches.

• referral of an agreed number of decisions to popular vote

The success of challenges in other sports such as tennis has already led us to recommend an expansion of the referral system in cricket to permit a limited number of challenges per innings in ODIs. We do, however, believe that it would be desirable to go further, and to refer a fixed number of doubtful decisions (say, five per innings in ODIs and three per session in Test matches) to a vote of the crowd, who would be given two minutes to register their view through the use of mobile telephones. This would, it is true, tend to favour the home side, and consideration should be given to allowing the television audience to take part in the voting. Partly as a short-term response to the logistical problems inherent in this proposal, but also because of its own intrinsic merits, we further recommend that, as from 2010,

• 80% of all international matches in any one year should take place on the Indian Subcontinent (defined to include Sri Lanka)

The financial arguments for this are self-evident.

• further adjustments to the format for Twenty20 internationals

Although it is apparent that the emergence of Twenty20 cricket has been extremely successful in a climate in which even ODIs are seen as excessively long and drawn out and in which there is evidence that only 3.5% of cricket enthusiasts under the age of 37 understand the concept of two innings per side, there are good reasons for believing that even the present Twenty20 format is insufficiently exciting to satisfy global demand. We have considered further reductions in the number of overs per side –including the EBAB (Everybody Bats And Bowls) system sometimes used in under-11 competitions) – but have come to the conclusion that the degree of randomness thus introduced might prove to be excessive.

We therefore recommend the retention of the 20-overs-per-side format, but with the following modification: that the bowlers operate from both ends at the same time. This would involve the use of two balls of different colours (thus providing a use for the new pink ball alongside the traditional white one), and both strikers being involved at the same time. This would lead to the abolition of the antiquated concept of the ‘non-striker’, and would permit the introduction of a ‘double play’ by which both batsmen could be run out simultaneously. The overall playing time of a Twenty20 match would be halved, with obvious benefits for our media partners, and the level of action greatly enhanced. We cannot think of a better way of achieving the long-term goals of the ICC.’