So for once it is not a batsman's game. About time! Bowlers, old and young, active or retired, will be enjoying the mismatch, but they know it will not last, even if the sun fails to arrive on time next year. Over the centuries, the game's law-makers and administrators have tended to be batsmen, ready to claw back any advantages bowlers have gained with an over-compensation in favour of those who wear the pads. After all, most of the game's Laws seek to make a batsman's life easier and a bowler's harder. The favouritism did not stop there. Pitches, uncovered during the hours of play for centuries, were suddenly made weatherproof and more batsman-friendly. But if that is a good thing from the spectators" point of view, with less play being cancelled, any ingenuity from the bowlers has been blunted. Just look what happened when the fearsome West Indies" pace quartets rose up and humiliated batsmen the world over in the 1980s. The law makers came to the rescue by reducing the number of bouncers allowed per over. It had been the same after Bodyline (restricting the number of fielders behind square on the leg side) and again for the no-ball Law (it used to be judged on the back foot, but that enabled bowlers to steal a yard by dragging). They also amended the lbw Law, so batsmen could not be out to balls pitching outside leg stump. Their protection of batsmen has continued unabated. In 1989, most counties began to use a Reader ball, whose seam comprised 14 strands of twine. Wickets tumbled and for the next season, along with a directive from the Test and County Cricket Board for groundsmen to produce straw-coloured pitches, the seam was reduced to nine strands. Big scores abounded, with Surrey making 707 against Lancashire at the Oval, who replied with 863. That match began on May 3 so forgive us bowlers for not shedding many tears at the plight of batsmen struggling to find their next run. In one-day cricket, fielding restrictions and shrinking boundaries have made bowling more difficult, while bat technology has ensured that, even with an impure connection the ball still clears the ropes. It has become so one-sided that MCC, bastion of the gentleman cricketer, has begun to look into restricting the size of the bat. Even wrongdoing on the field has favoured bat over ball. A batsman refusing to walk after edging a catch is considered part of the game, yet, if a bowler scratches the ball to get some reverse-swing or applies some lip salve to help it retain its shine, they are branded a cheat. A few changes have redressed the imbalance in favour of the bowler such as the Decision Review System and the banning of heavy rollers in the Championship, but they do not add up to a whole heap of sympathy for the batsmen, at least not from any card-carrying member of the bowlers" union.