To enforce or not to enforce that is the question. Rahul Dravid didn’t and neither did Shane Warne, Darren Maddy nor Jon Lewis in their respective county matches last week for Hampshire, Warwickshire and Gloucestershire. Has asking a team to follow on become unfashionable? Are captains trying to bat sides out of the game so as to be in a position where they feel they can’t lose? Or is electing to bat again, actually a positive move akin to keeping the foot on the windpipe?

In the days of three-day cricket the follow on was enforced as a matter of course as time was never a friend of the side bossing the game. Nowadays there are more ways to skin the cat and consequently more ponderables for captains. How tired are my bowlers? How close are we to an interval? Will the pitch deteriorate? Will chasing 180 batting last present a problem if they were to play better at the second time of asking? What’s the weather forecast? What’s the context of the match (i.e. series score or position in the county championship table)?

Rahul Dravid’s thinking at the Oval was exposed when he took an age to reach double figures after electing to bat again. 1-0 up on the series, the Indian captain wanted the game safe and would have worked out a that a rampaging England could have conceivably got 450 following on and had a late crack at his side with nothing to lose. Subsiding to 11-3 on the last afternoon chasing 130 would have been more serious than when they had a 300 run buffer.

That said, opting to bat again only to get bowled out cheaply is a captain’s worst nightmare as it alters the momentum of a game and instils belief into the chasing team. Just ask Lewis, the Gloucestershire captain, who decided to have another bat 190 runs to the good against Essex at Southend. Together with Steve Kirby he had just bowled out the home side for 88 inside 32 overs but with only one more seamer in Alex Gidman at his disposal, Lewis figured on batting Essex out of the game, which would give him and Kirby a well-earned rest, bring his two spinners more into play later in the game and avoid the prospect of Danesh Kaneria, the Pakistani leg spinner, bowling on a turning pitch in the fourth innings of the match. Unfortunately Lewis had his bowling boots on again less than forty overs later having witnessed his side blown away for 139 by a revitalised Essex team who suddenly faced a target of 330 for victory.

Lewis’ decision not to enforce was ultimately vindicated as Essex fell short but I would have liked to have seen him get the Essex boys straight back in when he had the chance. Firstly, Mark Pettini, the Essex captain and Varun Chopra his opening partner had not been in the best of form; secondly there was just thirty minutes to lunch, an awkward time to bat and enough time for the new-ball bowlers to have two cracks either side of the interval, and most importantly there was still plenty in the pitch for all the bowlers.

As for Shane Warne’s decision not to enforce having seen his Hampshire side rattle up 455 for 9 before knocking Worcestershire over for 86 inside 35 overs, I find it slightly ridiculous. His opening bowlers had hardly broken sweat and he had a lead of 369 on a Rose Bowl pitch, which always does something, yet Warne – probably the best captain Australia never had – thought batting again was the best policy. Hampshire won of course but their second innings effort of 103 for 8 in 35 overs was irrelevant as the visitors could only muster 187. A follow on would have seen a quicker death.

Darren Maddy elected to bat again at Hove having amassed 433 and bowled Sussex out for 168. His cricketing logic was spot on. A lead of 275 is not enough to expect to wrap up the game by an innings and Warwickshire would not have fancied chasing anything over 120 against Mushtaq Ahmed on a pitch, which takes spin increasingly as the game progresses. Had Maddy been allowed to pick Nayan Doshi, the former Surrey bowler, who was not properly registered with Warwickshire, they would have expected to win the game bowling last.

Warwickshire were also not helped in their match versus Sussex by a dropped catch at short leg by Mark Greatbatch, their New Zealand coach, who was on the field because of injuries to several Warwickshire bowlers. Richard Montgomerie was very grateful for the reprieve going on to score 195.

This reminded me of the time my Kent side were also let down by a dropped catch from a member of our backroom staff at Hove. We had a lead of over 200 on first innings and had reduced Sussex to 30 for 3 when Murray Goodwin chipped a straightforward catch into the covers only for it to be missed by our physio, Martin Sigley, who was on as a sub. He too went on to score a big hundred.

I kicked myself for weeks afterwards for positioning a physio at cover point even though he was a first class cricketer in New Zealand.

Magic number

On the subject of follow ons, why do captains like to declare setting a team a round number? Dravid set England 500. I don’t buy the psychological argument which says that 500 appears a much larger chase than 490. Declarations should be geared to how long you think you need to bowl a side out and how close to intervals you are. Fielding teams can play with more intensity if you shorten sessions. It also gives the batting side little to gain but plenty to lose.

I always liked declaring 45 minutes before lunch or tea, which would enable my opening bowlers to have a good crack either side of the interval but allow enough time to have a look at spin option against opening batsmen with men around the bat.

Instructions to the batsmen in the middle would be to get as many as we could by a certain time.