Editing Follow-on (section)

==Enforcement==
The follow-on is not automatic; the captain of the leading team decides whether to enforce it.  Conventional theory suggests the follow-on is almost always enforced.  In his classic text ''[[The Art of Captaincy]]'', [[Mike Brearley]] deals with the issue in a single paragraph, and finds the advantages overwhelming.<ref>Brearley, M. The Art of Captaincy. Macmillan, 1988, p.212</ref>

# The main reason to enforce the follow-on is to prevent a draw.  Batting last, the chasing side can bat cautiously and use up time to draw the match rather than lose, and the follow-on gives them more time, making that strategy more difficult.
# Enforcing the follow-on can also increase the pressure on the chasing team, since they have already posted an inferior score, and the [[Cricket pitch#State of the pitch|state of the pitch]] often deteriorates as a match progresses.

However, there are several reasons for not enforcing the follow-on:
# Most simply, it is tiring for [[Bowler (cricket)|bowler]]s to bowl for two consecutive innings, and it can be more difficult to dismiss a team in their second innings than it was in their first innings. During the first test of the [[Pakistani cricket team in the West Indies in 1957–58|1958 series between Pakistan and West Indies]] on 17–23 January, West Indies batting first declared at 579/9 and Pakistan replied with 106 all out. After Pakistan was asked to follow-on on the third day of the six-day match, Mohammed Hanif held his ground for 970 minutes, scoring 337 runs, forcing a draw.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17399/scorecard/62835/west-indies-vs-pakistan-1st-test-pakistan-tour-of-west-indies-1957-58/|title=1st Test, Pakistan tour of West Indies at Bridgetown, Jan 17–23 1958|website=[[ESPNcricinfo]]|access-date=31 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180402083015/http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17399/scorecard/62835/west-indies-vs-pakistan-1st-test-pakistan-tour-of-west-indies-1957-58/|archive-date=2 April 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>
# Declining to enforce the follow-on reduces the defending team's probability of losing.  Already with a substantial lead in the first innings, the defending team can score enough runs and/or use up enough time to give the chasing team no chance of victory. This does increase the probability of a drawn result, but it can also demotivate the chasing team who have nothing to play for.
# Refusing to enforce the follow-on can be a strategic decision based on the current situation of a multi-game series such as [[The Ashes]]. A team who only needs a draw to achieve their series goal may refuse to enforce the follow-on so they can bat out the remaining time when a draw is sufficient to win or retain the series trophy. This can happen when a team is leading the series by the number of games left to play including the current game, e.g. leading an Ashes series by one win during the fifth and final game of a series.
# It is usually a disadvantage to bat last, when the pitch has deteriorated and favours [[spin bowling]].
In recent years there has perhaps been a trend against enforcing the follow-on in Test cricket: former England captain [[Andrew Strauss]] on several occasions took his second innings straight away.  It has, though, had some notable successes, for instance at [[Lord's]] in the [[2009 Ashes series]]. Here, Australia were 210 behind on first innings but did not follow on; England batted again, set Australia a highly unlikely victory target of 522, and won the game easily. For their part, Australian captains [[Steve Waugh]] and [[Ricky Ponting]] were also notably reluctant to enforce the follow-on, although that was perhaps more to do with wanting to allow [[Shane Warne]] to bowl on a deteriorating pitch later in the game. [[Michael Clarke (cricketer)|Michael Clarke]] only enforced the follow-on once in his career as a captain (during his final match in the [[2015 Ashes]]), even when holding a substantial first innings lead due to the risk of tiring his fast bowlers.