Originally Posted by King Pietersen
Well Hughes didn't play that 1 delivery very well at all. Was short, but not bouncer length, Hughes just read the length wrong completely and tried to duck out of the way when he should definitely been up on his toes playing off the back-foot. It definitely wasn't a matter of just taking a blow because it was a good short one, just played it poorly.
It was early in his innings though, so I'm not reading too much into it, and I've heard talk that he's actually quite a good player of the short ball normally, so hopefully England won't go completely 1 dimensional at him and try and bowl constantly back of a length, especially Jim, he never looks threatening enough when bowling back of a length.
Absolutely. He played it poorly, which everyone does with all sorts of deliveries, pretty regularly. Mostly, playing a short ball poorly won't get you out - this time it did.
Most batsmen benefit if bowlers wrongly start to think they have a weakness against short bowling, because they then get preoccupied with that and fail to attack their real weaknesses. England spent over a decade doing that with Stephen Waugh. Let's hope the treatment isn't repeated with Hughes, or anyone else.