Should cricketers be able to....?

[Matteh]

I certainly can't throw far with my left hand - i just end up doing a girly throw - pretty sure that a left underarm throw isn't that different to a right handed one....

I've attempted to bowl left handed in a practice(it's Ashley Giles making me want to bowl SLA)....first ball was surprisingly accurate and then the second was about 15 foot away so i gave up....

 

[Scaly piscine]

I've attempted to bowl left handed in a practice(it's Ashley Giles making me want to bowl SLA)....first ball was surprisingly accurate and then the second was about 15 foot away so i gave up....

Same thing happens when Ashley bowls, except the 15 foot is the difference in length.

 

[Kweek]

cricket players who bowl and bat with different hands (Oram n Clarke) must be pretty good with both hands.

as left handed bowler and fielder and right handed fielders I say...to a degree. i can throw with my right hand although no extream pace i can be fairly accurate...but though getting it in my other hand is faster I reckon as i have waay more pace in the throw.

 

[PY]

Totally diff sport, but didn't Ronnie O'Sullivan once beat Tony Drago (IIRC) playing left-handed? I don't think Drago (if it was him) was too happy & said it didn't pay him the proper respect. I think The Rocket was actually just taking the Mickey Bliss!

Yeah, it happened a few years back when the playing with either hand thing was seen as not showing your opponent respect.

Several commentators have mentioned they believe O'Sullivan would be a top 16 player if he became left-handed all the time.

Now that is talent...

 

[simmy]

Anyone think of another major improvement fielders could implement?

Other than just being quicker, more agile and more powerful.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Generally, most young cricketers don't throw all that well at first anyways. The blueprint for fielding is really being set by baseball (see Mike Young and how in demand he is). And baseballers don't really bother using both hands - you're better off trying to perfect one than being OK with both. It's more about fielder placement, and what hand fielder you have in what position, that can make the ability to throw both hands less important.

It's something that could be handy, but in the end, it's a lot of effort for minimal pay off, and the "opportunity cost" is pretty large - you could increase the potency of your natural hand much more in the period that you spend getting your non-preferred side up to a decent level.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Generally, most young cricketers don't throw all that well at first anyways. The blueprint for fielding is really being set by baseball (see Mike Young and how in demand he is). And baseballers don't really bother using both hands - you're better off trying to perfect one than being OK with both. It's more about fielder placement, and what hand fielder you have in what position, that can make the ability to throw both hands less important.

It's something that could be handy, but in the end, it's a lot of effort for minimal pay off, and the "opportunity cost" is pretty large - you could increase the potency of your natural hand much more in the period that you spend getting your non-preferred side up to a decent level.

Of course baseballers don't bother throwing using both hands, they've got a bucket attached to the end of their weaker arm when they're fielding. The idea is to get to a point where you can let go of the ball fairly quickly with a flat throw, it would end up being more of a deterrent than anything, just as getting a reputation as a good fielder means you rarely get risks taken against you.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Of course baseballers don't bother throwing using both hands, they've got a bucket attached to the end of their weaker arm when they're fielding.

Haha, how daft by me!

The idea is to get to a point where you can let go of the ball fairly quickly with a flat throw, it would end up being more of a deterrent than anything, just as getting a reputation as a good fielder means you rarely get risks taken against you.

Look at someone like Ian Harvey - he could throw the ball with no discerning difference in pace (there was difference in accuracy) with both hands, yet always chose to throw it with his natural hand. Batsmen are more concerned about a direct hit (which unless there is a mix up, most run-outs need to be) than an extra half second for a mediocre throw from someone's wrong hand.

 

[steds]

cricket players who bowl and bat with different hands (Oram n Clarke) must be pretty good with both hands.

But you bat with both hands.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Look at someone like Ian Harvey - he could throw the ball with no discerning difference in pace (there was difference in accuracy) with both hands, yet always chose to throw it with his natural hand. Batsmen are more concerned about a direct hit (which unless there is a mix up, most run-outs need to be) than an extra half second for a mediocre throw from someone's wrong hand.

I can't say I've followed the career of Harvey, so I wouldn't know about him. Not sure whether you're actually agreeing with me in that last sentence, or unintentionally agreeing or what. Regardless a batsman won't take a run if they believe a direct hit would be curtains - regardless of whether it's Gary Pratt or Blind Pew doing the throwing with their respective chances of hitting the stumps.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Let me correct myself with the last part. Generally, as a batsman, you'll take on a fielder's wrong hand for a quick single. If they go to throw it with their wrong hand, then the chances of the throw - despite it being hard and flat - resulting in your dismissal is a lot less because the accuracy, combined with a quick release, takes years of practice to get anywhere near your natural arm.

It might gain you an extra second in how quickly you get to the ball and then throw it, but the accuracy and power lost by doing it with your "wrong" arm could be gained back with the (better) natural footwork that you'd use to get yourself into a position to throw with your normal arm, the increased power, and the increased chance of hitting the stumps.

 

[Scaly piscine]

The reason people take someone on when it's on the fielder's wrong hand is because they know the fielder is not going to throw with their wrong hand - no precedent has been set here so we can't say for sure whether someone would still attempt the run, although my opinion is they wouldn't.

From the fielder's point of view you have to go with the percentages, if you've no chance with one arm but a 10% chance with the other, then you take the 10%. Anyway as far as 3-day or longer cricket goes, you could consistently save 5-10 runs per game just by batters not taking the weaker arm on. From an average individual point of view you might get what, 1 run out in 20 games just as an average? Some of those again would be mix-ups and straight-forward from a fielder's point of view.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You were.

Didn't I already admit that twice?

Did you think I was being sarcastic? God forbid!

 

[shaka]

The problem throwing with 2 hands is the shoulder does not give force to the throw, hence its pointless.