• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Where are the Black Batsmen?

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Where are the Black Batsmen?

This CW Feature looks at why South Africa produces so few Black African cricketers and why the majority of those that actually do well are bowlers.

Snippet of Feature said:
The wealthy schools in the big cities with a strong cricketing heritage, superior coaching and facilities will continue to produce quality batsmen in the greatest numbers. As long as they remain predominantly White then their products will be White. Increasingly, though, the wealthy schools are not producing the desired seam bowlers, and people are looking outside the traditional centres. In the future the numbers of Black African bowlers should continue to increase. However, it isn't as easy to be optimistic about the numbers of quality Black batsmen dramatically growing.
 
Last edited:

ret

International Debutant
I skimmed through the article so may have missed something but will comment from what i got from it

In countries like India,

1. most players don't come from families with a sporting backround
2. the coaching facilities in general are not up to the mark .... even at the domestic level, there are complains of lack of proper coaching

but still we have good quality players. esp batsmen, coming up .... i wonder how many of Ind gr8 batsmen would hv gone to previliged coaching facilities in their early years

3. I don't get the point of the need of developing proper technique in early years for a batsmen while a bowler can start of late .... clearly, cricket has told us that it's bowlers who infact need special attention as even a wrong set of excercises could make them develop muscles at wrong places thus hurt their bowling performances .... 2ndly, there are instances of bowling centric players like Shastri, Imran, etc turn into better batsmen but the reverse has not been true, which makes me ponder if bowling is something that can be taken up anytime, while batting needs access to proper coaching from early years
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
3. I don't get the point of the need of developing proper technique in early years for a batsmen while a bowler can start of late .... clearly, cricket has told us that it's bowlers who infact need special attention as even a wrong set of excercises could make them develop muscles at wrong places thus hurt their bowling performances .... 2ndly, there are instances of bowling centric players like Shastri, Imran, etc turn into better batsmen but the reverse has not been true, which makes me ponder if bowling is something that can be taken up anytime, while batting needs access to proper coaching from early years
The physicality of being a bowler happens later. You can't start giving a bloke tons of overs young because they're not physically developed enough to handle the strain and as they grow their technique will necessarily change. Batsmen, on the other hand, can learn the fundamentals of batting earlier because, even with a huge growth spurt late in life, the way they bat is largely the same. It's why most places restrict the number of overs a bowler can bowl in a spell in youth cricket. And if you want an example of how much a sudden growth spurt can change the way you bowl, look at a bloke like Cullen Bailey for South Australia.

As far as what Goughy said, it's true that there are certainly subtlties about batting that need to be learned from an early age because batting is more about feel for the game, reflexes, etc. as much as technique. Whereas bowling, particularly quick bowling, you can take up late. Nab any power athlete and with some coaching, you could probably get them bowling reasonably well. Batting has all of the neuromuscular stuff which needs to be developed from an early age.
 
Last edited:

ret

International Debutant
The physicality of being a bowler happens later. You can't start giving a bloke tons of overs young because they're not physically developed enough to handle the strain and as they grow their technique will necessarily change. Batsmen, on the other hand, can learn the fundamentals of batting earlier because, even with a huge growth spurt late in life, the way they bat is largely the same. It's why most places restrict the number of overs a bowler can bowl in a spell in youth cricket. And if you want an example of how much a sudden growth spurt can change the way you bowl, look at a bloke like Cullen Bailey for South Australia.
i m aware of the physical limits of early years .... even a young batsmen can't bat for 1 1/2 days as in test cricket. haven't you seen that the boundries are shorter when young blokes play .... techniques change for batsmen too, don't we hear abt the 'adjustments' that batsman make

if a batsman is taught how to play the ball on the front/back foot, hit a cover drive, etc correctly then a bowler is taught how to roll his arm over, hold the seam, etc correctly too .... the relevance of technique in both cases is of equal importance
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
the relevance of technique in both cases is of equal importance
I agree with most of your post actually but I disagree quite a bit with that last sentence. The importance of bowling technique is indeed underplayed, but I'd never go as far to say it was just as relevant as batting technique.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
i m aware of the physical limits of early years .... even a young batsmen can't bat for 1 1/2 days as in test cricket. haven't you seen that the boundries are shorter when young blokes play .... techniques change for batsmen too, don't we hear abt the 'adjustments' that batsman make

if a batsman is taught how to play the ball on the front/back foot, hit a cover drive, etc correctly then a bowler is taught how to roll his arm over, hold the seam, etc correctly too .... the relevance of technique in both cases is of equal importance
I would argue that learning the correct technique, timing, etc. to play a cover drive takes far longer than learning how to roll your arm over, hold the seam, etc. One (batting) involves more than just motor parts of the brain (like bowling). It also uses central executive processing, etc. Rolling your arm over is, well, just that. Knowing how, when, etc. to play something like a cover drive is a different story. Bowling is more about learned behaviours, repetition, etc.

I'm a bowler, myself and I can tell you that I've bowled many deliveries with correct technique and taken many wickets yet I can't remember the last time I played a lovely cover drive to the fence. :D
 

ret

International Debutant
I would argue that learning the correct technique, timing, etc. to play a cover drive takes far longer than learning how to roll your arm over, hold the seam, etc. One (batting) involves more than just motor parts of the brain (like bowling). It also uses central executive processing, etc. Rolling your arm over is, well, just that. Knowing how, when, etc. to play something like a cover drive is a different story. Bowling is more about learned behaviours, repetition, etc.

I'm a bowler, myself and I can tell you that I've bowled many deliveries with correct technique and taken many wickets yet I can't remember the last time I played a lovely cover drive to the fence. :D
wrong analogy

timing the ball properly would be comparable to putting the ball in the right areas or something like that

i guess that a batsman will tell you the opposite :p
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
wrong analogy

timing the ball properly would be comparable to putting the ball in the right areas or something like that

i guess that a batsman will tell you the opposite :p
Yeah but I'm not just talking about timing, am I? And again, the ability time the ball is cognitively more demanding than putting the ball in the right areas. There are many more components to playing a batting shot than there are to bowling a ball. Batting, you have to have technique, etc. up and running but you also have to make decisions as the ball comes down regarding it's line, length, movement, etc. You're reacting to what's happening which requires higher-level processing in terms of adjusting thinking as the situation changes such as whether the ball is quicker than you thought, swinging more than the last ball in the same area, how much it bounces, etc.

Bowling, once you let go of the ball, it's over. You're no longer reacting to what's happening and it doesn't require the same ability to track or update situations quickly in the same way batting does. It's cognitively far less taxing and this is why these cognitions need to be developed from a far younger age whereas bowling, someone can come into fairly late. In fact, quite a few of the very best and most injury-free bowlers took it up seriously fairly late (Curtly, Glenn McGrath, etc.).
 
Last edited:

ret

International Debutant
Yeah but I'm not just talking about timing, am I? There are many more components to playing a batting shot than there are to bowling a ball. Batting, you have to have technique, etc. up and running but you also have to make decisions as the ball comes down regarding it's line, length, movement, etc. You're reacting to what's happening which requires higher-level processing in terms of adjusting thinking as the situation changes such as whether the ball is quicker than you thought, swinging more than the last ball in the same area, how much it bounces, etc.

Bowling, once you let go of the ball, it's over. You're no longer reacting to what's happening and it doesn't require the same ability to track or update situations quickly in the same way batting does. It's cognitively far less taxing and this is why these cognitions need to be developed from a far younger age whereas bowling, someone can come into fairly late.
when a guy like Afridi is smacking the ball around without even moving his feet then all that does look easy doesn't it

letting the ball go requires imagination, skill, etc too .... and entreprenuers will tell you that setting something in motion is a difficult thing

then you are unnecessarily pondering on to things like whats more difficult, action or reaction, which is again subjective and out of place in this discussion
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
then you are unnecessarily pondering on to things like whats more difficult, action or reaction, which is again subjective and out of place in this discussion
It's not subjective at all. fMRI studies for decades have shown which sort of brain machinations require more effort, are slower/faster, which ones develop and at what age, etc. It's entirely relevant to this discussion and not uneccessary at all. It stands to reason and the research backs it up that reacting to a fast-changing situation (batting) is an exponentially more complex problem to deal with than, say, thinking about what ball to bowl next and where as they use different parts of the brain at different speeds, etc. The skillset to be a good batsman is entirely different to that of a bowler and, considering the above and available research on such brain behaviour, takes longer to develop fully. This isn't my opinion on the matter, much psych literature is behind what I'm saying.
 

ret

International Debutant
It's not subjective at all. fMRI studies for decades have shown which sort of brain machinations require more effort, are slower/faster, which ones develop and at what age, etc. It's entirely relevant to this discussion and not uneccessary at all. It stands to reason and the research backs it up that reacting to a fast-changing situation (batting) is an exponentially more complex problem to deal with than, say, thinking about what ball to bowl next and where as they use different parts of the brain at different speeds, etc. The skillset to be a good batsman is entirely different to that of a bowler and, considering the above and available research on such brain behaviour, takes longer to develop fully. This isn't my opinion on the matter, much psych literature is behind what I'm saying.
haha, so based on your point, i guess, fielding which is an event of reacting after a batsman has hit the ball should be 'technically' more difficult than batting :p
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
haha, so based on your point, i guess, fielding which is an event of reacting after a batsman has hit the ball should be 'technically' more difficult than batting :p
You are so not getting it.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
I skimmed through the article so may have missed something but will comment from what i got from it

In countries like India,

but still we have good quality players. esp batsmen, coming up .... i wonder how many of Ind gr8 batsmen would hv gone to previliged coaching facilities in their early years

3. I don't get the point of the need of developing proper technique in early years for a batsmen while a bowler can start of late
Firstly, Id rather you actually read the piece if you are going to make comments disagreeing with it :)

Secondly the situation is quite different to that of India. India has large numbers of the population playing cricket at a young age and wanting to be cricketers. It may just be street cricket or tennis ball cricket but it is important in batting for it to feel natural and a 2nd instinct to be developed. This familiarity with the sport from a young age exists in India but not Black South Africa. Technique isnt essentially added as a tiny boy, it is added later upon a foundation of being comfortable with the bat and hitting the ball. You make comparisons with India, as I said there are a number of reasons why this is different to India, however the Indian system is also hardly efficient at producing talent. There are a billion people in India and the system inefficiently produces talent below that of Australia with a pop of 18 million.

As for your final point about being able to come to bowling late. It happens. Over coaching of seam bowlers is a common theme in selectorial talks in modern day cricket.

Increasingly bowlers that are newer to the game and with a less forced and technical action are being looked for as they generally have greater potential, understand their own games better (as they worked it out for themselves) and bowl quicker.
 
Last edited:

Precambrian

Banned
Nice read.

Yep. Quite an analysis into the reasons there. However one needs to really understand :

"How much of a priority is cricket as a game to a black child in South Africa, given the still relatively poor economic background he/she is born and brought up?"
 

StumpMic

School Boy/Girl Cricketer
2ndly, there are instances of bowling centric players like Shastri, Imran, etc turn into better batsmen but the reverse has not been true, which makes me ponder if bowling is something that can be taken up anytime, while batting needs access to proper coaching from early years

Afridi is an example of a batsman who turned into an above average bowler.

Those Black students that attend such impressive institutions often hold the cultural belief that weight gain and obesity is a sign of wealth and stature. Those Black students who attend schools that produce great batting talent are disproportionately overweight, unathletic and uninterested in sport, and are not in a position to excel in cricket. The irony is that those Blacks in a privileged position capable of gaining all the advantages in sports development held by wealthy Whites are often uninterested and incapable. Tessa van der Merwe of the International Association for the Study of Obesity said, "when being overweight is seen as a sign of health and wealth, it is extremely difficult to change this perception."
So we are to believe that rich black kids are lazy and fat? So they turn to bowling? There have been plenty of overweight batsman in world cricket over the years and next to none overweight bowlers. So how come if rich black kids are overweight they end up being bowlers and not batsmen? And, given that SA produces so few spinners am I to believe these fat kids end up as fast bowlers? 8-) :blink:
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
So we are to believe that rich black kids are lazy and fat? So they turn to bowling? There have been plenty of overweight batsman in world cricket over the years and next to none overweight bowlers. So how come if rich black kids are overweight they end up being bowlers and not batsmen? And, given that SA produces so few spinners am I to believe these fat kids end up as fast bowlers? 8-) :blink:
They don't do anything really in cricket.

The bowlers come from a different socio-economic group.

The point is that the top white batsmen (not bowlers) often come from from certain wealthy institutions. Greatly disproportionally the Black students at these schools are less interested in sport and in poor shape and can't take advantage of the same opportunities as the more intense and aggressive (especially Afrikaans) White childeren.

As I said, wealth and opportunity plays a large part in batting development in South Africa. The Black Africans that are wealthy are culturally and physically different to the poor Black Africans where the good athletes (such as soccer players) are predominently drawn from.

The article clearly explains that, regards less of race, batsmen and bowlers are being found in different places and are not produced evenly by the same proccess. It is the opposite of what you think is being said, that the rich Black Africans turn to fast bowling. The reality is that bowlers are being produced away from the areas traditionally producing batting.

And, given that SA produces so few spinners am I to believe these fat kids end up as fast bowlers?
The answer is, of course not. Nowhere is that even suggested. It is the opposite of what is explained.
 
Last edited:

Top