• 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.

Appreciating good techniques

wfdu_ben91

International 12th Man
I could go over it again, but I won't do, because I unlike some am a considerate person who doesn't want to bore everyone to death with posting of the type they're utterly sick of.

Suffice to say that in none of those examples, except possibly the lattermost, did Hayden successfully combat the swinging ball.
Agree to disagree then. I know that he did have to encounter swing bowling for the majority of his career post 2000/01, merely because I watched him bat. You can believe whatever you want, but you couldn't possibly prove that he didn't.

Unless you're advocating standing halfway down the pitch it still has time to swing easily enough to cause batsmen problems if the bowler is one who aims his deliveries rather than acts on a metronome.
Yeah, do you reckon it's easier to counteract swing bowling when the ball is swinging slightly or a mile? By standing outside your crease, you have get a little bit've swing, but by standing on your crease gives the ball a better chance for the ball to move more then what it would if you were standing outside of your crease and hence is even more difficult to face.

Standing outside your crease also forces the bowlers to change up their length, so unless they bowl half volley length then you're in no real danger of getting out LBW because of how far the ball still has to travel.

As Richard rightly pointed out, unless you're half-way down the track, the ball is still going to have time to swing. The ball only needs to swing a couple of inches to successfully take the edge.

As for your dig at me, I was genuinely asking a question, not trying to have a go. You're far too defensive for your own good.
Pretty hard to know when you turn off your VM's and take digs at me in other threads, tbh.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
We need to be clear what we mean by more or less swing. Are we referring to lateral movement from the time it starts to change course till it reaches the batsman (or wicket) or are we talking of the angle of swerve.

The swinging ball becomes more difficult when it swings late. Of course it swings late then it means it is happening later in its flight so it has less distance to travel. This means that for the same 'angle' of swerve' it would move less laterally.

The greater angle of swerve beats you by a bigger margin for sure whether it does more damage or less will depend upon where it was when it started swinging and whether it is coming in to the batsman or going away.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
We need to be clear what we mean by more or less swing. Are we referring to lateral movement from the time it starts to change course till it reaches the batsman (or wicket) or are we talking of the angle of swerve.

The swinging ball becomes more difficult when it swings late. Of course it swings late then it means it is happening later in its flight so it has less distance to travel. This means that for the same 'angle' of swerve' it would move less laterally.

The greater angle of swerve beats you by a bigger margin for sure whether it does more damage or less will depend upon where it was when it started swinging and whether it is coming in to the batsman or going away.
Speaks the truth.

Those who get the ball to start swinging just before the ball bounces are the most lethal, as the batsman has less time to pick up how much the ball is actually swinging, and then there's the possibility of the ball hitting the seam and doing something all-together different.
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Well it's not. The less it swings the easier it is to counteract and the easier it is to hit.
Tend to agree and disagree. If it moves a mile away from you, you can just defend the line, and let the ball beat the bat, which is not possible when it moves slightly provided the ball pitches short of a length. But a halfvolley moving obscene amounts off the deck would take the edge on a drive, while a lesser moving ball will be better conencted.

The "perfect" amount of movement differs with the length and the shot that is played IMO.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Agree to disagree then. I know that he did have to encounter swing bowling for the majority of his career post 2000/01, merely because I watched him bat. You can believe whatever you want, but you couldn't possibly prove that he didn't.
No-one can possibly prove anything without offering every ball of 2001/02 onwards on footage. All that's ever going to be proferred is power of recall.
Yeah, do you reckon it's easier to counteract swing bowling when the ball is swinging slightly or a mile?
It depends on all sorts of things. A quickish (130kph+) bowler who swings the ball a lot and bowls a lot of balls at the stumps is essentially unplayable, especially if he can bowl a well-disguised straight-on ball. Equally, if a bowler is swinging it less there's much more chance of nicks, if it goes late enough. It also depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the batsman's technique, and to some small extent the speed of the pitch - and to a much larger extent the bounce in it. Moderate outswing on a very low deck isn't often going to take many wickets because even if you get lots of edges most will fall short of the slips\wicketkeeper.
Standing outside your crease also forces the bowlers to change up their length, so unless they bowl half volley length then you're in no real danger of getting out LBW because of how far the ball still has to travel.
The "still got a long way to go" nonsense has increasingly been thrown out of the window what with HawkEye, and good that it has been. Generally, these days it's realised that if the ball hits the batsman in line and the bowler doesn't bowl from a massive angle then it's probably going to hit the stumps. As for the bounce, unless you're playing at an old-school WACA, you can still bowl an in-between length and hit the stumps even with a batsman standing outside his crease. Meanwhile, finally, if the ball swings any length is potentially threatening provided the line is right. Even a full-toss can be a dangerous ball with large swing.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Latest thinking seems to be that a keeping a still head is the single most important factor.
Basically the premise of all technique though, not just "playing swing bowling".

Simply, if your eyes are moving, and the target (ball) is moving, then you are simply making it harder for yourself to hit the target with the bat. This is further exaggerated if there is horizontal movement from the ball.
I know Matt said he didn't want this made about one player, but I immediately thought of Ponting when I read these posts. Early on in his innings he seems to have a slight problem with his head falling away to to off side and out of line with the ball. Looks like he could be a prime LBW candidate, but rarely is in practice.

Obviously it's not something you'd coach, but he seems to go ok with an imperfect technique.

What about front foot versus back foot? Talking in general terms here, but to use England as an example, our SA-raised blokes seem keener to get on the front foot than the natives. I'm assuming this is due to being brought up on truer tracks. As English decks generally seem to have more life our chaps tend to be more comfortable on the back foot to counter movement off the surface.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
As long as they don't turn into "Is Hayden a FTB" quote-war style direness, examples are really very welcome to discuss or illustrate points. ;)

re Ponting, you're quite right in that it's been accepted that he's an lbw candidate when he first comes in, at least relative to how secure he is once settled.

To pick another example for discussion, what exactly does/did Shane Watson do wrong when he was getting out lbw? A similar thing?
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
To pick another example for discussion, what exactly does/did Shane Watson do wrong when he was getting out lbw? A similar thing?
My take was that he was playing slight across the line to balls coming back in, a little too much toward mid-on. I'm not that much of a batting technician though so I'm sure someone has a better explanation.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Surprising if that's the case. How does he go overall in terms of frequency of dismissal for <20 compared to other batsmen?
 
Surprising if that's the case. How does he go overall in terms of frequency of dismissal for <20 compared to other batsmen?
He gets out less often to smaller scores under 10 runs, 20 runs to both Tendy and Lara, I used those two because of the sample size.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
When it comes to Technique, Sunny had the best one IMO . Starting from his immaculate yet simple stance, he had great balance throughout a shot execution. I have seen so much of Sunny and pretty much every picture of him batting ( in my memory) looks like a perfectly balanced position.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
People tend to look at the more defensive batsmen for perfect technique. Very often stroke players have rock solid technique as well. garfield Sobers is a great example.

I believe the same was the case with Frank Worrell.

Of the defensive players one has seen Hanif Mohammad stands out for his immaculate defense, concise and economical footwork and fabulously steady head. Gavaskar was almost a replica of Hanif with a slightly more aggressive attitude.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Here is Sobers against England in 1973 that makes it 19 years after his test debut.

In the midst of some glorious front foot drives, look out for the backfoot drives, one (1.05 mins) off Tony Greig to straight fence and another (1.50) to covers of Willis.

Sobers 150 at Lords 1973

You cant find a fault with a single one of his shots.
 

King Pietersen

International Captain
Great video that. Sobers' bat speed, especially through the covers is just exceptional. Sobers really was a joy to watch!

On a slightly un-related note; is it just me, or have techniques become slightly more robotic and in some respects stiffer? You don't see many players nowadays really flowing into their shots like Sobers was in that innings. Bowlers too appear to be far slingier in their actions, you see far more bowlers, especially spinners with a very slingy type action in footage of the 70's and 80's. Is it a bi-product of over-coaching? or is it just one of the many evolutions of the game? or finally, am I just seeing things? :p
 

Top