Let's play psychologist

[SamSawnoff]

And yet Bell faced more of Steyn than Collingwood did...

I only remember Colly facing Steyn.

Bell is a very elegant shot-maker but I never remember anything he does. I'm not sure why. I'm not particularly anti-Bell and I watch more English cricket than anything else.

 

[Howe_zat]

I only remember Colly facing Steyn.

Bell is a very elegant shot-maker but I never remember anything he does. I'm not sure why.

Don't think we can really blame Bell for this.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Mitchell Jonson is one of the most mentally fragile cricketers I've ever seen.

Paul Collingwood, less so.

I honestly think that it has far more to do with his technical issues more than mental. The fact that he doesn't find his action repeatable means that he appears a lot more fragile than he really is.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Does Brett Lee strike anyone as a character with a "short attention span"? I never really got that impression but an Aussie I met on TMSofa definately thought so.

I think it was a massive part of his career. Until the end part of his career (before the tailing off with injury), he was never prepared to work for over after over on a plan, he'd have to try and bowl a wicket ball too soon. It was sort of his role, and I'm sure that Steve Waugh backed him too at times, but he didn't work over a batsman for a long period of time till around 2007 or so, when he emerged as a true leader of an attack.

 

[vic_orthdox]

To clarify: Bell was beaten in 05 as he was promising but simply not good enough yet. In 06-07 he was actually one of our better batsmen, but it's irrelevant as the team was basically hammered.

Bell's learning curve has very little to do with Australia. The point where he stopped being so frustrating and started living up to what he's capable of came after (finally) being dropped & recalled in 2009.

In fact, watch the series against SA if you want the difference in Bell's set up. In '08 he scored an excellent 199 when the going was good but failed elsewhere. In 2009-10 he still hit a big hundred to set up a win, but in the next match played a five-hour 78 while batting to save the game against Steyn & Morkel in murder mode.

Bit of Ashes-only narrative going on here from you guys, kind of unfair.

Edit: And while we're on the subject, getting out to good bowling wasn't what people found so infruriating about Bell and what made them start calling him mentally weak. The logic is kind of flawed but he got that reputation by repeatedly getting to a good-looking 30 and giving it away.

Hold on, but others talk about Watson being mentally frail for regularly getting out when he's in. This was a major pattern of Bell's, including 2006/07. Simply put, when he felt like he was in, and it came about that there was a good patch of bowling, he wasn't prepared to cop it and work through it, he wanted to bat like he was still on top.

 

[Top_Cat]

Mentally tough vs weak is a hard one.

An example; Shane Warne, on the '93 tour to England, manages to restrain himself from bowling his best stuff at Graeme Hick in a warm-up even as Hick goes after him and lands several balls outside the ground. Then he dominates the series. The same Shane Warne takes Andrew Hudson's wicket on a tour to to SA the following year and goes ballistic at Hudson as he walks off.

Shane Warne, mentally tough or not? Some would say so on the evidence of the former but others would question his ability to maintain composure on the latter.

It's a continuum and, a few people aside, whether you rate someone as mentally hard or soft, it often comes down to what the individual watching values in a player. Not to mention it can potentially change radically over time for whatever reasons for the negative (KP), positive (AB) or from a single incident (Phil Simmons, Jamie Siddons). Some people have the seeds of mental fragility/strength in them from the start, others develop them from scratch. It's an incredibly individual thing.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Any player who limits their game over a long period of time to get the best out of themselves is someone that I'd consider mentally tough. That's why I have huge respect for Border, Steve Waugh and Mark Richardson (who was always limited, but was prepared to stick to his guns on what his game was over a long period of time, even if he wasn't scoring).

 

[Top_Cat]

Yet some people would say that Steve Waugh not playing the hook is a concession to quick bowlers....

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Mentally tough vs weak is a hard one...

Great post. It's hard alright. Hard to understand the pressures that the players have to cope with, which is perhaps why I made a mistake with Ponting.

I think of the saying "Don't be proud that you're strong enough to control your passions, be ashamed that your passions are weak enough to be controlled." This is why I put Jesse Ryder on the tough list - he is obviously a highly passionate guy, but has managed to control that enough to find a place in an international level team.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Mark Richardson...

Agree with this. Richardson always reminded me of Andrew Jones, in that he didn't look that great but you'd go away and come back an hour later and he was still there. Massive determination to transform from a spinner who couldn't bat at all to a world-class opener averaging in the mid 40s.

 

[Furball]

Yet some people would say that Steve Waugh not playing the hook is a concession to quick bowlers....

It might be a concession to quick bowlers, but it's also a way of not getting out to them. Which at the end of the day is the most precious resource a batsman has at his disposal.

 

[Top_Cat]

I wasn't making that judgement, though. The point I was making is that the perception of whether someone is mentally tough vs weak is down to what the person making the judgement values most of the time. You can find examples of behaviour in literally every player which, depending on how you view the world, you could make a case for mental toughness or weakness.

For example, Viv Richards never wore a helmet but was an incredibly emotional bloke, prone to tough-guy outbusts at anyone who looked at him sideways. Plus he couldn't adapt his game well at all when his eyes and reflexes started to go even slightly so you could definitely make the case that was a mental block rather than his physical limitations. Greg Chappell was hard as nails with the bat in his hands most of the time but, as Ian Chappell has said, against good spinners on a turning deck, he couldn't play ugly and improvise so didn't score that well in those situations. And, obviously, he's had a few very public meltdowns.

Mentally tough or mentally weak? Depends on who you are and what you value. It's subtle confirmation bias at work and changes over time too.

I certainly call blokes soft or whatever but I'm not that serious about it. When i actually think about it, there's no definitive answer which even vaguely fits anyone over the course of a lifetime.

 

[Burgey]

Mitchell Jonson is one of the most mentally fragile cricketers I've ever seen.

Paul Collingwood, less so.

Mitchell Johnson is an utter enigma. I can't work out what makes him tick.

On playing psychologist, Andrew Hilditch does my ****ing head in.

Analyse that.

 

[Burgey]

Mentally tough vs weak is a hard one.

An example; Shane Warne, on the '93 tour to England, manages to restrain himself from bowling his best stuff at Graeme Hick in a warm-up even as Hick goes after him and lands several balls outside the ground. Then he dominates the series. The same Shane Warne takes Andrew Hudson's wicket on a tour to to SA the following year and goes ballistic at Hudson as he walks off.

Shane Warne, mentally tough or not? Some would say so on the evidence of the former but others would question his ability to maintain composure on the latter.

It's a continuum and, a few people aside, whether you rate someone as mentally hard or soft, it often comes down to what the individual watching values in a player. Not to mention it can potentially change radically over time for whatever reasons for the negative (KP), positive (AB) or from a single incident (Phil Simmons, Jamie Siddons). Some people have the seeds of mental fragility/strength in them from the start, others develop them from scratch. It's an incredibly individual thing.

Shane Warne is insanely tough upstairs, cricket-wise. I mean, in 2005 his life unraveled yet he was a one man army. He copped pummellings too, in India for example, but he kept coming. His ego got in the way at times, like in 99, but he was a very tough cricketer. I suppose he had a great ability to compartmentalise his life. Which is a strength unto itself.

Agree with Macca, when blokes limit their games to prosper, that's tough. Blokes who come back from injury too - Gillespie, Lillee. Tendulkar after his form slump as well. They're tough.

Really though, let's just say Allan Border and close the thread.

 

[Burgey]

I would say both players in that situation are equally mentally frail.

In my eyes, a true sign of mental strength is being able to block out things in the macro environment, if you will, and not let those things dictate your actions/level of success.

This. There are blokes you set out to sledge as you know it will rile them and they'll get out. There are others who like a chat and for whom the silent treatment works really well.

The scary ones are those against whom nothing works.

 

[Top_Cat]

This. There are blokes you set out to sledge as you know it will rile them and they'll get out. There are others who like a chat and for whom the silent treatment works really well.

The scary ones are those against whom nothing works.

How about blokes against whom this changes over time?

Lara, for example. Early on, you'd never sledge him yet mid-career, you'd be crazy if you didn't sledge him. I bet there are more blokes deliberately having a chat to Ponting these days too.

Then there's Sachin. You never sledge Sachin. Mainly because he'll punish you with the bat but then he'll calmly walk up to you after play and politely mention he was a little bit hurt by what you said and "Was that really necessary? You're usually a really great guy, what happened to him? Is something wrong" and you'll feel guilty.

WAC.

 

[Burgey]

How about blokes against whom this changes over time?

Lara, for example. Early on, you'd never sledge him yet mid-career, you'd be crazy if you didn't sledge him. I bet there are more blokes deliberately having a chat to Ponting these days too.

Then there's Sachin. You never sledge Sachin. Mainly because he'll punish you with the bat but then he'll calmly walk up to you after play and politely mention he was a little bit hurt by what you said and "Was that really necessary? You're usually a really great guy, what happened to him? Is something wrong" and you'll feel guilty.

WAC.

Haha, well that was the case with Sachin early on, but I think since January 2008 we all know his hearing hasn't been what it once was

 

[Top_Cat]

haha, oh no you did not!

 

[Burgey]

Patron Saint of Cochlea Implants.

 

[vic_orthdox]

How about blokes against whom this changes over time?

Lara, for example. Early on, you'd never sledge him yet mid-career, you'd be crazy if you didn't sledge him. I bet there are more blokes deliberately having a chat to Ponting these days too.

Mid-career? You mean like near the turn of the century, when Andy Bichel decided to start sledging him in a game for Aus A vs the Windies. Brian then hit him for 6 fours in an over, made a double hundred and then got 180 at Adelaide in the next Test?