Leading Oz coaches refuse to teach doosra

[BoyBrumby]

Two of them being left armers and hence cannot bowl the doosra. The third one's presence denotes absence of cricket played by the usual suspects and the general deficiency of solid off spinners of late.

Surely an SLA bowler could bowl a doosra? Whatever you might like to call it, the delivery would just be the mirror image of an off-spinner's version. Pretty sure Panesar has spoken about practicing one in the nets at least. Chinamen bowlers' wrong 'uns are called just that, so I guess their orthodox brethren's ball that goes the other way might just as welll be called a doosra.

Regardless, my point still stands, it is possible for finger spinners to make a go of things without the delivery.

 

[Pigeon]

Surely an SLA bowler could bowl a doosra? Whatever you might like to call it, the delivery would just be the mirror image of an off-spinner's version. Pretty sure Panesar has spoken about practicing one in the nets at least. Chinamen bowlers' wrong 'uns are called just that, so I guess their orthodox brethren's ball that goes the other way might just as welll be called a doosra.

Regardless, my point still stands, it is possible for finger spinners to make a go of things without the delivery.

Classical off spin is no way the mirror image of slow left arm. Just like LHB is no mirror image of RHB. I am not pretending to be the greatest expert of spin bowling in the world. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable could step up to fill in the reasons.

And I do not agree with your reasoning of "If SLAs can, surely offies too can without the doosra". First of all how many SLAs are there in the history of test cricket who can be termed as world class? (say have taken above 250 test wickets at a good average?) That in itself should show the longetivity issues of LSAs.

 

[Richard]

Left-arm fingerspin has always been constrained by the same limitations as right-arm fingerspin. Given a non-turning surface, neither will have any effect against quality batting.

However, given a turning surface and (and this would be regarded as the standard) a surfeit of RHBs, a left-arm fingerspinner would generally be a decent bit more effective than a right-arm fingerspinner. This is the reason why, among the groups of fingerspinners who've had regular access to turning decks (ie, generally England before 1970, and India\Sri Lanka\sometimes-Pakistan), left-armers have generally abounded more than right-armers.

Almost all the few good ones from elsewhere (Tayfield from South Africa, Gibbs from West Indies, Johnson from Australia, for example) have been right-armers. Quality left-arm fingerspinners from any of the non-subcontinental countries (and England up to 1970) can probably be counted without too many counters: Vettori for example, or (briefly) Valentine.

As for the Doosra, any fingerspinner can bowl it. Same way no left-armer has yet bowled wristspin to a remotely notable standard, no left-arm fingerspinner has yet produced a Doosra (so far only Saqlain and Harbhajan of those with any decent skill have produced it of the right-armers, let's remember). But as long as they keep trying, it'll happen eventually.

 

[JimmyGS]

Two of them being left armers and hence cannot bowl the doosra. The third one's presence denotes absence of cricket played by the usual suspects and the general deficiency of solid off spinners of late.

Wtf are you talking about? Of course a left arm spinner can bowl a doosra.

 

[Pigeon]

Left-arm fingerspin has always been constrained by the same limitations as right-arm fingerspin. Given a non-turning surface, neither will have any effect against quality batting.

However, given a turning surface and (and this would be regarded as the standard) a surfeit of RHBs, a left-arm fingerspinner would generally be a decent bit more effective than a right-arm fingerspinner. This is the reason why, among the groups of fingerspinners who've had regular access to turning decks (ie, generally England before 1970, and India\Sri Lanka\sometimes-Pakistan), left-armers have generally abounded more than right-armers.

Almost all the few good ones from elsewhere (Tayfield from South Africa, Gibbs from West Indies, Johnson from Australia, for example) have been right-armers. Quality left-arm fingerspinners from any of the non-subcontinental countries (and England up to 1970) can probably be counted without too many counters: Vettori for example, or (briefly) Valentine.

As for the Doosra, any fingerspinner can bowl it. Same way no left-armer has yet bowled wristspin to a remotely notable standard, no left-arm fingerspinner has yet produced a Doosra (so far only Saqlain and Harbhajan of those with any decent skill have produced it of the right-armers, let's remember). But as long as they keep trying, it'll happen eventually.

Could be slightly OT, but I am surprised and actually chuffed at the stock of fingerspinners that Bangladesh seems to throw up regularly. Two or three among them, namely Shakib Al Hasan, Mahmudullah, Razzak etc can be world class should they do remain consistent.

 

[Matt79]

Left-arm fingerspin has always been constrained by the same limitations as right-arm fingerspin. Given a non-turning surface, neither will have any effect against quality batting.

However, given a turning surface and (and this would be regarded as the standard) a surfeit of RHBs, a left-arm fingerspinner would generally be a decent bit more effective than a right-arm fingerspinner. This is the reason why, among the groups of fingerspinners who've had regular access to turning decks (ie, generally England before 1970, and India\Sri Lanka\sometimes-Pakistan), left-armers have generally abounded more than right-armers.

Almost all the few good ones from elsewhere (Tayfield from South Africa, Gibbs from West Indies, Johnson from Australia, for example) have been right-armers. Quality left-arm fingerspinners from any of the non-subcontinental countries (and England up to 1970) can probably be counted without too many counters: Vettori for example, or (briefly) Valentine.

As for the Doosra, any fingerspinner can bowl it. Same way no left-armer has yet bowled wristspin to a remotely notable standard, no left-arm fingerspinner has yet produced a Doosra (so far only Saqlain and Harbhajan of those with any decent skill have produced it of the right-armers, let's remember). But as long as they keep trying, it'll happen eventually.

whazzup?

say what?

flipping heck...

I say!

Starting to struggle, itbt...

 

[chaminda_00]

lol left armers can't bowl the doorsa. I guess you have never seen Hearth bowl then?

 

[Richard]

whazzup?

say what?

flipping heck...

I say!

Hogg was hopeless, Sobers was principally a seam bowler (like Johnny Wardle it may have been no coincidence that one of the few decent practitioners used it as a change-up) and Adams, well, he was even more hopeless than Hogg. What's more he couldn't bowl the standard wristspinner's Break delivery, his stock-ball was the Googly. Who's the fourth pic of?

And as for Michael Bevan who you edited in, the inclusion of a batsman whose bowling was about as inaccurate as anyone I've ever seen says it all.

 

[Pigeon]

Who's the fourth pic of?

Looks curiously like Alan Stanford.

 

[Richard]

lol left armers can't bowl the doorsa. I guess you have never seen Hearth bowl then?

So Herath does bowl it? I've never seen him bowl but his change-up ball always seemed from what it was described as to be Doosra-esque.

Shame he hasn't done better through his career really.

 

[Jakester1288]

Hate to sound ignorant here, but what is a doosra?

As Richard said, it is the finger-spinners delivery that turns the opposite way to the standard off break (eg, for a right arm off spin bowler, bowling to a right hand batsman, it's a ball that would turn to the off side, or from the bowlers point of view, to the left).

I've tried bowling it numerous times (I am a seam bowler, but occasionally bowl a bit of spin), and I say it is impossible to bowl legally. Whilst IMO, in time they will learn to bowl it legally, whether through actually learning how to do it more effectively, or the rules being bended again, but it will eventually happen. Thus, I think this is stupid, we should be teaching our young spin bowlers the doosra as a variation ball, after they have competently learned their stock ball and the ins and outs of bowling finger spin.

 

[Matt79]

Fourth pic is Chuck Fleetwood-Smith. Hogg was not hopeless. He never got much of a chance in tests, but he was a fantastic ODI bowler. Bevan, playing as an allrounder, took nearly two wickets at match at a tick under 25.

Sobers, like those I've listed above, could deliver wrist-spin out of their left hand at more than a "remotely notable standard".

 

[The Sean]

Who's the fourth pic of?

Looks curiously like Alan Stanford.

That would be the wonderful Leslie O'Brien Fleetwood-Smith, known to the cricketing world as Chuck.

EDIT - probably fitting that the bloke who posted it in the first place beat me to the answer.

 

[Matt79]

Forgot to mention the hairiest man in world cricket as well! :shame:

 

[Richard]

Fourth pic is Chuck Fleetwood-Smith. Hogg was not hopeless. He never got much of a chance in tests, but he was a fantastic ODI bowler. Bevan, playing as an allrounder, took nearly two wickets at match at a tick under 25.

Sobers, like those I've listed above, could deliver wrist-spin out of their left hand at more than a "remotely notable standard".

Fleetwood-Smith was pretty hopeless too - worst figures in Test history or something. Hogg was not a "fantastic" ODI bowler, he benefited from the strength of Australia's seam attack and the fact that he would regularly be coming on at ~90-4 or ~70-1 off 20 overs. He was not that much of a spinner of the ball and did not possess particularly outstanding accuracy. The main reason he struggled to get much of a chance in Tests is because he would hardly have played First-Class cricket for WA but for his batting. Bevan had no more than 3 or 4 Tests as an all-rounder, had he played more his bowling average would've ended at 60 or so - he was that bad. Sobers hardly ever bowled wristspin, he was mostly a seamer (and occasionally a fingerspinner) so how good he was at it we'll never really truly know.

 

[Matt79]

whatever

 

[Richard]

Really begs the question of what the point of posting is at all if that's going to be your final response TBH.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Forgot to mention the hairiest man in world cricket as well! :shame:

Thought Punter bowled seam up, tbh?

 

[Jakester1288]

Thought Punter bowled seam up, tbh?

I know what you are getting at, but Ponting actually bowls his mediums and some off spinners as well.

I'm not sure if he is pace only, but I know he used to bowl off spinners.

 

[Streetwise]

Exactly...

To be very honest its mindset like this that has created such a lack of good spin bowlers in Australia, people like John Davison (FFS), are teaching spin bowling to aspiring spin bowlers.

Dean Jones recently said that CA should seriously think about hiring people like Saqlain and ask him to coach young Aussie spin bowlers, and that's definitely something that should be done, a lot of spin bowlers in Australia hardly know much about their trade, because most of them aren't being coached by the right people.

I think all these "spin mentors" really need to wake up and smell the coffee, they need to realise that's its year 2009, and every finger-spinner around the world is either bowling a doosra or trying to develop one, because since the pitches are flat like ****, they know they won't last long without having any variations.

Great spinners are not taught how to bowl, Murali for instance was not the creation of coaches teaching him how to bowl and the same with Warne. These players had something that was special and the coaches job was to teach them how to play the game using their talent. Warne was mentored by Jenner who encouraged him to have the confidence to do what he does best. Jenner didnt say here this is how you bowl it was more of a talk about what he needs to do to succeed. Murali was the same it was not a coach that came along and said here Murali you should bowl like this or do it this way it is more of a mentor role to help them deal with the mental side of playing cricket.

Mendis is another, nobody taught him how to bowl he just had the talent and needed to be mentored on how best to use that talent. Bowling coaches identify talent then teach the bowler how best to use what talent they have. Most fast bowlers that adjust their action at the request of coaches end up failing miserably. Coaches dont teach players how to bowl, they may suggest some minor adjustments but very little.

This idea that a coach has to be able to bowl the doosra before they can coach a player is poppycock and shows the lack of understanding some people have of what a coaches role is.