'Footwork to pace bowlers is a myth' and other hot takes

[RossTaylorsBox]

I can believe that.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

"The batsman knows if they've hit it" after 15 years of DRS.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

*sees an inswinger*

Ah, just a hint of reverse

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I've heard the theory from Starfighter and others that top-level batsmen can subconsciously tell the length a bowler will bowl by watching the bowler prior to release and picking up alterations in the hand/stride etc. So they know a bouncer is coming before the ball is actually released, even if they don't realise it, and that's how they can adjust and play 150kph bouncers

I'm sceptical to say the least

There is definitely research that much of what we think of as reaction time based skills in sport aren't actually explained that well by measured reaction times. That's not proof that it's subconcious anticipation but that's the most plausible theory.

 

[honestbharani]

The skill is in consistently bowling with a release which has a higher than normal probability of doing something unexpected (and as you say putting it in an area which matters), not in controlling exactly what it does.

Yeah, but when an offie does it, its natural variation. When seamers do it, somehow its some great skill.

 

[honestbharani]

There is definitely research that much of what we think of as reaction time based skills in sport aren't actually explained that well by measured reaction times. That's not proof that it's subconcious anticipation but that's the most plausible theory.

I think its true esp. in those years when there used to be these big long tours of 5 or 6 tests, 5 ODIs and a bunch of FC games. Lets assume a batsman for the home team plays a majority of these matches and a main bowler of the away team does too. Its quite probable that just through facing the bowler so many times, the batsman has naturally adjusted to certain "gives" from the bowler like maybe slightly closer to the umpire means a ball most likely fuller and at the stumps etc.

It may still hold true with all these T20 leagues where certain batsmen face certain number of bowlers very often. But I still think it really is more visible in the tests/FC games as you most likely can face far more overs from the same bowler in that scenario.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

The Head Tracks and Gaze Predicts: How the World’s Best Batters Hit a Ball - PMC

Hitters in fast ball-sports do not align their gaze with the ball throughout ball-flight; rather, they use predictive eye movement strategies that contribute towards their level of interceptive skill. Existing studies claim that (i) baseball and ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

There's probably the tech now to do a similar study during an actual game to see where batters actually look.

 

[Spark]

That might go one way to explaining one curiosity I've long wondered about: why Mitch Starc can bowl 145km/h on the speed gun and still somehow look fast-medium at most, whereas Cummins hovers in the mid-130s yet consistently seems to hurry the batsmen up for pace, as have many "heavy ball" bowlers like him. If the batsmen are reacting (or not reacting, in the case of the latter) to cues in the bowlers' action before the delivery has been bowled then that would make the nominal reaction time much less important.

 

[shortpitched713]

I've heard the theory from Starfighter and others that top-level batsmen can subconsciously tell the length a bowler will bowl by watching the bowler prior to release and picking up alterations in the hand/stride etc. So they know a bouncer is coming before the ball is actually released, even if they don't realise it, and that's how they can adjust and play 150kph bouncers

I'm sceptical to say the least

That's real, it's the 'anticipation', that allows them to deal with deliveries that pure reflex alone wouldn't be adequately reliable for.

 

[thierry henry]

Whenever a ball jags back and bowls a batsman trying to play it through the offside you always hear ‘it’s well bowled, but look at that huge gap between bat and pad’…as if proper off-side stroke play involves thrusting the pat and bad together towards the ball. How do commentators say this without visualising literally any off-side shot they’ve ever seen?

 

[Starfighter]

Whenever a ball jags back and bowls a batsman trying to play it through the offside you always hear ‘it’s well bowled, but look at that huge gap between bat and pad’…as if proper off-side stroke play involves thrusting the pat and bad together towards the ball. How do commentators say this without visualising literally any off-side shot they’ve ever seen?

This one irritates me too. Though people are taught as a basic concept to play that way, nobody actually does. You can play some shots - especially the classic forward defence against spin - that way, but otherwise it would restrict the available range of motion and timing. Not to mention hitting the pad with the bat.

Of course some batsmen do reach out excessively and are unable to adjust to movement which carries the ball through the gap, but the idea that the pads should always there to intercept a delivery that goes inside the bat is silly.

 

[Son Of Coco]

The skill is in consistently bowling with a release which has a higher than normal probability of doing something unexpected (and as you say putting it in an area which matters), not in controlling exactly what it does.

Yeah, the first part of this is just a bowler's stock ball, whatever that might be. At a high level, they'll land this more often than not, but it doesn't mean they get the same result every time.

The variations are more hit and miss, although Cummins seems to be able to get his inswinger going fairly regularly...probably because it requires a very similar seam position to his stock ball. For a bowler that seams it in, however, a leg cutter is probably going to be a lot more difficult to bowl and land regularly.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah, the first part of this is just a bowler's stock ball, whatever that might be. At a high level, they'll land this more often than not, but it doesn't mean they get the same result every time.

The variations are more hit and miss, although Cummins seems to be able to get his inswinger going fairly regularly...probably because it requires a very similar seam position to his stock ball. For a bowler that seams it in, however, a leg cutter is probably going to be a lot more difficult to bowl and land regularly.

Seemed to take Bumrah about 6 months to get that going. Ishant Sharma needed about 6 years.

 

[honestbharani]

Whenever a ball jags back and bowls a batsman trying to play it through the offside you always hear ‘it’s well bowled, but look at that huge gap between bat and pad’…as if proper off-side stroke play involves thrusting the pat and bad together towards the ball. How do commentators say this without visualising literally any off-side shot they’ve ever seen?

I mean, there were old school batsmen (Dravid comes to mind) who did play the drive from closer to their legs and left the ones they couldn't reach. But in today's game especially, it probably just means you are missing out on more scoring opportunities.

 

[Starfighter]

I mean, there were old school batsmen (Dravid comes to mind) who did play the drive from closer to their legs and left the ones they couldn't reach. But in today's game especially, it probably just means you are missing out on more scoring opportunities.

Thing is you've said closer, but it's a line that you see trotted out when there's any gap at all.

Secondly, David was actually out bowled a high (for the era) proportion of the time, so he certainly doesn't stack up as a successful example.

 

[honestbharani]

Thing is you've said closer, but it's a line that you see trotted out when there's any gap at all.

Secondly, David was actually out bowled a high (for the era) proportion of the time, so he certainly doesn't stack up as a successful example.

Yeah but it was mostly defending just based on what I can recall.

 

[Burgey]

'm not saying those things don't happen, I just think the comms team/broadcast folks sometimes go looking for things where they don't always exist based on the result of the ball by the time it gets to the batsman. One goes straight on, then one seams - that's not all bowler skill. Some of it's luck and natural variation. More of the skill is in being able to hammer away on the same length so that when a ball does do something, the batter is ****ed because there's no discernible change in how the ball has been released (because the release wasn't actually any different).

Ironically, one of the blokes who first really spoke at length in commentary about the importance of natural variation to spinners was Warne. it was a great admission, given he'd spent most of his career conning players into thinking he was bowling different balls to them with the same action and wrist position.

 

[Burgey]

I've heard the theory from Starfighter and others that top-level batsmen can subconsciously tell the length a bowler will bowl by watching the bowler prior to release and picking up alterations in the hand/stride etc. So they know a bouncer is coming before the ball is actually released, even if they don't realise it, and that's how they can adjust and play 150kph bouncers

I'm sceptical to say the least

Definitely true. Have seen level 4 coaches try to get their quicks to bowl a bouncer with their head up because it confuses batsmen when they're subconsciously looking for cues from bowlers.

 

[nightprowler10]

I wonder if this is one factor at the absolute top level where some seemingly good bowlers can't buy a wicket, that they give up too many cues. I recall an interview from Wasim when I was a kid talking about how much effort he would put into hiding the ball during the runup and not making any changes in his action.

 

[nightprowler10]

nah wobble seam is real, you're just a shill for Big Swing

Yeah just on this, Asif was a good example of someone who seemed to rely primarily on bowling in good areas and let the wobble do the work. His spells in South Africa in '06 were great to watch as he hit the same spot over and over again with different results. I do recall commentators (either in that series or against England) talking about how brilliant he was for luring the batsman to play one shot but then seaming it the other way, when he was really hitting the same spot over and over again and the batsmen were probably just taking a 50/50 chance.

I will say that he was great at using the crease to change the angle of delivery which likely only made him more lethal on lively pitches.