1-800-CallGoughy The Technical Helpline for International Bowlers

[Autobahn]

Oh Lord,

This is what I am talking about. Qualifications do not help you in this regard. Having a certificate does not mean you know what you are talking about.

I will constantly fight this 'idea' of a course being the be all and end all.

You should take them seriously because
a) They are correct
b) I am a successful coach

The fact I refuse to take certain exams has nothing to do with the relevance of knowing what you are doing.

This is getting a bit annoying now. I work based on my knowledge not implimenting lower level stuff from others.

But surely you can see the flipside of the coin that even your "correct" coaching methods could be wrong.

Coaching qualifications are i agree not the be all and end all of coaches but at least it ensures a basic standard knowledge of coaching where the better coaches will expand on that knowledge

For example whereas a qualified coach you can guarantee will know this, this and this, a good qualified coach will know this, this, this, this and that.

That's what exams are all about, meeting a standard, it's up to the individual to expand on those standards.

But without qualifications you can't guarantee a standard and that makes it much harder to judge a coach.

 

[Goughy]

But surely you can see the flipside of the coin that even your "correct" coaching methods could be wrong.

Coaching qualifications are i agree not the be all and end all of coaches but at least it ensures a basic standard knowledge of coaching where the better coaches will expand on that knowledge

For example whereas a qualified coach you can guarantee will know this, this and this, a good qualified coach will know this, this, this, this and that.

That's what exams are all about, meeting a standard, it's up to the individual to expand on those standards.

But without qualifications you can't guarantee a standard and that makes it much harder to judge a coach.

What you fail to understand is that the lower level badges are just that. Lower level stuff, basic things that whilst important do not come close to guaranteeing a coach is any good or understands the game.

Most of my work comes from correcting guys who go to a certain Academy who come away with more problems than they started with.

Lower level coaching certificates have a role to play, as I said getting people who are not the most experienced or knowledgable helping people. As previously mentioned, I would be happier if a non-playing History teacher took them if they were to coach my kids but as for proving knowledge or coaching ability they are worthless.

Im not trying to sell myself to you, I dont need to.

EDIT- Note about our company. Depending on the season we have about 40-60 coaches working for us across a variety of sports at any one time. Now coaching qualifications are not a big selling point when we employ someone as we are not great believers that they prove anything. Now, a qualification will never count against you but playing and coaching experience are equally if not more valid. After that we want to talk to you about sport and watch you in action. If you are any good you can work for us without any certificates and if you are very qualified but a bad coach you will be out of the door very soon.

Can we get back on topic, The bowlers I mentioned have basic flaws (Im not being controversial here or spouting any radical theory) the question is why they exist and why they have not been sorted out.

 

[Sir Redman]

Goughy

Could you tell me what's wrong with Shane Bond? I've noticed a number of changes to his action since he had his back titanium-ised - his head is more upright in his action, his left arm and left leg are further to the left (so he's more open at the crease) and he keeps his arms much more still at the crease - but he still keeps getting injured. It's so frustrating having your number 1 bowler break down the whole time, and we desperately need him (particularly in tests, since no-one else can take wickets. Mind you, we don't actually play any tests these days). Is he just ultra-fragile, or are there still a number of things wrong with his action?

 

[Goughy]

Goughy

Could you tell me what's wrong with Shane Bond?

I would love to but Ive just not seen enough of him play.

I was so disappointed that he missed out on so much cricket during the SA tour. I was really looking forward to seeing him bowl.

Ive not watched him close enough to make a detailed assessment, I just hope that the reason he breaks down is not down to his action and that the same reason for the injuries is not where he generates a lot of his pace from. It would be hard on him and NZ if his greatest strength turned out to be his biggest problem.

 

[Goughy]

Goughy

Could you tell me what's wrong with Shane Bond? I've noticed a number of changes to his action since he had his back titanium-ised - his head is more upright in his action, his left arm and left leg are further to the left (so he's more open at the crease) and he keeps his arms much more still at the crease - but he still keeps getting injured.

Right Ive just downloaded a couple of videos and there are 1 or 2 things that concern me from an injury point of view rather than a technical issue.

I dont know when the videos were from so Im not sure if they were pre or post injury and its only a glimpse so these notes are on first viewing.

Concerns
- Run-up is straight and then at the last second he veers towards the umpire and then jumps away as he goes into his action. This puts extra sideways pressure on the joints apart from just the normal downward pounding of bowling.

- However, the major 1 is- he gets his pace like a number of bowlers do (including myself when I was decent) by using his body like a wooden ruler. The more you bend the ruler back the greater the force it will spring back with. Now there is nothing wrong with that apart from the fact that it puts massive pressure on the body. The footage I have just seen has Bonds left leg pointing to backwards square leg in his action and then swinging around to point to 1st slip when it lands. The problem I have (from what I have seen) is that Bond causes extra tension on the 'ruler' by having his backfoot horizontal but his front foot landing vertical on the crease. It is a great way to generate pace and bring the hips through but an easy way to wreck your body.

 

[Sir Redman]

Right Ive just downloaded a couple of videos and there are 1 or 2 things that concern me from an injury point of view rather than a technical issue.

I dont know when the videos were from so Im not sure if they were pre or post injury and its only a glimpse so these notes are on first viewing.

Concerns
- Run-up is straight and then at the last second he veers towards the umpire and then jumps away as he goes into his action. This puts extra sideways pressure on the joints apart from just the normal downward pounding of bowling.

- However, the major 1 is- he gets his pace like a number of bowlers do (including myself when I was decent) by using his body like a wooden ruler. The more you bend the ruler back the greater the force it will spring back with. Now there is nothing wrong with that apart from the fact that it puts massive pressure on the body. The footage I have just seen has Bonds left leg pointing to backwards square leg in his action and then swinging around to point to 1st slip when it lands. The problem I have (from what I have seen) is that Bond causes extra tension on the 'ruler' by having his backfoot horizontal but his front foot landing vertical on the crease. It is a great way to generate pace and bring the hips through but an easy way to wreck your body.

Cheers. I've actually noticed the first point before, and wondered whether that could be corrected. I can see your second point as well, but I think - I'm not entirely sure though - that his back foot now lands perpendicular to the crease, rather than parallel, so it's possible that that your video was shot before his operation. I've read somewhere that he had something like 3 stress fractures in his back by the time he was 18, which would suggest that he had a bad action early on which has caused a lot of long-term damage, and has made his body quite unsuitable for fast bowling.

It doesn't help that he seems to pick up illnesses extremely easily as well.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Meh, fast bowlers have always been precious

With regards to the coaching courses, the lowest level courses are often designed so that even someone with no knowledge of cricket can learn how to coach at a basic level. It's not till you end up getting to about Level 3 or 4 (having already departed with a lot of money for not much) that a keen cricketer really learns a lot, and that in-depth technique analysis and that sort of thing occurs.

You might pick up a few handy hints and/or little drills in early courses, but it's not worth the dosh.

 

[Jamee999]

No posts advertising your product.

 

[Craig]

Why is Simon Jones so injury prone Goughy?

I know he was very very ver unfortunate when he did his knee in Brisbane 3 and half years ago (give or take a few months), but why is it that he has had these ankle problems (and calf strains) that have kept him out for so long that would have to wonder if that he has anymore come backs left him?

 

[Goughy]

No posts advertising your product.

I assume you are joking as Ive not mentioned the name of the company or who I am so Im certainly not advertising.

 

[Autobahn]

Goughy have you read Ian Pont's new "The Fast Bowler's Bible" and if so what do you think of it?

 

[Goughy]

Why is Simon Jones so injury prone Goughy?

This is going from memory.

Simon Jones is an interesting case as his action is different.

- It is obvious he has a weak left arm (it never gets high), but different to most who have this issue he DOES aggressivly pull it down in his action as any player should who wants to generate pace should. This means he only has 1/2 a problem but the lack of balance between arm going up and then down could have injury ramifications.

- Jones does not have a run-up, he ambles in and then explodes at the crease. In order to do this the legs have to be smashed into the ground and all the work is done by the right shoulder. This places a massive amount of excess torque on the body. The easiest way to bring the hips through and generate good pace is through a quick but rhythmical run-up. Jones does not have this and he struggles to bring the hips through and his pace is generated from the right shoulder (he is a strong boy). However, his strength could also be a reason for injuries as the force he imparts at the crease can affect his whole body.

- About his former injury. There is no doubt that his body will have been trying to protect it even subconsciously for a long time after coming back and with certain muscle wastage it is hard to get the definition the same. Even years after his body could be fighting itself to protect the injury and battle to balance different levels of strength in different parts of the body.

Do I think he will ever come back for a long period? I hope so but doubt it. As the injuries accumulate the explosive action with continue to cause problems. As his body gradually wears down his action will hurt him more. If he trys to dramatically change his action at this late stage he will never come close to repeating his results. The changes needed would be far greater than those DKL made.

I honestly think that his strength will prevent him being injury free in the future as he may well be now too strong for certain parts of his body.

 

[Goughy]

Goughy have you read Ian Pont's new "The Fast Bowler's Bible" and if so what do you think of it?

I have not. I saw a review of it on Cricinfo a few days ago but I do not know too much about it. It seems has a few similar ideas to myself but without reading the book I would not know for sure.

 

[Goughy]

NOTE ON FAST BOWLING INJURIES

Fast bowling develops different parts of the body at different rates. Using myself as an example, I was a Right Arm Fast Bowler and even now after retiring my right shoulder and upper back is considerably more muscular and developed than my left.

Fast bowlers are always struggling with the muscular balance in the body. If your right side is far stronger than your left then there is extra force being exerted that can cause untold numbers of injuries.

Using myself again as an easy example, I used to suffer from hamstring problems. Why? is it because I did not warm up properly? No. It was because my quads were stronger than my hamstrings. When I got tired my hamstrings weakend first and my quads would still be fresh and they would put too much force on the hamstring and tear them.

Now the above issues can partially be remedied in the gym but it is impossible to get a perfectly balanced body as long as you continue to bowl. Unless a player quits bowling and purely does gym work this battle within the body will always exist.

All fast bowlers face these issues and some have a greater muscular imbalance between one side of the body than others. Its unfortunate and only partially fixable. It is proof of the fact that fast bowling is bloody hard work and a profession prone to doing the body damage.

 

[Autobahn]

All fast bowlers face these issues and some have a greater muscular imbalance between one side of the body than others. Its unfortunate and only partially fixable. It is proof of the fact that fast bowling is bloody hard work and a profession prone to doing the body damage.

I take it that's why a lot of bowlers cut down on their pace during a county season.

 

[Dasa]

Goughy, what do you think of the new crop of Indian seamers, particularly Munaf Patel, Sreesanth and Pathan (if you've seen enough of them, that is)?

 

[Goughy]

Goughy, what do you think of the new crop of Indian seamers, particularly Munaf Patel, Sreesanth and Pathan (if you've seen enough of them, that is)?

I must admit I have not seen too much of them and the times I have Ive not really tried to break their actions down.

Ill watch the 3rd Ind vs WI test closely and get back to you.

From what a read it should be a decent track for the quickies so it should be a good time to study them.

 

[Jono]

4th test, but yep that should be a good test to observe them if the rumours about the track helping fast bowlers are true. Kumble may not bowl 20 overs straight then.

 

[Goughy]

Abdul Razzaq

As mentioned by a10khan in ***Official*** Pakistan in England thread

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=17733&page=10

Abdul Razzaq is a strange bowler. He's all over the place one day and absolutely bang on target the next. The gulf between the "two Razzaqs" is huge.

Again it comes down to technical issues in his action. The technical issues that I will talk about do not mean he is not a good bowler who can bowl at decent pace but that he will struggle for consistency and performance will vary from day to day.

He has 2 issues that when put together cause this apparant "2 Razzaqs".

Firstly his backleg (right) is almost horizontal, nearly parallel with the crease whereas his his front foot is vertical, bisecting the crease. Now, this is not a massive problem (its a good way to generate pace) in its self but it causes a massive amount of torque and body rotation.

However, the above issue becomes a problem when factored in with the fact that he collapses his left leg in delivery.

What this means is that the collapsing left leg exagerrates the body rotation and makes it difficult for the body to move in a straight line. This in turn means that Razzaq has a tiny window in which to release the ball for it to be accurate before his action takes him towards the off side.

On a bad day he may be releasing fractionally too early or late and he would look nothing like the bowler he does when he gets it right.

Also any slight variation in the bend of the left leg or body rotation would change accuracy. This would explain why on certain days a small unnoticable change in these factors would throw him off.

 

[open365]

W/E, there's still no way on earth you could make Liam PLunkett bowl 2 yards quicker in a couple of coaching sessions. At all.