Bouncers in the old days

[stumpski]

I forgot about him. His career is so anonymous, despite the fact he was a damn good batsman.

I wonder what his story is.

His Cricketer of the Year profile in the 1961 Wisden makes interesting reading - you can access it by the Cricinfo archive of course. Indian father, English mother, another that Surrey let get away.

 

[Swervy]

I am sure I am right (although I might be wrong) about that Abdul Aziz chap...it was actually a spinner who bowled the ball that killed him

I remember Rod marsh getting in the face when trying to hook maybe vs Pakistan(Sikander bowler maybe?) in the early 80s. The bruise came up instantly, and at first it looked pretty serious

Rick Darling always seemed to get clocked in the head

 

[zaremba]

I am sure you mean the height of the bouncing ball when you mention shoulder height and not the hook shot itself which need not always be airborne and could be played below shoulder height. it is possible to hook (a ball bouncing higher than shoulder) and still keep it flatter and closer to the ground.

Yeah, absolutely. If the point of contact between bat and ball is above shoulder height, it's a hook, regardless of the direction in which you hit the ball.

 

[Burgey]

I wonder what would be the attributes needed by a batsman to dominate good short pitch bowling. i dont know why some good batsmen did well against short pitch bowling and some failed.

the best players of short pitch bowling are a mixed bunch;
technical masters like gavaskar and greenidge. instinctive attackers like de silva, botham, kapil, pietersen. all round aggressors like tendulkar, lara and inzamam (an awesome player of quality pace bowling). and defensive bores like amarnath, shastri and boycott. all were successful against high quality, fast, short pitched bowling. some stylish wizards like viswanath and waugh also handled short pitched bowling well. a few notable names who struggled against bouncers were azharuddin, zaheer abbas and ganguly.

someone who understands batting technique better can explain to us why some good batsmen were crap against this type of bowling.

Don't forget Viv. I think it got to the point where fast bowlers didn't bowl a lot of short stuff to him, coz it wasn't worth the effort really.

 

[Burgey]

They are two completely different shots with different technique. It is pretty concrete.

A simple overview would be:

A hook shot has the batsman getting completely inside the line of the ball. Ie the ball is going to pass behind them.

The pull shot take the ball from off the body ie the batsman would likely get hit if they missed the ball.

This.

 

[JimmyGS]

I am not ready to accept that Guppy is a good hooker. He plays pull well. But was he tested properly in the last series as to hooking the ball?

Yep. Zaheer bounced him 3 (?) times at the basin. Three sixes, one onto the road. Next question?

 

[JimmyGS]

18.2 was definitely at least at head height. I remember it vividly.

Guppy's pulling in the tests was well below usual standard because the coaches told him to put the shot away.

 

[bagapath]

Don't forget Viv. I think it got to the point where fast bowlers didn't bowl a lot of short stuff to him, coz it wasn't worth the effort really.

true. but what was he not good at? thought i should leave the most obvious one out.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah. Fair 'nuff.

 

[Top_Cat]

Don't forget Viv. I think it got to the point where fast bowlers didn't bowl a lot of short stuff to him, coz it wasn't worth the effort really.

Medium pacers bounced him.

Well, one did. For all his great exploits with the bat, Steve Waugh is the man for having the balls to bounce Viv on a regular basis and, sometimes, succeeding. Couldn't imagine Watto, for example, doing the same.

 

[zaremba]

Medium pacers bounced him.

Well, one did. For all his great exploits with the bat, Steve Waugh is the man for having the balls to bounce Viv on a regular basis and, sometimes, succeeding. Couldn't imagine Watto, for example, doing the same.

I'm sure Botham used to try to bounce Viv Richards at a pace comparable with Monty Panesar's stock delivery.

 

[wpdavid]

Medium pacers bounced him.

Well, one did. For all his great exploits with the bat, Steve Waugh is the man for having the balls to bounce Viv on a regular basis and, sometimes, succeeding. Couldn't imagine Watto, for example, doing the same.

Couldn't imagine Waugh getting away with it if he'd come across Viv five years earlier.

 

[Richard]

Don't forget Viv. I think it got to the point where fast bowlers didn't bowl a lot of short stuff to him, coz it wasn't worth the effort really.

You'd certainly hope so.

If ever there was a "don't bowl short to him lad, else he'll flog you out the park" batsman it was Vivian Richards.

 

[Richard]

Medium pacers bounced him.

Well, one did. For all his great exploits with the bat, Steve Waugh is the man for having the balls to bounce Viv on a regular basis and, sometimes, succeeding. Couldn't imagine Watto, for example, doing the same.

Couldn't imagine Waugh getting away with it if he'd come across Viv five years earlier.

Yeah, have heard this stuff about Waugh sending down bouncers at Richards once or twice before, and not tasting complete failure. Not sure whether it was in the 1988/89 series or the 1991 one (may have been both - Waugh played the two Tests he played in the latter basically because of his bowling), but either way, it was at the end of Richards' career where his success was diminished quite considerably, against all types of bowling. So I've always taken it with a pinch of salt.

Also, I remember Waugh being a bit quicker than medium-pace TBH. Was still medium-fast (late-120s) at the end of his career, I imagine he was probably fast-medium in his mid-20s.

 

[zaremba]

Also, I remember Waugh being a bit quicker than medium-pace TBH. Was still medium-fast (late-120s) at the end of his career, I imagine he was probably fast-medium in his mid-20s.

Not from my recollection. Pretty much RM from day 1 IIRC.

 

[Top_Cat]

Couldn't imagine Waugh getting away with it if he'd come across Viv five years earlier.

Why not? Even in 1989, Viv was physically well capable of handling meds pitched around his nose. It was clearly a tactic just to annoy him which was worth a try at any time, as pointed out by Zaremba. Sometimes, you just have to try something stupid.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah, have heard this stuff about Waugh sending down bouncers at Richards once or twice before, and not tasting complete failure. Not sure whether it was in the 1988/89 series or the 1991 one (may have been both - Waugh played the two Tests he played in the latter basically because of his bowling), but either way, it was at the end of Richards' career where his success was diminished quite considerably, against all types of bowling. So I've always taken it with a pinch of salt.

Also, I remember Waugh being a bit quicker than medium-pace TBH. Was still medium-fast (late-120s) at the end of his career, I imagine he was probably fast-medium in his mid-20s.

The consecutive bouncers he bowled to Viv were in the 1988-89 series IIRC. I think they may have been in Brisbane.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah, have heard this stuff about Waugh sending down bouncers at Richards once or twice before, and not tasting complete failure. Not sure whether it was in the 1988/89 series or the 1991 one (may have been both - Waugh played the two Tests he played in the latter basically because of his bowling), but either way, it was at the end of Richards' career where his success was diminished quite considerably, against all types of bowling. So I've always taken it with a pinch of salt.

Yeah but even though Viv's stats had dipped by that point, you'd have backed him to physically be able to handle a medium-pacer! As he proved by spanking the daylights out of the Aussies attack in Perth. Clearly it was the shock-value and sheer annoyance factor of Steve Waugh that got to him rather than the physical potency of the bouncer. You can't blame Viv's troubles with Waugh's bouncers purely on teh fact his reflexes and eyes had started to go.

Shows to go ya, doesn't have to be quick to be a good bouncer. And, conversely, just because someone is quick, doesn't mean they're really good at bowling short balls (Brett Lee).

 

[Richard]

I've never said either such thing. Shaun Pollock was about 10 kph slower than Allan Donald but all batsmen found Donald's short deliveries far easier than Pollock's, purely because Pollock tucked you up while Donald allowed you to free your arms.

Either way, as I say, I reckon that had Stephen Waugh of '88/89 been playing and tried said tactic in '84/85, he'd have gained zero dismissals. Not for a second suggesting it was an utterly shocking tactic, because as you say, sometimes, against batsmen as of-times-impenetrable as Richards, you need to try something totally off-the-cuff.

But I don't expect it'd have worked against a tip-top Richards. And it should be noted that it wasn't just Waugh's short deliveries that he had a bit of trouble against, at the time he was having said trouble.

 

[The Sean]

Either way, as I say, I reckon that had Stephen Waugh of '88/89 been playing and tried said tactic in '84/85, he'd have gained zero dismissals. Not for a second suggesting it was an utterly shocking tactic, because as you say, sometimes, against batsmen as of-times-impenetrable as Richards, you need to try something totally off-the-cuff.

Would now be the wrong time to mention that Viv actually had a better tour in 88/89 than he did in 84/85...?