Should Shoaib Shorten His Run Up?

[Gangster]

It can be done and will not reduce his speed.

Show me how you know this.

 

[SJS]

Show me how you know this.

Sure. I could say I know it from experience and talking to cricketers but I know thats not good enough for you so here we go.

The run-up should be the exact length required for the purpose - not too short and certainly not too long. It should be smooth and regular. There is no point in unnecessarily wasting your energy.

A fast bowler usually aims to achieve his maximum momentum at the point of delivery.

The Bowlers run up should be sufficiently long for him to work up his top pace.

Keith Miller was a grand example of a man who could achieve full speed with an economical run up of about ten paces. Many others run 20 yards or so and felt they lost rhythm if there was any reduction, but I remain convinced that they would have been just as effective with a run up 5 yards shorter.

Frank Tyson, when he first came to Australia, had a tremendous run, longer than the pitch itself, but waqs wisely persuaded to cut it down and he immediately obtained better results. He had more energy left to bowl the ball. It was not all expended in running.

Remember every five yards extra in the run up also means another five yards extra in walking back to the start of the run up

Don Bradman in his The Art of Cricket

Watch this space for more on this subject.

 

[benchmark00]

Sure. I could say I know it from experience and talking to cricketers but I know thats not good enough for you so here we go.

The run-up should be the exact length required for the purpose - not too short and certainly not too long. It should be smooth and regular. There is no point in unnecessarily wasting your energy.

A fast bowler usually aims to achieve his maximum momentum at the point of delivery.

The Bowlers run up should be sufficiently long for him to work up his top pace.

Keith Miller was a grand example of a man who could achieve full speed with an economical run up of about ten paces. Many others run 20 yards or so and felt they lost rhythm if there was any reduction, but I remain convinced that they would have been just as effective with a run up 5 yards shorter.

Frank Tyson, when he first came to Australia, had a tremendous run, longer than the pitch itself, but waqs wisely persuaded to cut it down and he immediately obtained better results. He had more energy left to bowl the ball. It was not all expended in running.

Remember every five yards extra in the run up also means another five yards extra in walking back to the start of the run up

Don Bradman in his The Art of Cricket

Watch this space for more on this subject.

haha i dont know about anyone else but i respect Donalds opinion on the matter.....

 

[PAKMAN]

even if he is to shorten his run up no way he should do it on this tour
he shud practice it in nets and try it out playin 4 worcestershire next summer

 

[Gangster]

Sure. I could say I know it from experience and talking to cricketers but I know thats not good enough for you so here we go.

The run-up should be the exact length required for the purpose - not too short and certainly not too long. It should be smooth and regular. There is no point in unnecessarily wasting your energy.

A fast bowler usually aims to achieve his maximum momentum at the point of delivery.

The Bowlers run up should be sufficiently long for him to work up his top pace.

Keith Miller was a grand example of a man who could achieve full speed with an economical run up of about ten paces. Many others run 20 yards or so and felt they lost rhythm if there was any reduction, but I remain convinced that they would have been just as effective with a run up 5 yards shorter.

Frank Tyson, when he first came to Australia, had a tremendous run, longer than the pitch itself, but waqs wisely persuaded to cut it down and he immediately obtained better results. He had more energy left to bowl the ball. It was not all expended in running.

Remember every five yards extra in the run up also means another five yards extra in walking back to the start of the run up

Don Bradman in his The Art of Cricket

Watch this space for more on this subject.

First, I respect the fact that you went out of your way to justify your opinions. Thank you, I appreciate it and it shows your class and intelligence.

Second, while I respect Sir Bradman a lot, I do not care a bit about what he thinks about a fast bowler's run-up. When he talks about playing shots on the leg-side, I will listen with rapt attention. But until and unless he had secretly been a fast bowler who scalped a load of wickets, I don't really know what he knows about the matter. Yeah he may have played with some greats, but that doesn't mean he knows what it's like. Would you listen to Ray Lindwall prattle on about batting?

The man whose opinion I would be interested in would be someone like Dennis Lillee, or Michael Holding. I understand Holding has said that shortening the run-up wouldn't do anything, and that's someone I'll believe infinitely more than Bradman. But still, each person is different. For whatever reason, whether it be mental or physical (more likely the former), Akhtar does not believe that he can bowl to his full potential without his long run-up. I say Woolmer should worry about telling Sami how to bowl a slower delivery properly, or telling Razzaq not to take stupid shots in test matches like he's playing a one-dayer, and should worry more about not losing so badly, instead of trying to focus on his stud fast bowler. Leave Shoaib alone!

 

[marc71178]

In the era of reliable speed guns

Erm no, they're not that reliable.

WC03 is an example of why not...

 

[marc71178]

There is no question that Typhoon's "magic 100 mph ball" was baloney from the outset.

And the same can be said about Akhtar IMO.

1 ball delivered at extreme altitude with speed guns that were putting someone like Zaheer at 93mph.

 

[Tony Blade]

What about Lahore, then?

 

[Slow Love™]

If Shoaib has tried it before and it's made him less of a bowler, then no, I don't think he should shorten his runup.

There's probably two issues at stake, both of which are priorities for different parties, in a way. To me, it seems that he's most useful as a strike weapon with the long runup. It can't be argued that he didn't bowl very well in the last test using it. The fact that Pakistan lack decent backup bowlers is far more to blame for the lack of pressure once Sami and Akhtar are out of the attack - and if Shoaib cuts his runup down, how many extra overs will they get out of him per spell? A couple? I have to agree that if the Pakistan heirarchy are going to focus on their team's problems, there are way bigger fish to fry than a player who was one of their best performers.

If the argument's just over prolonging his career, I guess that's one thing - if it comes at the expense of his general effectiveness though, there's no real point. There are different types of bowlers, and Shoaib is a firebrand. Truth be told, his career probably won't be that long. His speed and late swing make him what he is - if he needs a long runup for his best rhythm, I certainly wouldn't tamper with it during this tour, at least.

 

[Crazy Sam]

if there is a time to do it, it's in these tests. get it sorted before they get to the vb series and face the prospect of batting second with less than 50 overs to get their target. last thing they need is inzamam suspended, and it's not like as much damage will be done here anyway.

 

[Choora]

Is there a bigger match winner in Pak team than Shoaib? NO

Then why mess with him? he has said many times that he doesn't like to bowl with shorter run up, well that should be end of chapter.

Presently in Pak team he's the only one who is performing, yet interestingly the coach is worried about him instead of being worried about the ten other men.

I guess BOB think that Shoaib can win matches singlehandedly, and even if Pak team score a total of hundred they still have nothing to fear about as long as shoaib bowls a ten over spell, as then he will bowl out opponets to below hundred everytime.

what a coach.

 

[bryce]

i think the idea is to get him to bowl longer spells so he has the possibility of being more successful, it is idiotic of the coach to suggest this mid-tour though - you'd think he would have sorted it out beforehand

 

[Gangster]

Erm no, they're not that reliable.

WC03 is an example of why not...

Oh, you so know more than speed gun. Phenomenal! Let's have Marc figure out the speeds at every event! This is surely a great boon for society...

 

[JASON]

Is there a bigger match winner in Pak team than Shoaib? NO

Then why mess with him? he has said many times that he doesn't like to bowl with shorter run up, well that should be end of chapter.

Presently in Pak team he's the only one who is performing, yet interestingly the coach is worried about him instead of being worried about the ten other men.

I guess BOB think that Shoaib can win matches singlehandedly, and even if Pak team score a total of hundred they still have nothing to fear about as long as shoaib bowls a ten over spell, as then he will bowl out opponets to below hundred everytime.

what a coach.

I notice pidge has also joined in on criticising Shoaib's long run up !! He called him 'a Showman' !! (Maybe there's some truth in it )

Is it part of the mind game or genuine concern, I wonder !!

I agree Woolmer should be focusing on the others in the Team who are not performing at all rather than messing up the guy who is giving his best !!

 

[Top_Cat]

That Shoaib has refused is not surprising. He genuinly believes that his long run up is directly related to his speed. Its also true that when he has cut short his run up he has bowled at lower speeds. None of this proves that he is right in assuming that he can not reduce his run up and the speed at which he runs without affecting the speed of his delivery.

He needs to be willing to give it an honest try, do it in the nets with a shorter (not dramatically) run up which is smooth and relaxed and builds to a crscendo of explosive energy only in the last couple of strides. It can be done and will not reduce his speed.

It will allow him to bowl longer spells.
It will reduce his chances of ankle injuries and even other lower limb injuries.
It will allow him to relax during the boeling and is likely to make him more focussed and accurate.

After having settled on a reduced and less stressful and smoother run up AND most importantly, seen for himself that his speed is not affected, he should take it into match play.

I don't know if this would neccessarily work on Shoaib. He seems one of those bowlers who, unless he's sweating and straining at every sinew, he's not comfortable. As shown with other bowlers, the long run-up relation to speed is clearly not a physical thing (some guys consistently stop the gun FASTER with a shorter run-up) but predominantly mental. With Shoaib and Brett Lee, I get the feeling that if they shortened their run-ups, they'd feel like they weren't trying in their own minds.

Leave Shoaib's run-up alone and leave him as a shock weapon I say. He'll never be the bowler who can bowl consistent 10-over spells because I believe he doesn't want to. Pakistan's problems in bowling in the Test was more a problem of support for him and Sami than anything else. Shoaib did his bit and snaffled a 5-fer. What more could anyone want? He certainly still bowled his share of overs in the first innings (22 overs; Sami bowled the most with 25.5).

And lets' face it; Pakistan's real problems start with their batsmen. Their bowlers did, on a perfect batting track, do the job for them (not withstanding Langer's and Gilchrist's outstanding innings; both of them are in peak form, let's not forget). Their batsmen need some work.............

 

[PAKMAN]

Akhtar too preoccupied with pace, says McGrath
Associated Press
Melbourne (Australia), December 23

Australian fast bowler Glenn McGrath says Pakistan compatriot Shoaib Akhtar often sacrifices the quality of his bowling because he's too concerned with the speed of his deliveries.
In a verbal taunt in the leadup to the second Test beginning on Sunday in Melbourne, McGrath said Akhtar's only worry was bowling fast.

"From a personal point of view, my goal has always been to be the best bowler in the world, not so much the quickest," McGrath said on Thursday. "Whereas I'm sure Shoaib's major goal and only goal is to be the quickest bowler in the world, if not of all time. "That's his goal and what he wants to do."

McGrath, whose career-best 8-24 in Australia's 491-run first-Test win in Perth took him back to the top of cricket's bowler rankings, said he was certain Akhtar's refusal to shorten his run-up was based mainly on showmanship.

"Without a doubt, that's Shoaib," he said. "He's a showman, there's probably no bigger bowler in the world. That's what he loves.

"So cutting that run-up down might take a bit away from that, might take a bit away from who he is, so maybe that's why he's holding on. He's the type of bowler that can rip through sides, so he's got that potential there, but then he's got the potential to bowl a heap of rubbish as well."

(things people do to unsettle opposition greats )

 

[marc71178]

Oh, you so know more than speed gun. Phenomenal! Let's have Marc figure out the speeds at every event! This is surely a great boon for society...

Right, so you're going to say they're accurate even though the speed guns that clocked Shoaib at 100mph also clocked several other bowlers as being 7 or 8 mph faster than they've ever been clocked before?

How accurate that shows they are (!)

 

[marc71178]

(things people do to unsettle opposition greats )

There's only one great in that article, and it's not Akhtar.

 

[mavric41]

40 yards amazing! 60 times 40= 240 in odi's he goes down then comes up 240 time's plus fielding you dont want to bring test matches in mind.the guy shoiab is a machine a machine.

You missed a zero - 2400

I say let him bowl off what ever runup he wants. He is exciting to watch and good for the game. Let fat Inzi jog quicker between the overs. Let the spinner bowl more overs. Play more overtime. Just don't take away the spectacle and leave us with faceless, generic players with no personality. Thats the way to make spectators leave.

I'd rather see 85 overs of great cricket than 90 overs of crap.

 

[David]

I wasn't around in 1492 either but I know Columbus sailed the ocean blue...

Did he? We didn't have reliable recording equipment back in those days..