John fought the law and the law won!

Monday proved to be quite a struggle for me after the exertions of a hectic weekend. On Friday night, I travelled up to Manchester to see Bruce Springsteen rock the City of Manchester Stadium. ‘The Boss’ put on quite a show, and despite the seasonal Lancashire weather (heavy rain pouring for sections of the performance), Springsteen and his E Street Band played non-stop for over three and half hours. Not once did I see, the drummer come out with a brolly looking up towards the clouds, nor did Springsteen whip out a light meter. They played to entertain the crowd, something the ICC seem to forget when players walk off with full houses and the flood lights on.

Saturday saw us play a great game of cricket up at Welbeck, where we pleasingly took the larger portion of the points in a hard fought draw. The match was dramatized by one very unusual incident in the later stages of the home sides run chase. Guy Darwin struck the ball out to the mid wicket boundary where the ball seemed to be destined for six. John Terry, the fielder in closest proximity started to move off the pitch ready to collect the ball when he realised it has started to hold up in the powerful breeze. From his position just off the pitch, Terry leapt forward, caught the ball in the air, and landed safely a yard inside the rope. Everyone celebrated the wicket, and the batsman started to walk off. The umpires however, were not convinced. After some discussion, they informed us that it was not out as Terry had started just outside the pitch. “So its six then?” Asked a disappointed Kimberley Captain. “No” came the reply. In the end, the ball resulted not in a wicket, or in a six, but with one run awarded to the batting team. This was even more confusing as the batsmen had not even run the single!

It was an unusual situation, and one that has split opinion with the different people I have asked. Some suggested that if he had started outside the pitch then it should have been six, others though argued, how is that any different to a player who catches the ball, throws it in the air before toppling over the rope, then runs back in to catch it before it lands.

Sarah Ansell (c) - Mind those feet! Joe Denly takes a boundary catch

After looking online at the Law Book I was pleased to see that the umpires had got the initial decision spot on following a law clarification issued in 2010. Law 19 point 4 states, For it to be out, ‘the first contact with the ball is by a fielder either with some part of his person grounded within the boundary, or whose final contact with the ground before touching the ball was within the boundary’. I decided to then check to see if it should have been a six. Again, the umpires had it spot on that the ball was not six. So it appears John’s antics have found a loophole in the laws of the game! In my opinion, the correct decision on Saturday would have been bizarrely a dot ball, as no runs had been scored and no wickets taken. I just wonder if this is the last time we hear of John Terry in breach of the law in the coming weeks.

My hectic weekend was completed on Sunday when I drove up to my old school in Lancaster to play in an Old Boys game as part of the opening of the new revamped, Douglas Cameron Pavilion. Douglas has been involved with cricket at Lancaster RGS for nearly 60 years, starting at the school as a teacher in the 1950s and continuing his involvement since retiring in 1991 up to the present day. Doug is an remarkable example to us all of dedication to the development of young players, and to him I am eternally thankful for the positive way he influenced my game. Long may your contributions continue Doug, and if there were only a few more of your kind, we might just have some stronger school cricket within the state sector.

Are you proactive or reactive?

Saturday was another frustrating day for us. Once again we had to battle against the conditions to try to get a match in. I have never known a season quite as bad as this one, with the number of games and overs that have been lost to rain. It was only through the remarkable work of our groundstaff, led by the diligent and devoted Stewart Burrows, that we were able to get any play in at all on Saturday. Our frustration was then compounded by the fact that once Sam had managed to negotiate getting the game on, we then fought our way into a strong position only to be dashed by the weather again.

It was nice to get a good bowl, and I always relish bowling towards the end of an innings when batsman are trying to come hard at you. It gives you a real challenge, and puts the pressure on you as a bowler to hit your lengths and perform. It also places the emphasis on you to try and be proactive, and win the mind battle over the batsman. Too many times in the later stages of a game, you see the Captain move the fielder where the ball has just gone. This kind of reactive response, is not necessarily wrong, given that it is shrewd to avoid a player scoring in the same zone again, but as cricketers we need to be intelligent and look for the clues as to where the batsman will hit the ball before it goes there.

After being hit for a four on the third ball of the last over, I wanted to ‘react’ and come around the wicket after bowling the previous balls over the wicket. I was pleased that Sam intervened and reminded me that so far I had won the battle and that has been a one off. I carried on over the wicket, adjusted my line and length, and managed to get the stumping.

This ‘reactive’ situation crops up most for slow bowlers when it comes to where to position your mid off and mid on, and when to drop them back. I often here this phrase ‘lets see if he goes first’. But should we wait until he clears them before you drop them back? I would argue that more often than not, a lifted straight drive is an impulse shot based on length and flight of the ball. Most batsman have the confidence they will reach the boundary, so whether they are back or not they are happy to take the risk. It can be very frustrating as a batsman seeing a ball go over mid on or mid off for a one bounce four. Often the first can be a sighter, and mishit which is the best or only chance to take your wicket. Yes, we don’t want to give easy singles to mid off, but very few league cricketers have the patience of skill to continually milk this area.

Getting the man in deep right can be the difference between 6 runs or a wicket

As a bowler, to be proactive, you need to look for the clues. How are they holding the bat, which shots have they played so far? If they haven’t looked to sweep, why have a man on the sweep? Do they keep eyeing up a particular part of the pitch? Is one batsman looking to go hard, and one looking to work singles? All of these factors should be running through your mind to help you set your field and shape your approach.

The same can be said for batsmen too. One thing that players are now often coached is to try and look for a boundary off the first ball of the over. Why? Well this puts all the pressure onto the bowler. As a batsman, are you proactive in getting the opposition to set the field that you want, or are you reactive and thus constrained by the field they set? Calculated risk taking can open up your favourite shot to enable you to milk easy runs.

As the season progresses, and we move into a crunch phase of the year, it is important that we continue to be a proactive as possible with our cricket and try be smart with everything we do. If we can master that balance, we still have a good chance of being in the mix at the right end of the table.

STOP PRESS

It would be untoward not to express my sadness for the events of the last week. My thoughts are with the Maynard family and those of the children hit by the tree at the club in London.

Finding the right balance...

This weekend saw a rich smorgasbord of sporting festivities on the television. On Sunday afternoon I found myself flicking between the Test Match, the Euro 2012 football, the French Open Tennis Final and the Grand Prix. While such riches provide you with great entertainment, it can be a real hassle deciding which one to watch and trying not to avoid any crucial moment in each!

The Test Match, despite the weather has provided many headlines. It was great to see Tino Best showing everyone just what a good number 11 batsman is made of with a scintillating innings of 95 to break many a record. Then we saw Dinesh Ramdin post a hundred before revealing a poster admonishing Sir Vivian Richards for questioning his selection. However, it was the English selection which drew most of the initial headlines.

After two days washed out, could we have picked 5 bowlers? - Guardian (c)

After opting to rest Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad for the match, in order to include Graham Onions and Steven Finn, the selectors were heavily criticised for not selecting ‘the strongest team’ available for the Test and showing disrespect. To be honest, I have no real issue with rotating a squad in international cricket. With the series won, and Anderson and Broad both prone in the past to picking up injuries, why not keep them fresh for the upcoming South Africa series? Onions and Finn are both very capable young players, who will be needed to be called upon soon in the future, so the more exposure they can get to Test cricket the better. Some argue that you can’t draw the comparisons with club football and rugby where players are rotated on a regular basis. However, with the advent of central contracts, and the increasing workload of the international cricketer, I see no reason why you can’t use a squad and prioritise your matches. You wouldn’t expect Stuart Lancaster to keep the same side for a midweek match on the current England rugby tour, or criticise Roy Hodgson for including squad players in the third group game should England secure qualification after match two.

I think many people missed the real question about the selection this week. After losing the first two days to rain, why only pick three seamers? To win the game in three days you are going to have to take 20 wickets. With the series won, why not gamble and take a risk? Who to leave out would of course be the question. Some could argue that Graham Swann would be the one to go, but of course it would be madness not to include the World leading off spinner in your team. So that would mean losing a batsman. Which leads us on to another point, why is it bowlers get rotated but not batsmen? Yes its physically tougher as a bowler, but why shouldn’t you use the opportunity to give Trott, Cook or Bell a rest? It might just give you better balance and put some pressure on others to step up to the plate.

Finding a selection balance can be notoriously tough. From speaking to Oggy at Kimberley, it is something he is always looking to achieve. Just how do you get it right though, giving yourself the correct amount of options in each of the different areas to meet the challenges of that specific match? We saw at the weekend how Spain struggled to really exert themselves after failing to select a clear identifiable striker in their team. Only when the mercurial Fernando Torres came on did I feel they truly look better balanced. When I select sides at hockey, it is something that I always think carefully about, and of course, you never always get it right. Picking the team with the correct blend of attackers and defenders, or in our case, batsmen, all rounders and bowlers, is no precise science. It is something that comes with practice, experience and getting a feel for the blend that will bring you the desired result. Let’s just hope that Sam can find that mix throughout the rest of the season to get Kimberley competing at the top of the table. Oh, and yes, you obviously have to have a round left armer in your team! Obviously.

STOP PRESS

A big congrats to Oggy and Victoria on your engagement!

The Left and Right Spectrum

As I arrived at Newdigate Street this Saturday, and drove through the entrance, I nearly turned straight back around and left. My heart sank after gazing out across the field and seeing the wickets pitched at the far end of the square. The 30 yard circle almost kissed the boundary, and I immediately stomped across to stride it out myself. At its closest point I estimated it was just 35 yards, and as a spinner the alarm bells began ringing in my head.

In the end, any fears I had were dissipated by two mesmerising knocks from Andy Platts and Mick Blatherwick, which took the game away from Wollaton, and enabled us to bowl with the confidence of a large score behind us. With a tough score to chase, Wollaton had to come hard at us, and with a plethora of early breakthroughs we were able to secure the positive result we wanted.

One thing that was very noticeable on Saturday was the lack of left handed batsmen in the team (just me unfortunately!). Obviously, when you have one short boundary it is nice to have at least one batsman at either end who is able to exploit it. With us only having right handers at the top of the order, and the umpires offering a generous interpretation of the wide law outside off stump, it enabled the opposition to employ a negative tactic to make it difficult for us to score to the short boundary.

Brian Lara on the drive

It does pose an interesting question. Is it of a distinct advantage to be a left handed batsman? This has been a much debated question over the generations. There is no doubt that a number of the best players of all time have been left handers (Sobers, Lara, Pollock, Border, Lloyd, Gower et al.). Indeed, a look at top eight teams in the Test rankings tells you that of the 48 batsmen that regularly make up the top six in each team, 15 of them are left handed.  Considering only 10% of the population are deemed to be left handed and this represents 30% of the total, it is a clear overrepresentation. But why?

Well firstly there are some obvious advantages. Generally it is much tougher to get a left hander out LBW. Right handed bowlers bowling over the wicket have to get the ball to straighten if they are to induce the umpire to raise their finger. Left arm over bowlers are an increasing rarity, so the left handed batsman does not have to face the same issues as the right hander.

Secondly, bowlers in general just aren’t as good at bowling to the left hander as the right hander. They perfect the away swinger to the right hander in the hope of forcing an edge to the keeper or slips, but this proves less effective to the left hander as it becomes an in-swinger. In addition, slip fielders at club level rarely practise catching to the left side. Most feeds prepare them for fielding to a right hander and so they become less comfortable moving to their left.

Some bowlers employ the tactic of bowling around the wicket, but more often than not they are uncomfortable bowling this side as again, they do not practise it enough during the week. Perhaps there is a sense of arrogance amongst the bowlers that they will not change their plan. But all this does is often feed a batsman’s confidence when a bowler is forced to come around the wicket as ‘plan B’.

Scientists have argued that left handers also have a biological advantage. The possession of right brain to left side wiring gives them increased special awareness, and the capacity to think and react quickly to three dimensional moving objects.

I also argue that it is an advantage being a natural right hander, but left handed batsman. This means that your top hand is your strong arm, and as a result it resists the temptation for your bottom hand to come through and create ugly shots!

So should we get our young right handers to turn around and bat left handed to increase their chances? One of our close family friends , Ian Whitehouse, was a talented all round cricketer who was right handed but batted left handed. The reason for this? Well his father, a talented bowler in the Yorkshire leagues, hated bowling to left handers. So as he brought up his son’s (and grandson’s for that matter), all were turned around and told that ‘this is the only way to bat!’ All of them went on to be talented players, and certainly gave support to the argument that left handers are the scourge of many a bowler.

Let’s just hope that both our left handers at the top of the order (Dan and Akhil) in the 1^st XI can continue to show the form that suggests they can dominate the Premier League scoring charts for the season.