The PlanetCricket View: The Technical Failings of the Younger Generation

[PlanetCricket]

Article by Sylvester -

There have been a number of young Australian batsmen that have come and gone from the Test scene well before their test tally hits double digits. Chris Rogers wrote an interesting piece regarding the technique of these batsmen.

Here is quick summary of the technical flaws he noted in some of the recently dropped batsmen.

Usman Khawaja – Points his back foot to the bowler rather than to point causing him to be squared up and prone to the away-swinging ball.

Phil Hughes – Swivelling into a front-on position which led him being b. Martin c. Guptil.

Shaun Marsh – Lack of trigger movements hence the reason why he has been labeled a confidence player. When he is down on confidence like he was against the Indians, the lack of footwork meant he was a walking wicket.

Callum Ferguson – Backswing heads towards gully meaning he struggles to play in the ‘V’ especially when forced to defend.

This is one of the better articles you will find floating around and very rarely do you find an article written by a current player regarding the flaws of their opposition. It does bring about one interesting question of whether opposition states should be sharing these flaws they have found to help the national team.

It is hard to comment on who is at fault for these flaws not being fixed, Khawaja for instance had this flaw during his County stint in 2011 which was carried on to his second tasting of Test cricket. If an opposition can spot these weaknesses, you would hope your batting coach could do likewise.

The final part of Chris Rogers’ article talks about how difficult it is for batsmen to adapt between T20 and Test Cricket. This isn’t a problem which only plagues the younger batsmen, the older batsmen have also shown a more aggressive streak. Jacques Kallis not known for his quick scoring, blitzed 54 runs from just 41 balls in the 2nd Test against Australia last year. As mentioned by Rogers, it certainly is worth considering finding a batting coach who can convert a batsmen technique from T20 back to Test cricket.

I did find it interesting that the guy whose technique is most like a T20 technique in Steven Smith was given glowing praise by Rogers. With 492 runs at 41 for the season including 86 of NSW total score of 208 against Chris’ team, I can see why he gave him a good review. Smith also seems to be adapting well, he had a solid Big Bash series including leading his side to the title and currently is in career best form in the IPL with 220 runs at 37 with a strike rate of 157.

One worrying thing he mentioned was teams splashed out on bowling coaches but not so for batting coaches. I don’t know what teams he is referring to but if he is talking about the State teams then that is a worrying sign.

Going by his article, Rogers may well have a future in coaching. I do hope our current coaches have already picked up on these flaws and are looking at rectifying them.





More...

 

[puddleduck]

I really don't know where I stand on international coaching. If a player has made it to the top level they should be backing their game to succeed. I think too many people are quick to highlight flaws in technique when things are going badly, whilst they're just as quick to ignore what it is that was scoring them bucket loads of runs.

Interesting from Rogers though definitely, and I appreciate you collating it into an article.

Bowling is a very mechanical process. It's about repeating an action over and over again so that it happens almost without thought. I think this differs from batting, where it is an act that involves many different variables in terms of scoring runs.

Also, you talk about sharing the input, but I think in the modern game, everyone pretty much knows everything about every player at the higher levels. It actually comes down to execution and that highly immeasurable quantity - confidence.

Edit// To elaborate a little as I wasn't clear, I definitely think small adjustments can be made, but attempting to unlearn everything that has been learnt over 20 years of being a cricketer up until that point will be difficult. A lot of it is still down to instinct, and the moment a player is thinking about his technique and not the ball, the game is in the bowler's hands.

----------

Also... should that be failings or falling?

 

[angryangy]

I just don't rate using T20 as an excuse. With the exception of Marsh, these guys aren't in the company of the best T20 players. Comparatively, most of the best T20 players are very effective first class cricketers overall. So it begs the question, do they really have techniques intended for T20 or do they just need to generally improve? Once upon a time young players just had 'a few things to work on', but now it seems there's a garishly clothed boogeyman out to get you if you don't.

 

[aussie1st]

I really don't know where I stand on international coaching. If a player has made it to the top level they should be backing their game to succeed. I think too many people are quick to highlight flaws in technique when things are going badly, whilst they're just as quick to ignore what it is that was scoring them bucket loads of runs.

It's more the small technical flaws which I hoped would be fixed. Khawaja's one sounds quite small whereas Hughes should never have been forced to change his one. Smith I'm sure would have got similar advise if not from the coaches from the fans talking about him online. But he seems to have stuck to his game.

The sharing of information was more about the youngsters in the domestic system. Like I'm sure England have no idea what the technical flaws would be for Joe Burns heck they probably never heard of him. Of course there will be some flaws which will be exposed at the top level but if we can catch some of them at the domestic level that would help their transition so the sharing of information between states would be useful if the state of the player in question hasn't picked up on it.

Also... should that be failings or falling?

I was going for the plural of falling hence the 's'.

I just don't rate using T20 as an excuse. With the exception of Marsh, these guys aren't in the company of the best T20 players. Comparatively, most of the best T20 players are very effective first class cricketers overall. So it begs the question, do they really have techniques intended for T20 or do they just need to generally improve? Once upon a time young players just had 'a few things to work on', but now it seems there's a garishly clothed boogeyman out to get you if you don't.

The thing is these best T20 players you speak of are veterans of the game who have perfected their technique and have learnt how to adapt well before T20 came along. The youngsters on the other hand haven't had this same luxury. How many youngsters can you name that have a great T20 record with a similarly great Test one?

 

[puddleduck]

No S

----------

Also if a guy gets picked for Australia, I guarantee you Flower and co will have whatever video footage exists of them playing.

People have different ideas to what constitutes coaching as well. For some it's working on their mental game to make sure the rest follows, for others it's a purely mechanical and technical thing. I'm sure the best coaches find an intermediate ground.

I know that someone like Murali would not have benefitted from coaching as a child (or at least a mechanical technique based one), whilst someone like Alistair Cook has clearly benefitted from the years of honing his game around simple ideas and premises.

----------

It's also amazing how people will say things like "KP has a massive flaw" when he's not scoring runs, and then wax lyrical about how unauthodox he is when he smashes a match-winning hundred at a run-a-ball. Likewise how for years Ponting apparently had a tendency to fall over his front pad... whilst smashing you through mid-wicket for four.

Take Bell, he's consistently lauded as being a technical dream to watch, yet it appears that he can lack the nouse to get himself runs when the goings are really tough. Yet someone like Collingwood was all bottom hand and leg-side with a tendency to get squared up and nick off (or get trapped in front) to bowlers with genuine pace. However, he was able to play to his strengths and score runs at international cricket.

I definitely think with all the analysing that gets done, a lot of young batsman can find themselves mentally already thinking they're going to get out.

 

[aussie1st]

How about downfalls? Falling doesn't sit right for me

Fair point on Ponting, would be interesting to know how his career would have gone if he was starting his career now.

 

[puddleduck]

Haha, I'd go with failings if you're desperate to have the S in

Or even with "The Technical Failings of the Younger Generation."

 

[angryangy]

The thing is these best T20 players you speak of are veterans of the game who have perfected their technique and have learnt how to adapt well before T20 came along. The youngsters on the other hand haven't had this same luxury. How many youngsters can you name that have a great T20 record with a similarly great Test one?

But that's just the point. If they can't play any form of the game well, can't we just say they're bad or need improvement? It seems a bit roundabout to say T20 has caused today's batsmen to be bad at T20.

 

[aussie1st]

But that's just the point. If they can't play any form of the game well, can't we just say they're bad or need improvement? It seems a bit roundabout to say T20 has caused today's batsmen to be bad at T20.

The point is youngsters who have been brought up with a good technique are having to adapt it to T20 if they want to earn more cash. As a result of trying to adapt their technique to T20, there are flaws creeping into their game which is affecting them in the longer form.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

I don't think it's technical flaws that T20 ingrains, I guarantee you any young cricketer when he was a kid was well into clearing his front foot and slogging, slamming the ball all over place is how every young cricketer starts. yes, they need technical re-adjustment but unless coaches are simply shrugging and thinking a good backfoot game is unnecessary then they should still be getting it.

what I think t20 is damaging is temperament. you can never replicate a match situation in practice, you can do long stints in the nets, or whatever but the pressure of staying out there is impossible to recreate. you need to have honed a kind of mental toughness to playing long innings, it's impossible to do this on technique alone. obviously setting aside lots of time to play unlimited over matches in grade cricket and the like is becoming harder and harder when t20 is becoming an idealised form of the game for young cricketers.

It's very easy for coaches to get players play t20s with correct technique anyway and I think there is an element of nit picking in rodgers assessment, you have to refine a player, coach him to his strengths, not always get him playing like a text book. one interesting thing, for example, about phil hughes is that he hits superb cover drives, but very rarely opts to do so, why has no coach got him using this more?

 

[sifter132]

Well I always found it interesting that bowling strike rates have stayed the same (or even a little better) in recent Test cricket despite the apparent abundance of flat pitches. It's because batsmen score quicker, take more risks and arguably have less patience to dig in - or perhaps don't need to dig in because of flat pitches...I think at least a little of that mindset comes from T20. I don't think T20 ruins physical techniques, but it changes mindsets I think.

Either way, I can almost bet that batsmen don't have to play for as long periods under pressure as they used to ie. once you get to 20 in Tests there is probably a sweeper at cover, especially if you are a middle order player. So batsmen just don't get the experience at surviving tough bowling, using just their technique.