Ollie Robinson (Kent) is one of best young England keepers. His development as a batsman has been somewhat stifled by having to bat at 6 in the County Championship but he is now opening and has had scores of 43, 14 and 120 doing so. I'm certainly not saying that Ollie is ready as a Test batsman yet though he wouldn't be far behind Bracey in that respect.
But if we are talking about pure glove work there are few better. An example of this is the catch that he took the other night down the leg side off Darren Stevens to dismiss D'Arcy Short. Ollie has to adopt a wide stance to get a view of the ball because Stevens is bowling across the left hander - the hands go first and are followed by the head and body rather than the old style of getting the body across first:
Robinson was mentioned by Nasser in his post match analysis when questioning why we turned to Bracey. He said that, in terms of keeping, Robinson is way ahead of Bracey and that we ended up playing the latter at 7 when he bats at 3 for his County i.e. we picked him as a batsman first but then didn't play him in his position and forgot that the keeper has to be a top keeper too! He also said that Billings had been asked to join the squad but not used and that he hadn't kept consistently in the CC for over two years
Kent have often bemoaned the fact that we do not produce fast bowlers. But we have, since time began, had a conveyor belt of keepers. The man responsible for guiding the likes of Billings, Robinson and Cox was Ray Willis. He was also the Kent U14 coach for a number of no longer coaches the keepers but, along with his son, Simon (who is an ECB talent spotter for the South and former head of the Kent and Sri Lanka Academy) and Geraint Jones used to run a monthly training session for keepers during the winter too. I wonder if all the counties do that?
Don’t Surrey have Foakes, Pope and Jamie Smith who all can keep ? Wonder if these days young keepers need to be top 4 batters in order to have more than one string to their bow ? Funnily enough they all also appear to be top class fielders !
Ollie Robinson (Kent) is one of best young England keepers. His development as a batsman has been somewhat stifled by having to bat at 6 in the County Championship but he is now opening and has had scores of 43, 14 and 120 doing so. I'm certainly not saying that Ollie is ready as a Test batsman yet though he wouldn't be far behind Bracey in that respect.
But if we are talking about pure glove work there are few better. An example of this is the catch that he took the other night down the leg side off Darren Stevens to dismiss D'Arcy Short. Ollie has to adopt a wide stance to get a view of the ball because Stevens is bowling across the left hander - the hands go first and are followed by the head and body rather than the old style of getting the body across first:
Robinson was mentioned by Nasser in his post match analysis when questioning why we turned to Bracey. He said that, in terms of keeping, Robinson is way ahead of Bracey and that we ended up playing the latter at 7 when he bats at 3 for his County i.e. we picked him as a batsman first but then didn't play him in his position and forgot that the keeper has to be a top keeper too! He also said that Billings had been asked to join the squad but not used and that he hadn't kept consistently in the CC for over two years
Kent have often bemoaned the fact that we do not produce fast bowlers. But we have, since time began, had a conveyor belt of keepers. The man responsible for guiding the likes of Billings, Robinson and Cox was Ray Willis. He was also the Kent U14 coach for a number of no longer coaches the keepers but, along with his son, Simon (who is an ECB talent spotter for the South and former head of the Kent and Sri Lanka Academy) and Geraint Jones used to run a monthly training session for keepers during the winter too. I wonder if all the counties do that?
Don’t Surrey have Foakes, Pope and Jamie Smith who all can keep ? Wonder if these days young keepers need to be top 4 batters in order to have more than one string to their bow ? Funnily enough they all also appear to be top class fielders !
Paul Downton told me that they are now called batsmen that keep and not keepers that bat. That rather says it all and at the very least they have to be able to bat in the top six at County level. That then means that they also have to be able to field. The issue with some kids is that they start to keep at an early age and don't therefore develop a throwing arm - which rather rules them out of County cricket.
I really envy the young guns who are making their careers from T20 at the moment, lads like Tom Banton, Liam Livingstone and Phil Salt for example. Even if they don’t play much for England they can still have a very rewarding time playing in the various franchises around the world. If the choice is £40,000 for three weeks of T20 somewhere hot or facing the new ball on a bleak April morning at Derby, it’s a no-brainer.
Within the next decade I reckon 30 to 40 per cent of English pros will have white-ball only contracts. I’m a massive fan of the Championship and it’s still the competition most players covet above all others, but someone who concentrates on red-ball cricket but who isn’t good enough to play for England can expect to earn about £40,000 a year: decent money but not a sum you can retire on.
These guys will do all the requisite white-ball skills training in the winter and then when the Blast starts they either kick their heels or go and play in the second team. And believe me, there is nothing worse than watching your mates play a T20 in front of a full house having earlier that day played the same format for the seconds at a club ground with 20 people watching.
I speak to young players all the time about not being pigeon-holed. And players who think they are red-ball specialists can absolutely re-invent themselves. If you can play a forward defensive you should be able to hit the ball for six.
Absolutely nothing about red ball batsmen improving themselves or white ball specialists trying to re-invent themselves as red ball players. But as he suggests, for the money available, why should they?
Interesting reading all of the above, from some very informed cricket fans.
From a historical perspective I can't remember a period when England were producing so few test class batsmen who were capable of averaging over 40! Less than ten years ago we still had the likes of Cookie, KP, Bell, Trott, Strauss and Matty Prior, who all averaged well into the 40's, and yet here we find ourselves with only Root averaging 40+, with even the much celebrated Stokes and Buttler averaging mid-30's after plenty of tests.
Worrying times indeed, and I can see us being regularly bundled out for less than 100 in the Ashes, as Hazelwood, Cummins and Starc will be more than a handful on pacey tracks, with the baying mob of raucous Aussies calling for English blood.
Interesting reading all of the above, from some very informed cricket fans.
From a historical perspective I can't remember a period when England were producing so few test class batsmen who were capable of averaging over 40! Less than ten years ago we still had the likes of Cookie, KP, Bell, Trott, Strauss and Matty Prior, who all averaged well into the 40's, and yet here we find ourselves with only Root averaging 40+, with even the much celebrated Stokes and Buttler averaging mid-30's after plenty of tests.
Worrying times indeed, and I can see us being regularly bundled out for less than 100 in the Ashes, as Hazelwood, Cummins and Starc will be more than a handful on pacey tracks, with the baying mob of raucous Aussies calling for English blood.
i mean, that really was a golden generation - we got to number 1 in the rankings for a while. Remember when cook was captain and he was criticised for not winning quickly enough?
Ollie Robinson (Kent) is one of best young England keepers. His development as a batsman has been somewhat stifled by having to bat at 6 in the County Championship but he is now opening and has had scores of 43, 14 and 120 doing so. I'm certainly not saying that Ollie is ready as a Test batsman yet though he wouldn't be far behind Bracey in that respect.
But if we are talking about pure glove work there are few better. An example of this is the catch that he took the other night down the leg side off Darren Stevens to dismiss D'Arcy Short. Ollie has to adopt a wide stance to get a view of the ball because Stevens is bowling across the left hander - the hands go first and are followed by the head and body rather than the old style of getting the body across first:
Robinson was mentioned by Nasser in his post match analysis when questioning why we turned to Bracey. He said that, in terms of keeping, Robinson is way ahead of Bracey and that we ended up playing the latter at 7 when he bats at 3 for his County i.e. we picked him as a batsman first but then didn't play him in his position and forgot that the keeper has to be a top keeper too! He also said that Billings had been asked to join the squad but not used and that he hadn't kept consistently in the CC for over two years
Kent have often bemoaned the fact that we do not produce fast bowlers. But we have, since time began, had a conveyor belt of keepers. The man responsible for guiding the likes of Billings, Robinson and Cox was Ray Willis. He was also the Kent U14 coach for a number of no longer coaches the keepers but, along with his son, Simon (who is an ECB talent spotter for the South and former head of the Kent and Sri Lanka Academy) and Geraint Jones used to run a monthly training session for keepers during the winter too. I wonder if all the counties do that?
Don’t Surrey have Foakes, Pope and Jamie Smith who all can keep ? Wonder if these days young keepers need to be top 4 batters in order to have more than one string to their bow ? Funnily enough they all also appear to be top class fielders !
Paul Downton told me that they are now called batsmen that keep and not keepers that bat. That rather says it all and at the very least they have to be able to bat in the top six at County level. That then means that they also have to be able to field. The issue with some kids is that they start to keep at an early age and don't therefore develop a throwing arm - which rather rules them out of County cricket.
I get where you are coming from. But. As a cricket player you should either be a specialist batsman or specialist bowler. Some players of course can do both. But as a keeper you cannot bowl so therefore you should be capable as a batsman otherwise you are weakening the team.
I’ve been doing some reselling and recently picked up a cricket bundle. I know what most of the stuff is but haven’t a clue about the below.
can somebody tell me what exactly they are? Let’s call them item A,B,C and D for easiness. Item D I’m sure is a crotch protector but does it need a band with it?
I’ve been doing some reselling and recently picked up a cricket bundle. I know what most of the stuff is but haven’t a clue about the below.
can somebody tell me what exactly they are? Let’s call them item A,B,C and D for easiness. Item D I’m sure is a crotch protector but does it need a band with it?
Thanks in advance.
Item D is a face mask. But please please wash it before wearing it.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
Ollie Robinson (Kent) is one of best young England keepers. His development as a batsman has been somewhat stifled by having to bat at 6 in the County Championship but he is now opening and has had scores of 43, 14 and 120 doing so. I'm certainly not saying that Ollie is ready as a Test batsman yet though he wouldn't be far behind Bracey in that respect.
But if we are talking about pure glove work there are few better. An example of this is the catch that he took the other night down the leg side off Darren Stevens to dismiss D'Arcy Short. Ollie has to adopt a wide stance to get a view of the ball because Stevens is bowling across the left hander - the hands go first and are followed by the head and body rather than the old style of getting the body across first:
Robinson was mentioned by Nasser in his post match analysis when questioning why we turned to Bracey. He said that, in terms of keeping, Robinson is way ahead of Bracey and that we ended up playing the latter at 7 when he bats at 3 for his County i.e. we picked him as a batsman first but then didn't play him in his position and forgot that the keeper has to be a top keeper too! He also said that Billings had been asked to join the squad but not used and that he hadn't kept consistently in the CC for over two years
Kent have often bemoaned the fact that we do not produce fast bowlers. But we have, since time began, had a conveyor belt of keepers. The man responsible for guiding the likes of Billings, Robinson and Cox was Ray Willis. He was also the Kent U14 coach for a number of no longer coaches the keepers but, along with his son, Simon (who is an ECB talent spotter for the South and former head of the Kent and Sri Lanka Academy) and Geraint Jones used to run a monthly training session for keepers during the winter too. I wonder if all the counties do that?
Don’t Surrey have Foakes, Pope and Jamie Smith who all can keep ? Wonder if these days young keepers need to be top 4 batters in order to have more than one string to their bow ? Funnily enough they all also appear to be top class fielders !
Paul Downton told me that they are now called batsmen that keep and not keepers that bat. That rather says it all and at the very least they have to be able to bat in the top six at County level. That then means that they also have to be able to field. The issue with some kids is that they start to keep at an early age and don't therefore develop a throwing arm - which rather rules them out of County cricket.
I get where you are coming from. But. As a cricket player you should either be a specialist batsman or specialist bowler. Some players of course can do both. But as a keeper you cannot bowl so therefore you should be capable as a batsman otherwise you are weakening the team.
Absolutely. The days of Bob Taylor are long gone. I suppose what I'm saying is that, at Kent for example, Billings, Cox and Robinson are lumped in with Denly, Leaning, DBD, Kuhn, Crawley etc etc. They will pick the best 6 batsman from that lot to play and then decide who is going to keep based on their ability to do so. There is a rider to that in so far as they have always had a reluctance to bat that keeper in the top 3 in the CC but circumstances have dictated that Robinson is now opening and keeping.
Ollie Robinson (Kent) is one of best young England keepers. His development as a batsman has been somewhat stifled by having to bat at 6 in the County Championship but he is now opening and has had scores of 43, 14 and 120 doing so. I'm certainly not saying that Ollie is ready as a Test batsman yet though he wouldn't be far behind Bracey in that respect.
But if we are talking about pure glove work there are few better. An example of this is the catch that he took the other night down the leg side off Darren Stevens to dismiss D'Arcy Short. Ollie has to adopt a wide stance to get a view of the ball because Stevens is bowling across the left hander - the hands go first and are followed by the head and body rather than the old style of getting the body across first:
Robinson was mentioned by Nasser in his post match analysis when questioning why we turned to Bracey. He said that, in terms of keeping, Robinson is way ahead of Bracey and that we ended up playing the latter at 7 when he bats at 3 for his County i.e. we picked him as a batsman first but then didn't play him in his position and forgot that the keeper has to be a top keeper too! He also said that Billings had been asked to join the squad but not used and that he hadn't kept consistently in the CC for over two years
Kent have often bemoaned the fact that we do not produce fast bowlers. But we have, since time began, had a conveyor belt of keepers. The man responsible for guiding the likes of Billings, Robinson and Cox was Ray Willis. He was also the Kent U14 coach for a number of no longer coaches the keepers but, along with his son, Simon (who is an ECB talent spotter for the South and former head of the Kent and Sri Lanka Academy) and Geraint Jones used to run a monthly training session for keepers during the winter too. I wonder if all the counties do that?
Don’t Surrey have Foakes, Pope and Jamie Smith who all can keep ? Wonder if these days young keepers need to be top 4 batters in order to have more than one string to their bow ? Funnily enough they all also appear to be top class fielders !
Paul Downton told me that they are now called batsmen that keep and not keepers that bat. That rather says it all and at the very least they have to be able to bat in the top six at County level. That then means that they also have to be able to field. The issue with some kids is that they start to keep at an early age and don't therefore develop a throwing arm - which rather rules them out of County cricket.
I get where you are coming from. But. As a cricket player you should either be a specialist batsman or specialist bowler. Some players of course can do both. But as a keeper you cannot bowl so therefore you should be capable as a batsman otherwise you are weakening the team.
Absolutely. The days of Bob Taylor are long gone. I suppose what I'm saying is that, at Kent for example, Billings, Cox and Robinson are lumped in with Denly, Leaning, DBD, Kuhn, Crawley etc etc. They will pick the best 6 batsman from that lot to play and then decide who is going to keep based on their ability to do so. There is a rider to that in so far as they have always had a reluctance to bat that keeper in the top 3 in the CC but circumstances have dictated that Robinson is now opening and keeping.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
A - used for tightening your studs, name escapes me B - thigh pad C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh? D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
I have just listened to a podcast which touches on the rise of left handed batsmen at the top level.
A couple of years ago I raised this very topic on here specifically in relation to why there are so many left handed batsmen as against left handed golfers. My argument is/was that batting should be top hand dominant and that still holds. The other aspect that comes into this is which eye is dominant.
When I originally raised this, the one thing I couldn't get my head round was why so many batting line ups at international level were left handed. I would suggest that the average number of top order batting left handers in club cricket is one - neither of the top sides of the two clubs I am associated with actually have a single left hander. But when one looks at the make up of Test batting line ups most have at least two (bar the ones I mention below) and in the case of a top three, the differential between the two has in the last 20 years or so been minimal. In fact, since 2000, 84% of Australian openers have been left handed.
So why is this so? Fundamentally, because the LBW law that dictates that if a ball pitches outside leg a batsman cannot be out. Over 50% of balls delivered to a left hander by a right handed seamer that would have hit the stumps actually pitch outside leg. For that reason and the advent of DRS, twice as many right handers are out LBW than left handers. Left handed bats are equally as vulnerable to left arm seamers but how many, for example, left arm bowlers have we produced in the last 20 years in Test cricket?
Of course, the other question is why does a right arm bowler not go around the wicket more often to left handers and why are they not more successful doing so? The reason is that the bowler has to have the ability to attack both edges of the bat and to straighten the ball coming around. And that is a skillset in itself. Plus you are now no longer inviting the caught behind or in the slips and there is every potential of you being clipped through the leg side doing so.
Note I have consistently talked about "seamers". The reason I have done so is because the stats are not the same for spinners as they do not, as a rule, push the ball across the left hander - an off spinner will come around the wicket to a left hander, pitch it in line so still has the main three modes of dismissal available to him including LBW but, more to the point, they turn the ball away to the left hander. And that is why the likes of England, Australia, NZ and West Indies have a far higher number of left handers than their Indian counterparts do not. Because, at home, the former countries rely on seamers to take wickets whereas India are far more influenced by spin. Things are starting to change in this respect because there are fewer and fewer old school right arm off break bowlers - more and more are leg break bowlers or have the ability to bowl liquorice all sorts.
In Tests, the humble offspinner hasn't been this sexy since Laker, I'd counter, and this has a lot to do with the profusion of lefties (and the rise of DRS) - the liquorice allsorts bowlers are mostly popping up in the short stuff where they're just about the most valuable asset a team can have
Leggies are barely getting a look-in in Tests. Warne and Kumble were accuracy freaks and nobody comes close to them now. Witness the fall of Kuldeep Yadav recently
Yasir Shah is good, I guess, but Pakistan have still picked a LOT of finger spinners and Nauman Ali recently leapfrogged him in the pecking order. Matt Parkinson has a claim to be the most accurate leggie in world cricket right now!
In Tests, the humble offspinner hasn't been this sexy since Laker, I'd counter, and this has a lot to do with the profusion of lefties (and the rise of DRS) - the liquorice allsorts bowlers are mostly popping up in the short stuff where they're just about the most valuable asset a team can have
Leggies are barely getting a look-in in Tests. Warne and Kumble were accuracy freaks and nobody comes close to them now. Witness the fall of Kuldeep Yadav recently
I honestly don't know but how many English qualified front line off break bowlers there are on the County Championship circuit? We probably have as many of them to pick from as we do left arm seamers or even left handed orthodox spinners - the latter two are obviously dictated by whether they are left or right handed but the former isn't. It comes back down to the rise of white ball cricket and the fact that a leggie will have a googly in his armoury - although playing half your CC matches in April/May does lend itself to not playing a front line spinner at all
I have just listened to a podcast which touches on the rise of left handed batsmen at the top level.
A couple of years ago I raised this very topic on here specifically in relation to why there are so many left handed batsmen as against left handed golfers. My argument is/was that batting should be top hand dominant and that still holds. The other aspect that comes into this is which eye is dominant.
When I originally raised this, the one thing I couldn't get my head round was why so many batting line ups at international level were left handed. I would suggest that the average number of top order batting left handers in club cricket is one - neither of the top sides of the two clubs I am associated with actually have a single left hander. But when one looks at the make up of Test batting line ups most have at least two (bar the ones I mention below) and in the case of a top three, the differential between the two has in the last 20 years or so been minimal. In fact, since 2000, 84% of Australian openers have been left handed.
So why is this so? Fundamentally, because the LBW law that dictates that if a ball pitches outside leg a batsman cannot be out. Over 50% of balls delivered to a left hander by a right handed seamer that would have hit the stumps actually pitch outside leg. For that reason and the advent of DRS, twice as many right handers are out LBW than left handers. Left handed bats are equally as vulnerable to left arm seamers but how many, for example, left arm bowlers have we produced in the last 20 years in Test cricket?
Of course, the other question is why does a right arm bowler not go around the wicket more often to left handers and why are they not more successful doing so? The reason is that the bowler has to have the ability to attack both edges of the bat and to straighten the ball coming around. And that is a skillset in itself. Plus you are now no longer inviting the caught behind or in the slips and there is every potential of you being clipped through the leg side doing so.
Note I have consistently talked about "seamers". The reason I have done so is because the stats are not the same for spinners as they do not, as a rule, push the ball across the left hander - an off spinner will come around the wicket to a left hander, pitch it in line so still has the main three modes of dismissal available to him including LBW but, more to the point, they turn the ball away to the left hander. And that is why the likes of England, Australia, NZ and West Indies have a far higher number of left handers than their Indian counterparts do not. Because, at home, the former countries rely on seamers to take wickets whereas India are far more influenced by spin. Things are starting to change in this respect because there are fewer and fewer old school right arm off break bowlers - more and more are leg break bowlers or have the ability to bowl liquorice all sorts.
Fascinating stuff. Well it is to me anyway!
the Times had an article about this recently .. time for a wholesale review of the LBW law, especially with regard to southpaws
In Tests, the humble offspinner hasn't been this sexy since Laker, I'd counter, and this has a lot to do with the profusion of lefties (and the rise of DRS) - the liquorice allsorts bowlers are mostly popping up in the short stuff where they're just about the most valuable asset a team can have
Leggies are barely getting a look-in in Tests. Warne and Kumble were accuracy freaks and nobody comes close to them now. Witness the fall of Kuldeep Yadav recently
Jim Laker bowled on uncovered wickets, which were a great help to spinners in those days.
I’m sure you’re probably right Johnny (certainly was the case in Manchester for THAT match) although I do seem to remember the covers being rolled out at the Oval on occasions.
I just googled Laker and was interested to read he spent some months in Auckland in the early ‘50s on honeymoon and was player/manager for the provincial side during that time. He considered staying here according to the article but returned to England for greater things.
On the subject on Jim laker ..he played for catford cc ( pennerley road) after being demobbed..he was eventually picked up by Surrey...as a very younger cricketer the lift lid changing rooms benches (above) were a source of wonderment...just piles and piles of old score books featuring himself...he wasn't a bad bat either
I’m sure you’re probably right Johnny (certainly was the case in Manchester for THAT match) although I do seem to remember the covers being rolled out at the Oval on occasions.
I just googled Laker and was interested to read he spent some months in Auckland in the early ‘50s on honeymoon and was player/manager for the provincial side during that time. He considered staying here according to the article but returned to England for greater things.
After Jim Laker retired, he became a commentator on the 40 over Sunday League with John Arlott in 1969, I used to love watching that every Sunday on BBC 2.
Comments
I really envy the young guns who are making their careers from T20 at the moment, lads like Tom Banton, Liam Livingstone and Phil Salt for example. Even if they don’t play much for England they can still have a very rewarding time playing in the various franchises around the world. If the choice is £40,000 for three weeks of T20 somewhere hot or facing the new ball on a bleak April morning at Derby, it’s a no-brainer.
Within the next decade I reckon 30 to 40 per cent of English pros will have white-ball only contracts. I’m a massive fan of the Championship and it’s still the competition most players covet above all others, but someone who concentrates on red-ball cricket but who isn’t good enough to play for England can expect to earn about £40,000 a year: decent money but not a sum you can retire on.
These guys will do all the requisite white-ball skills training in the winter and then when the Blast starts they either kick their heels or go and play in the second team. And believe me, there is nothing worse than watching your mates play a T20 in front of a full house having earlier that day played the same format for the seconds at a club ground with 20 people watching.
I speak to young players all the time about not being pigeon-holed. And players who think they are red-ball specialists can absolutely re-invent themselves. If you can play a forward defensive you should be able to hit the ball for six.
Absolutely nothing about red ball batsmen improving themselves or white ball specialists trying to re-invent themselves as red ball players. But as he suggests, for the money available, why should they?
From a historical perspective I can't remember a period when England were producing so few test class batsmen who were capable of averaging over 40! Less than ten years ago we still had the likes of Cookie, KP, Bell, Trott, Strauss and Matty Prior, who all averaged well into the 40's, and yet here we find ourselves with only Root averaging 40+, with even the much celebrated Stokes and Buttler averaging mid-30's after plenty of tests.
Worrying times indeed, and I can see us being regularly bundled out for less than 100 in the Ashes, as Hazelwood, Cummins and Starc will be more than a handful on pacey tracks, with the baying mob of raucous Aussies calling for English blood.
But.
As a cricket player you should either be a specialist batsman or specialist bowler.
Some players of course can do both.
But as a keeper you cannot bowl so therefore you should be capable as a batsman otherwise you are weakening the team.
I’ve been doing some reselling and recently picked up a cricket bundle. I know what most of the stuff is but haven’t a clue about the below.
can somebody tell me what exactly they are? Let’s call them item A,B,C and D for easiness. Item D I’m sure is a crotch protector but does it need a band with it?
But please please wash it before wearing it.
B - thigh pad
C - looks like a thigh pad but for the back foot thigh?
D - A box, it protects your bollocks! No, if you wear brief/boxer briefs it just slides down and holds in place.
You sum it up perfectly.
A couple of years ago I raised this very topic on here specifically in relation to why there are so many left handed batsmen as against left handed golfers. My argument is/was that batting should be top hand dominant and that still holds. The other aspect that comes into this is which eye is dominant.
When I originally raised this, the one thing I couldn't get my head round was why so many batting line ups at international level were left handed. I would suggest that the average number of top order batting left handers in club cricket is one - neither of the top sides of the two clubs I am associated with actually have a single left hander. But when one looks at the make up of Test batting line ups most have at least two (bar the ones I mention below) and in the case of a top three, the differential between the two has in the last 20 years or so been minimal. In fact, since 2000, 84% of Australian openers have been left handed.
So why is this so? Fundamentally, because the LBW law that dictates that if a ball pitches outside leg a batsman cannot be out. Over 50% of balls delivered to a left hander by a right handed seamer that would have hit the stumps actually pitch outside leg. For that reason and the advent of DRS, twice as many right handers are out LBW than left handers. Left handed bats are equally as vulnerable to left arm seamers but how many, for example, left arm bowlers have we produced in the last 20 years in Test cricket?
Of course, the other question is why does a right arm bowler not go around the wicket more often to left handers and why are they not more successful doing so? The reason is that the bowler has to have the ability to attack both edges of the bat and to straighten the ball coming around. And that is a skillset in itself. Plus you are now no longer inviting the caught behind or in the slips and there is every potential of you being clipped through the leg side doing so.
Note I have consistently talked about "seamers". The reason I have done so is because the stats are not the same for spinners as they do not, as a rule, push the ball across the left hander - an off spinner will come around the wicket to a left hander, pitch it in line so still has the main three modes of dismissal available to him including LBW but, more to the point, they turn the ball away to the left hander. And that is why the likes of England, Australia, NZ and West Indies have a far higher number of left handers than their Indian counterparts do not. Because, at home, the former countries rely on seamers to take wickets whereas India are far more influenced by spin. Things are starting to change in this respect because there are fewer and fewer old school right arm off break bowlers - more and more are leg break bowlers or have the ability to bowl liquorice all sorts.
Fascinating stuff. Well it is to me anyway!
Leggies are barely getting a look-in in Tests. Warne and Kumble were accuracy freaks and nobody comes close to them now. Witness the fall of Kuldeep Yadav recently
Jim Laker bowled on uncovered wickets, which were a great help to spinners in those days.
I just googled Laker and was interested to read he spent some months in Auckland in the early ‘50s on honeymoon and was player/manager for the provincial side during that time. He considered staying here according to the article but returned to England for greater things.
After Jim Laker retired, he became a commentator on the 40 over Sunday League with John Arlott in 1969, I used to love watching that every Sunday on BBC 2.