Wrist Spin Bowling (part Five)

Top Contributors
Liz Ward said:
Absolutely right Cleanprophet, it is always best to get advice.

For a Grade 1 strain, I would always consider approximately 3 week rest. This does not, of course, mean no mobility and it is a good idea to keep it 'rolling' over with as full a range of motion as you can muster without pain.

The body is extremely good at telling us what we need to know and we ignore it at our peril! :D

Warming up is essential but if the issue returns it may be mechanical. If so, let me have a video and I will have a look.

Take care!
Click to expand...

Sounds good.

I've just been rotating the arm, quite slowly, and felt no pain or discomfort. It feels like if I did try to rotate with more effort it would be risky. But just 4 or 5 days ago I couldn't rotate it at all without a bit of pain.

I'm filming my bowling all the time so if I do have any more problems I will put a video of my bowling up on youtube and post the video here.
 
I think my club, up here in the north west, was involved in a last man stands thing not so long ago. It's a great idea, especially for getting people involved who don't normally play cricket.
 
Cleanprophet said:
I think my club, up here in the north west, was involved in a last man stands thing not so long ago. It's a great idea, especially for getting people involved who don't normally play cricket.
Click to expand...


Gotta be honest, I don't really see the point in it. Its like T20 cricket... but really shit. I can see it putting people off cricket.

Its a commercial enterprise of course. No-one makes money from people playing T20 cricket, it is a game that belongs to everyone, whereas some bloke somewhere does make £££ every time you play last man standing.
 
SLA said:
Gotta be honest, I don't really see the point in it. Its like T20 cricket... but really shit. I can see it putting people off cricket.

Its a commercial enterprise of course. No-one makes money from people playing T20 cricket, it is a game that belongs to everyone, whereas some bloke somewhere does make £££ every time you play last man standing.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I've seen people new to cricket come to my club in the last few years and leave the game pretty quickly. They usually can't bowl or bat very well and it's a long day if you don't get any runs. It's easy for people to not feel involved and engaged in the game. At my club, people pay £15 for a game. I don't even know how you can entice people to come and play in those circumstances. They often prefer just coming to the nets because they know they will do some batting and bowling and be back home after a couple of hours.

A new approach like this is well worth trying - unless, of course, the clubs themselves organise T20 games where plenty of players get a bowl and a chance to bat and the match lasts only 2-3 hours as well as costing a much smaller match fee.
 
Cleanprophet said:
To be honest, I've seen people new to cricket come to my club in the last few years and leave the game pretty quickly. They usually can't bowl or bat very well and it's a long day if you don't get any runs. It's easy for people to not feel involved and engaged in the game. At my club, people pay £15 for a game. I don't even know how you can entice people to come and play in those circumstances. They often prefer just coming to the nets because they know they will do some batting and bowling and be back home after a couple of hours.

A new approach like this is well worth trying - unless, of course, the clubs themselves organise T20 games where plenty of players get a bowl and a chance to bat and the match lasts only 2-3 hours as well as costing a much smaller match fee.
Click to expand...

£15? Jesus Christ. Ours is £5.

I probably play more T20s than 40 over games each summer maybe 30 to 20, something like that. The T20s are very informal, we often play retire at 25 so that everyone gets a bat.

For obvious reasons, when new players come along we push them in the direction of the t20s where they can have a bat and a couple of overs, they don't need to wear whites, and the game only lasts maybe 2 1/2 hours at most before we get down the pub for a pint. If they get the hang of it, they move up to 30 over games on sundays then 40 over games on saturdays.

I see no reason why any of this needs to be replaced by a franchise system with frankly bizarre and poorly thought out rules. 5 ball overs? 8 players? 1 ringer allowed to bat on by himself? double plays? last over scores double? I don't know what it is, but its certainly not cricket.
 
I am sorry you feel that way SLA... but that is just your opinion. I can understand guys saying "It is not for me" but to trash it completely is extremely closed mind thinking! No form of cricket is "...really shit". Any opportunity to engage with the game is progress and Last Man Stands, other than the equipment, is not like T20 at all!

Last Man Stands is huge... and hugely popular with students, new fathers, guys who work very long hours etc who want to keep involved in the game but cannot afford the time and those who are bored with standing on a field all day. It is a different culture and MUCH more inclusive than any other form of cricket. It is fast, bright and fun and I can understand that it can be quite hard to keep up with play... but just as Rugby 7s has its own fans but still enjoyed and appreciated by the 10s, 13s and 15s, so does Last Man Stands and in general, the cricket fraternity is just as open minded as rugby... horses for courses!
 
Liz Ward said:
I am sorry you feel that way SLA... but that is just your opinion. I can understand guys saying "It is not for me" but to trash it completely is extremely closed mind thinking! No form of cricket is "...really shit". Any opportunity to engage with the game is progress and Last Man Stands, other than the equipment, is not like T20 at all!

Last Man Stands is huge... and hugely popular with students, new fathers, guys who work very long hours etc who want to keep involved in the game but cannot afford the time and those who are bored with standing on a field all day. It is a different culture and MUCH more inclusive than any other form of cricket. It is fast, bright and fun and I can understand that it can be quite hard to keep up with play... but just as Rugby 7s has its own fans but still enjoyed and appreciated by the 10s, 13s and 15s, so does Last Man Stands and in general, the cricket fraternity is just as open minded as rugby... horses for courses!
Click to expand...

But the game is badly designed. I'm sorry but that's the way it is. If I sat down and tried to think of a way to make cricket slower, more boring and complex, and significantly less inclusive, I would come up with something very similar to LMS.

Its not "hugely popular" either, for every LMS franchise frantically blowing their own horn, there are 100 teams just quietly getting on with the business of playing T20 cricket.

It hasn't caught on in the UK, and for very good reason.
 
I've played cricket for over 20 years, I've captained teams, I've coached teams, I've administrated leagues, I've organised tournaments, I've designed bonus points systems, I've played every format of cricket known to man. I'm the ultimate cricket format nerd.

There are a few basic principles of designing a format.

If you want to make the game go quicker, you don't reduce the number of balls in the over, you increase it. You also definitely don't reduce the number of fielders so that it takes longer for each ball to be fielded and more likely to get lost.
If you want to make it more accessible to beginners, you simplify the rules, you don't complicate them with free hits and double plays and wides counting different values as the over progresses.
If you want to make the game more inclusive and less likely to be dominated by a handful of ringers, you make batsmen retire at a set score, you don't allow them to bat on by themselves.
If you want to make the game cheaper, you let people wear whatever they like, you don't require colour coordinated team strips and charge them a franchise fee.


Everything LMS propaganda claims to be: cheap, quick, accessible and inclusive, the rules actually do the exact opposite.
 
SLA said:
£15? Jesus Christ. Ours is £5.
Click to expand...

Yeah, very steep indeed. I don't know if you pay any subs? Most teams we come up against pay a sub for the season and then a match fee (usually something like £70-£80 sub and then somewhere between £6-£8 match fee). We don't pay any subs, just the match fee. £15 is too much though, I know that much. You talk all day about new players being put off by this, that and whatever. But I'm sure £15 match fees are top of the list for pushing new players away. That's cricket committee's for you.
 
Cleanprophet said:
Yeah, very steep indeed. I don't know if you pay any subs? Most teams we come up against pay a sub for the season and then a match fee (usually something like £70-£80 sub and then somewhere between £6-£8 match fee). We don't pay any subs, just the match fee. £15 is too much though, I know that much. You talk all day about new players being put off by this, that and whatever. But I'm sure £15 match fees are top of the list for pushing new players away. That's cricket committee's for you.
Click to expand...


We pay £20 subs for the year + £5 match fees for all formats + £2 for nets but we're not too fussy about collecting that.

I know this because I am the treasurer, and I have insisted on freezing player costs for the past 5 years. Even if it pushes just one person away, its not worth it.
 
SLA said:
You also definitely don't reduce the number of fielders so that it takes longer for each ball to be fielded and more likely to get lost.
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced about that argument. In my experience, whenever a ball gets lost you have about 3 or 4 people looking for it whilst the best part of 20 people look on. People want to hit the ball and watch it go for runs. I've played games that were 8-a-side. It was not much fun for the bowler, but the batters loved it. Extra time chasing the ball? Not really an issue. It might add 15mins to the game. That's probably a price worth paying for giving new players the chance to score runs.
 
SLA said:
We pay £20 subs for the year + £5 match fees for all formats + £2 for nets but we're not too fussy about collecting that.
Click to expand...

Our club used to have a yearly sub of £120 and no match fees, but there were too many players who could only play a handful of games each season so they scrapped the subs. Really, there needs to be a sub/fee balance because a player only has to play 9 games and he has paid more than the previous yearly sub amount.

That said, we have a great netting area with four lanes and players are able to use them all year round, for free - as I do. Plus, we have a bowling machine which is also available for all members of the club all season round. £15 is too much though, for sure.
 
Cleanprophet said:
I'm not convinced about that argument. In my experience, whenever a ball gets lost you have about 3 or 4 people looking for it whilst the best part of 20 people look on. People want to hit the ball and watch it go for runs. I've played games that were 8-a-side. It was not much fun for the bowler, but the batters loved it. Extra time chasing the ball? Not really an issue. It might add 15mins to the game. That's probably a price worth paying for giving new players the chance to score runs.
Click to expand...


The point is, the probability of a ball getting lost is directly correlated to the number of gaps in the field there is for it to go through.

We've probably all played 6 aside cricket, its fun but its knackering and there is a lot of time wasted, hence the reason the innings are 40-48 balls absolute max.

The entire point of quick, inclusive cricket is to pack as many balls in to the time as possible, and try and get the distribution of batting and bowling as even as possible. Normal amateur T20 games gets 240 balls into about 145 minutes and everyone gets a bat and a bowl. LMS takes the same time but you get 40 less deliveries, and its more likely that it will be a ringer facing them.
 
Darth Spin said:
Fair few batsmen saying I'm getting drift recently. Just thought I'd mention that, what better way to spend a Saturday night.
Click to expand...

Whatever you are doing, keep doing it. We've spoken a lot on here about drift. Some people are quite clear that seam position plays no part. Others think otherwise (just been ready Grimmett and he's another who talks about how important seam position is). The point is, we don't really know why some people get drift and others don't. So if you start getting drift, it's important to try and keep your action and retain that movement through the air. It's a game changer. Once a spinner starts getting drift, his effectiveness improves vastly for varies reasons. The batters get fearful and the bowler's confidence soars.
 
Darth Spin said:
Yeah I found it encouraging. I find it hard to tell if I'm getting drift or not.
Click to expand...

Same for me. With your follow through and head position, you will struggle to get a good clear view. You tend to fall a little to the off-side as the ball is drifting to the leg-side. The best position to view it is straight on, from the wicket. If you can, I'd strongly advise videoing your bowling from right behind the bowler's stumps. I kept telling myself, for months and months, that I would do that and only finally got around to doing it late last year (October time I think it was). As soon as I did it, it left me thinking "I wish I'd done this long ago". I spotted several things that I could improve straight away and one of those was linked to getting drift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top