Nasser is bloody brilliant. Him, and Athers are so objective, thoughtful and eloquent. They break things down without assuming listeners are idiots. Love them
They are trying to score before that only few batsman wanted to score and most of 5 days match was drawn and the series results for 5 or 4 test series was 1-0 or 2-0 sometimes 0-0 😂😂
@@educationworld9699 but they are not scoring and getting out. That's the point. 90's tests were 1-0 2-0 and not 4-1 because players knew how to play test cricket. Hence you saw big hundreds and double hundreds. Players had temperament to play long innings. Test cricket is not T-20 where you whack few balls and get out cheaply. Bowlers had to work their ass off to get a wicket in those times. We had proper contest of bat and ball. Test batting is wearing your opponent physically and mentally...making bowlers work hard to get you out with skills. Not throwing you wickets cheaply
@@galariajaved what good in watching boring test in which last day of a test 3rd innings was being played and i love draws test when one team fight for it but before there was draws game more than the result and wasting five days without getting a result with boring test is absolutely stupid that why test cricket doesn't grow and because of it cricket also doesn't grow and there is human tendency that we are not satisfied with anything before the cricket experts says that how to get results in test matches now we are seeing results in every test match but now they are saying why test cricket doesn't going to 5th day 🤦🤦
@@educationworld9699 it's all opinion, you love batsman playing risky irresponsible shots trying to scored quick runs and getting out in 20's, I love top order batsman playing a waiting game, countering the new ball, leaving balls, looking for loose balls and defending good balls and building an innings, building a big first innings, and then opponent trying to match their skills with balls, not allowing batsman to settle, using swing pace spin, I like this balance contest, where the first session bowlers have a chance, then batsman score in last two, next day bowler has a new story to say...Nowadays it's too easy for bowlers to get wickets...batsman doesn't apply themselves, no patience, no fight, it's like which team can make more mistakes at high frequency loses...Anyway I don't even follow cricket anymore...lost interest long back ....too much cricket nowadays...I follow football....so you can have your opinion...no issues...I am all for aggressive cricket but with a balance where you don't end up losing wickets every 3rd over...afterall it's TEST CRICKET.
Ahh..No "Channel" does such gems on cricket analytics better than Sky sports... So we touched on: Batsman's offside guard, Normal old school guard, Trigger movement guard, Guard against Spinner, And also DRS, umpiring, batting techniques, coaching, learning the game, 3 old guys being cynical about sports, also letting us know the weather at hand,,,,all of this in 18 mins .. 🤯
When comparing to Steve smith, need to remember he is A) unbelievably strong through the leg side and will barely ever miss the straight one and B) has probably the best judge/feel for his off stump in the world. He won’t play outside off if he doesn’t need to, you will very rarely see him defending to cover/extra which is generally a result of playing at deliveries which a batter didn’t need to. This combination is why he can be so successful batting covering all his stumps, unless you can do the same it’s probably not the “best” way to bat
Yes, his judgement is best in the world, he shuffles so much that he doesn't even need to play on the off side which is much more riskier than playing the ball on the body. But it's not for everyone, he is just confident about his technique, he is mentally strong and has got an unbelievable eye. Really rare to see players like him. Marnus plays a bit like him but I don't think he would be able to score again on tough pitches, it's just not his game. Don't want to take credit away from him but he has scored half of his runs after getting dropped. Luck can run out anytime
@@GauravYadav-bf7qj we can expect a lot of great things from marnus, just some of his bad county games cannot tell much, yes a little bit of luck was with him, which is good, but he has a great technique and resilience
this is cracking content, worth taking a look at whether the batting averages have gone up or down in comparison to the LBW%. That might show if it’s a response to nibbly pitches or just poor technique 👍🏼
I reckon in the present era batsman are worried about the one that nips away from middle and leg and hits top of off so you could presumably assume their stance first up is middle and off covering their off stump
But they can certainly take that middle and leg guard so that won't take yr head outside that off stump line in the modern era many batsman shuffle towards off stump end result being nicking a fifth stump outswinger or the one that shapes in they can wait fr the bowlers to bowl on middle and leg and leave those innocus nuts outside off stump
You know its funny: I haven't played for like 20yrs either but I grew up watching those guess and their technique... Always thought highly of Atherton, Ramprakash & Thorpe. (Even Butcher was good to watch) Atherton always had economy of movement, looked like he had time to play his shots. Ramps and Thorpe were super to watch. There's literally no one in the current England team I enjoy watching, not even Root.
The other way of looking at it is that he's getting some fabulous advice and coaching from three knowledgeable guys for free. Having said that, it must be uncomfortable for him to watch.
*Mark Butcher having a baby* Doctor: I can see the head Mark: Where is it? Is it outside the line of the off stump? Doctor: ... Mark's wife: wat Mark: It's already falling over, it doesn't make sense, I don't want this kid
Atherton knows when to pull a mickey out when he commented on Naseer that most of his runs have come to third man off outside edges. However, at the same time, he knows when not to be over critical on current batsmen's technique. A genuine commentator who knows what he is talking about.
@@satanicmc because Smith has those hands,they just find the ball with a straight bat and a solid head position, everyone mimics the feet,not the fundamental,and I do believe that not everyone can have those hands.
@@sunset1394 spot on. Smith backs himself to hit the ball off his pads, it is his natural shot and his feet set up to enable that. Through the off side, you are right, his ability to shift his hands and stay balanced means he can adjust, aided by his playing back and across giving him a smidgeon more time than if he used a front foot press. I started watching some of the older players in the 1960's and 70's...they played a lot more like Smith...Ian Chappell is an example, Mike Brearley too where the stylish front foot cover drive off the quicks was not really played...but they did drive full balls from the quicks down the ground more off a very small shift of their weight forward but still off the back foot. Very much like Smith and even a little like Steve Waugh.
Yes the new generation players are defending the deliveries just outside the off-stump, which is old generation players might have been a cut shot. But at the same time, new generation players are scoring deliveries on middle and off-stump, which the old generation players might be defending. So both have their pros and cons.
All I know is you have to be an exceptional player in order to hit every ball angled in at you if you’re on off stump. As a left arm in swing bowler I’d love batsmen batting there all the time
I've been trying a trigger movement that finishes on middle-and-off as I've been very recently coached (and contrary to what I was coached to do when I was younger). This video has taught me a lot. As I suspected, I reckon I'm usually getting it wrong and ending on off, and going out LBW all the time. Thanks lads. Still, you really, really needed to get someone in to explain why it's coached that way now.
As an old fart, who played in the late 60's and 70's, I can honestly say that no one in those ancient days (lol) ever took guard further than leg stump. Watching from America, where I live now, until I watched this video, could not for life of me, think why the game looked so different.
I played in the fifties onwards and watched Peter May, Colin Cowdrey, The West Indian 3 W's etc, also Richie Benaud. In In those days batsmen had the bat on the ground and only lifted it as the ball was about to be delivered or on its way. Now they all stand holding the bat up like in baseball. Looks inelegant. I missed watching cricket for years while in Canada. Can someone please explain to me how and why this developed. I can't find the answer anywhere.
@@normangoldstuck8107 How and why ? Simply because of the proliferation of limited over matches. Where emphasis is on scoring runs. 4s and 6es draw crowds or that's the perception. So the game of cricket has been bastardized to a form of baseball where upcoming cricketers compromise on technique and focus on power. You would recall that even in the 90s era scoring sixes and fours weren't so easy and playing shots across the line of the ball / hitting balls on the up was considered technically incorrect. The emphasis on technique is not just for flair or that it looks good. It's to survive a torrid bowling attack where the pitch and conditions are suiting the bowler. So while these modern batsmen can get away with poor technique in the limited over games ; they suffer whenever there's tough batting conditions.
@@BinoBaba Thanks. Explains why they play such poor shots in test cricket and there are often batting collapses. In my day test crickets wore shirts with rolled up sleeves and flannels not elasticized trousers. No advertising logos as well.
@@normangoldstuck8107 I am young and watched cricket in the 90 early 2000s growing up. T20 RUINED THE GAME, I Notice this new stance watching a game recently after a number of years.
Man, this is such top class and awesome analysis. Bloody brilliant to watch. People only talking cricket and talking with a great technical understanding and in depth knowledge of the game. Big Kudos to you guys. Haven't seen such intellectual discussion in india on any thread or forum.
I remember reading Dexter's advice about batting besides the ball, not behind it, in a column which was, coincidentally, written by Atherton, and it is such good advice even at amateur level that I play at. Also the context to that advice, if memory serves, was Mark Ramprakash who had sought Dexter's advice. Ramps was in a midst of a slump, I believe. That advice worked out pretty well if you look at Ramps' county record. "Let's bring in a man who scored all his runs through third man' *queues in Nas* Athers has all the jokes. That was hilarious. Also the best deep dive into batting technique I've seen in years. More of this please. I look at someone like Sibley and Burns' technique and wonder how they score any runs at all. It just looks all over the place.
Really enjoyed this discussion. I would appreciate a discussion about the wide batting stances these day which seem to result in the batsman power hitting the ball from the crease line and reduces the ability to move forward or back flowing from a more balanced stance. Another interesting comparison would be Derek Randell's walkabout before the ball was bowled, and Steve Steve Smith's walkabout waving his waving his bat like a baseball bat - the pros/cons of a moving flow into the shoot. Thanks Tom
It’s come in from SA and Aus where the ball doesn’t move about so much. Graham Smith, Steve Smith, Kevin Pieterson all do did it. You have to have great eyes.
Pietersen if I can recall correctly had a big front stride, hence getting him out leg before was a bit more off a challenge since a lot would hit his pad outside the line. Smith moves around a lot, most modern batsman play much deeper with a statuary stance.
@@AlecBown I've seen people point at Marnus and say that copying Smith works, but if you look at their actual techniques, they're still very different. The way Marnus plays his shots has more in common with Tendulkar than it does Smith. It's just masked well by idiosyncrasies like his pull shot leave.
No, it's what happens when technique suffers from T20 with its pursuit for fast runs - stand and deliver and bludgeon the ball through/over the leg side.
What a brilliant video. Agree or disagree with what they are saying, you cannot but deeply admire the knowledge and sheer observational skills of these three. What a relief to hear this compared to the meaningless dribble of most pundits (self proclaimed experts or people that are brought in front of a micro just because they look good or sound good). I did not like Atherton as a player, but hats off to his skill here.
The whole point of the off stump guard is to *not* have your head outside the off stump, but have a very well balanced stance, facing straight down the off stump in the line of the delivery, which is what the example shows (I have no idea why Athers and Butch are saying they're "outside off" when quite clearly they aren't). Balance is key, and playing a ball under your nose is a lot easier than playing one outside off, moving away. That said, I'm a lefty, so this all works in my favour for a regular RHO bowler.
Really interesting conversation with great broadcasters, followed by 2 dreadful Surrey dismissals. @Nasser Hussain would be really interesting to get alternative points of view for balance: Are there any notable players who are successful with this technique? &, is it a technique that, perhaps, is suitable in certain conditions - but probably not UK conditions in early summer!
I never got out edged, my stance was outside leg stump but my head ended at off stump and I would get LBW every time. I just fixed it by keeping head still though that reduced the percentage of my cover drive shots that I used to be good at but now my leg side has improved and I don’t get lbw anymore. Batting is all about staying and making runs.
While the move towards players taking off stump guards is contributing to the increase in LBW. I think that we also need to highlight the massive increase in player analysis done by each team that is leading to batters struggling due to the lack of free balls. This is leading batters to overly align their techniques to their specific strengths at the cost of a more balanced game.
Interestingly, I've had this theory for a few years now. Legside dominant players do better in test cricket whereas in ODI you need a 360 game. Alistair Cook, Graeme Smith, Pujara, even Steve Smith to some extent don't have great cover drives but are excellent at clipping off their pads. So getting over to the offstump does limit your offside play but it doesn't matter in Test cricket because you can just leave it. You then practice a straight drive, leg glance and a pull shot and make sure you're excellent at those 3 shots and then you've got yourself a very successful career! I don't think Graeme Smith's technique would have allowed him to hit an outside off yorker past point/third man in a modern T20 death overs game. On the other hand, offside dominant players such as Ganguly, Sehwag, Jayasuriya, etc often got out pushing away at balls outside offstump and getting caught in swinging/seaming conditions but were excellent ODI players.
The off side dominant players you mention all grew up on sub continent pitches that didn't bounce or seam very much so playing through the off side is less risky.
@@nasserhussain4902 best in the world at test cricket,20/20 both? Buttler is a prime example of being amazing at white ball cricket but struggles at test level because his technique struggles against the moving ball as his eyes are not level.
@@plym1969 Exactly, having that balance, where your technique allows you to be able to adjust when playing the different formats, is a great skill to have,
Great analysis... although I'd be interested as to whether more wickets overall are being taken. If the rate of wicket-taking remains the same, then the mode of dismissal is kind of irrelevant. If players are upping their average, the changing modes of dismissal are neither here not there, but if their susceptibility to LBW is increasing the rate of wickets, there's a problem.
Was just thinking that... So much to take note of when watching him play. Think he's my favorite england opener. Realized that I'm getting into watching old school cricket a lot more and wished I had watched a lot more of Greenidge.
This is great analysis from the team. It would be interesting to know if average scores are lower as a result of this shift in technique. The technique change should mean less wickets lost to bowled and potentially caught behind. If average scores are the same, then it’s just a shift in method of dismissal due to the technique and as a result not that big an issue? Keen to understand your thoughts on this/if this was discussed @nasserhussain @skysportscricket
Scores are down in general the county championship has changed with pitches and conditions and ultimately the quality of batting has declines as shown in the england test team
This is an exceptional analysis of a feature of the current approach to batting that I have observed at various levels that has come increasingly into vogue. I wonder if a contributing factor is the growing impact of the shorter version of the game in which the 'leaving' the ball is not an option in the decision making process, for obvious reasons. Hence, the the player is fully committed (or premeditated) to hitting the ball, whether it pitch in the line of the stumps or outside. This approach appears to transfer from the limited overs game plan into the longer version and as result the player's technique is compromised. I could only imagine how many LBWs Terry Alderman would have collected against this approach to batting. Thanks everyone for what is a most interesting and intelligent analysis of the art of batting.
I'm glad to join this conversation but unfortunately my view is different on this Most successful batsmen like Viv Richards, Ricky Ponting Lara, Tendulkar, Kholi, Aravinda De Silva, Babar Azam, Kane Williamson to name few, cover the stumps to play all around the wickets.. If you analyze how they have been successful, you will find the following things in common * At the stance, the knees are slightly bent with feet rooted on "balls of the feet" (this will enable players to move the feet forward and back quickly and generate more power) and the back is bent too * Front elbow is closer to the body, and bat closer to the back shoulder * Head pauses on top of the toes with eyes parallel to the ground - this will help with your 180° view to pick the line of the ball early and the length too. This helps to roll your eyes around well to play on side as well as off side equally well * Bat angle is directed to first or second slip positions * At stance, the width of the two legs are as same as the shoulder width and it will be more advantageous to have a slightly open front toe too. Also the front leg is slightly crossing towards off side at the point when bowler releases the ball. This will get a better balance. If you carefully study, you will notice all these conditions in all successful players *The most important of all is to keep the balance to move the head over the toe without moving feet. If you don't do this, your balance is compromised and you cannot pick the line and length early to play with freedom. Result will be a good candidate for LBW. ** It is important to note that all these findings are backed up by sound biomechanical techniques.. If you manage these causes the results will fall in, whereas if you concentrate on the results you will be confused as to how they become LBW candidates. Also specifically for bottom hand players playing front of the wicket - It is advisable to release the back leg early rather than releasing the bottom hand to hit the ball under the eyes All successful batsman had these things naturally in them or adopted them knowingly. Therefore covering the wickets with the correct technique and balance will be far more beneficial than opening the wickets and getting out to slips. There are much more benefits to playing the ball covering the wickets, but it is not easy to describe all of them here.. By Anusha Samaranayake - former SLC national coach
Great points made here i agree with u but the issue is plp standing on off stump thn their head is usually outside off stump thus causing imbalance when playing balls that are straight or in swinging. But i agree covering the stumps with a balanced stance is the best opens up all kinda options and shots. Head is the key.
Unfortunately there aren't many genuinely good players of the short ball these days. Modern players have become too reliant upon their helmet (which has effectively given them a false sense of security) and many are getting their head in a bad position and/or taking their eyes of the ball. Its why batsmen are getting struck on the head so often these days, even though there are so fewer genuinely fast bowlers and way less short balls bowled than there used to be.
Some advantages of standing middle and off is you can pull a lot tighter towards fine leg, and you can better exploit an off-side biased field by hitting the ball onto the on side. I agree it's more dangerous, but it might be a risk taking for top order batsmen to score faster. For tail enders a traditional set up to lessen the chance of lbw would be favorable.
That Pope dismissal at the end illustrated it perfectly. He was utterly lost with a ball that had he been side on with his head over off ought to have been blocked easily OR clipped away to the on side. His head is in line with about a 4th or 5th stump. Had the ball followed the same path and the stumps moved two stumps to off then it would've been almost certainly not out going down leg. They were right, too, about Steve Smith. Yes he moves a long way, but his movements typically open up MORE scoring shots plus keep him well aware of his off stump, so an entirely different situation (although he's not in the sort of devastating form he was a few years back).
The reason batsman are starting further across their stumps is to cover the nick & fourth stump line. (I'm a level 3 coach in Australia, trust me I know what I'm talking about) When they showed the LBW dismissals the first time, all the batters were trying to hit the ball too straight if you understand that. When the ball is moving, or really in general when there is a quick bowler bowling, as a right-hander facing right arm over, a ball pitching on middle, should really go somewhere between the umpire and mid-on. Simple angles. That example is what hitting straight as a batsman truly means. All these players are making it way too complicated these days, if you are an aspiring cricketer feel free to message me on Facebook (same name). There are numerous other things that these players are ding wrong but that's the main one. Their head is too far across the stumps, and consequently they are trying to hit the ball 'too straight' have a great day everybody!
hlo. hope you are doing great.. i wanted to ask you some questions regarding my stance and trigger movement but there were alot of Bailey Foster on facebook.. i did not know which one were you..is there any other way where i should contact you!
Couple of things, old mate on the left’s head wasnt outside off stomp, he was trying to stay still and watch the ball closer on a green top, the idea is also that if everything out side your eye line is missing off stomp that means you can throw hands at it knowing its not hitting stumps and everything at you can be defended or flicked through the onside, labuschagne and smith are the masters of this where even an off stump line is too straight to them, the guy on the left missed a straight ine and was fired, if alec stuart had cime forward and was caught in front he’d be fired too, the best advice when avoiding lbw is use the bat
The difference between Steve Smith and the rest is that for Smith any ball even near the stumps would be worked towards the leg side. I’m very surprised by this new technique though. I can just imagine the carnage Waqar Younis would’ve caused against these batters. Full and fast and straight at the stumps. Great video Sky Sports!
I personally stand on off-stump for four reasons: 1. I am a good flicker. I have more space to flick good straight balls. 2. The pull shot is my best shot. When facing faster bowling, I don't have time to get inside the line of each ball. If you are facing good bowling and a ball is pitched short in the middle-stump region, you have time to give it a good whack if you are standing on off-stump. 3. I see the ball more clearly. It is more comfortable for my neck to look at the hands of the bowler. I used to get LB's all the time while standing on leg-stump. Now, I rarely ever do. 4. Leaving good balls is so much easier. I've only started this habit recently, but it has been really effective; especially as mainly a back-foot player. I encourage others to actually have a go at it. You avoid nearly any chances of edges from good balls outside off-stump.
Robson looked like he overbalanced a bit and has a very side on front foot, recipe for LBW. But I believe the intent is to reduce the amount of movement when facing quick bowling. So instead of a trigger that takes you to off you start there, ideally with a slightly opened front foot to access the straighter delivery. The modern player is trying to minimize movement to allow for more time to play. Great video boys.
Yet Robin Smith had a major issue with overbalancing and getting out LBW, caught at mid wicket or getting bowled as he tried to get his feet out the way but didn't have time. He was at his best when his front foot did not go so far towards point but took a smaller step, his head did not overbalance and stayed level.
this is just making me think of where I start I've only been LBW once from about 15 or so innings (tail ender hence the small number xD) but I do tend to start on middle, so maybe bringing myself back to leg will not only help me see it better and thus help my batting, but remove all risk of LBW and would keep it open for one of my two good shots, being a cut shot (the other being a sweep for the 0 people who care xD) have to try it next season, defo
I used to take middle and leg then changed to middle in about 1988. I always kept my head above my feet - like a boxer that way moving your feet is easy and you keep your balance. Off stump guard means straight balls get hit off your pads and balls on leg or just outside are hard to hit.
The smart thing about blocking the stumps is that you're forcing the umpire to make a decision. Used to be if you missed the ball the bowler hit the stumps and there was no doubt you were out. Now if you miss then the bowler hits the pads and the umpire has to make a decision. It *could* go either way, but in my experience umpires are quite reluctant to give a batsman out if there's even a sliver of doubt. The downside is, it makes it harder to play straight balls without necessarily making it easier to play balls moving away from you.
*Mayank Agarwal from Karnataka* who's on Ind test xi, he always plays beside the ball & *both he&klr* always make sure to keep their right eye on that off stump. & now the results are in front of u.
A big batting technique fault is when the bat comes down from the backlift in an arc rather than straight. This is why players often end up in the correct position (sometimes holding the pose) but the ball has already hit their pads (or stumps). It's fairly basic really if not necessarily easy to change - though you would think high level cricketers might be able to avoid this.
Definitely agree that there's no mode of dismissal better or worse than other, but the outside edges towards slips still have probabilities of dropping short or dropped catches whereas LBW dismissal has no such window of survival and with the DRS now, bowling side won't leave out even the half chances for LBW.
I think the key point isn't the end position, its the lack of movement before that. As Ath says being "too robotic" which is so important in any hitting sport
In a country like England where ever since I can remembera large majority of wickets fall to edges behind. I think the players are naturally adapting their techniques to counter that.
Really good analysis. In my view this is the impact of T20 cricket where the batters are trying to clear the leg and hit to cow corner all the time. I agree with Nasser about the many ways to score runs however there is a lot to be said for the old techniques, they have worked for hundred of years, I am not saying there is no place for unorthodox techniques but all the greatest players have used pretty orthodox methods: Bradman (obviously), Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Ponting, Lara, Gooch, Border et al.
Nasser should compare the lbws percentage with caught behind +maybe 1st and 2nd slip percentage. Perhaps the second percentage is much lower than the increase in lbw percentage. The second thing to look at is whether the percentage of balls bowled on off or outside off going for runs has gone down. If that remains the same, these two stats taken together, would allow me to disagree with what our experts are asserting.
A lot of this would have to do with white ball cricket being able to make shots on the leg side in particular boundaries It also means when death bowling bowlers have to get it right or they will hit it in the onside or if they don't get the line right when bowling offside yorkers etc it's easier to hit boundaries on the offside Alot of reward especially in white ball cricket is hitting to the onside, which generally are shorter boundaries then hitting straight, much easier to hit from a 5th or 6th stump to the onside whilst batting on offstump then batting on middle and leg (more traditional) and trying to hit on to the onside
Main probelm is the front leg coming over as well. Then you're in all sorts of trouble. If you can clear that front foot out the way and come back and across on your back foot then youre pobably okay. Get too square and you can knick off, but you're access to scoring opportunities is greatly increased. Risk/Reward. There's also no technique that exists that can stop you from getting out.
1. What were the scores and % of LBW dismissals against those scores versus history? 2. Time in the saeaon and conditions. 3. T20 cricket contribution. Will be interesting to add those facts.
Thanks to steve smith, there is no right or wrong way batting. Only thing matters is you score runs. Dhoni to was very unorthodox yet he scored more than 10k+ runs in odis.
MSD was pretty orthodox - you are looking only at a few of his shots in ODI and inferring he is unorthodox. - he could and did play traditional test cricket.
The ben foakes dismissal proves that they also not protected against the outside edge because you could have left that if you were on middle stump but since you have taken guard on off stump and are falling over, you dont know where your off stump is and had to poke at it.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Nasser Hussain is brilliant at his job 👍🏻
Many thanks, much appreciated
@@nasserhussain4902 It is so, so far ahead of any competitor cricket coverage. Thanks so much, would never think of this and always very interesting.
Spot on. Him and Mike Atherton best of any pundit In any sport
@@nasserhussain4902 will you do commentary in the eng vs nz series and WTC final?
Nasser is bloody brilliant. Him, and Athers are so objective, thoughtful and eloquent. They break things down without assuming listeners are idiots. Love them
Wasim Akram used to call such batsmen "walking stumps" , just hit them on the pads and they're out.
They are trying to score before that only few batsman wanted to score and most of 5 days match was drawn and the series results for 5 or 4 test series was 1-0 or 2-0 sometimes 0-0 😂😂
But what about Steve Smith chanderpaul
@@educationworld9699 but they are not scoring and getting out. That's the point. 90's tests were 1-0 2-0 and not 4-1 because players knew how to play test cricket. Hence you saw big hundreds and double hundreds. Players had temperament to play long innings. Test cricket is not T-20 where you whack few balls and get out cheaply. Bowlers had to work their ass off to get a wicket in those times. We had proper contest of bat and ball. Test batting is wearing your opponent physically and mentally...making bowlers work hard to get you out with skills. Not throwing you wickets cheaply
@@galariajaved what good in watching boring test in which last day of a test 3rd innings was being played and i love draws test when one team fight for it but before there was draws game more than the result and wasting five days without getting a result with boring test is absolutely stupid that why test cricket doesn't grow and because of it cricket also doesn't grow and there is human tendency that we are not satisfied with anything before the cricket experts says that how to get results in test matches now we are seeing results in every test match but now they are saying why test cricket doesn't going to 5th day 🤦🤦
@@educationworld9699 it's all opinion, you love batsman playing risky irresponsible shots trying to scored quick runs and getting out in 20's, I love top order batsman playing a waiting game, countering the new ball, leaving balls, looking for loose balls and defending good balls and building an innings, building a big first innings, and then opponent trying to match their skills with balls, not allowing batsman to settle, using swing pace spin, I like this balance contest, where the first session bowlers have a chance, then batsman score in last two, next day bowler has a new story to say...Nowadays it's too easy for bowlers to get wickets...batsman doesn't apply themselves, no patience, no fight, it's like which team can make more mistakes at high frequency loses...Anyway I don't even follow cricket anymore...lost interest long back ....too much cricket nowadays...I follow football....so you can have your opinion...no issues...I am all for aggressive cricket but with a balance where you don't end up losing wickets every 3rd over...afterall it's TEST CRICKET.
It's a real treat to listen Nasser hussain and Atherton for us 90s indian kids.
Both of 'em are so enchanting.
I love Atherton's analysis. Best analyst out there imo
90s kids , man ! Those were the days
no just kids of the 90s from indian, but from australia too. loved those guys
True .in India commentators are jokers
Ahh..No "Channel" does such gems on cricket analytics better than Sky sports...
So we touched on:
Batsman's offside guard,
Normal old school guard,
Trigger movement guard,
Guard against Spinner,
And also DRS, umpiring, batting techniques, coaching, learning the game, 3 old guys being cynical about sports, also letting us know the weather at hand,,,,all of this in 18 mins .. 🤯
also about the pitch 🍃
08:20 love the banter and the way Nasser plays along...typical English banter where they don't take themselves too seriously
This is genuinely the best 'Masterclass' on how to take your 'Guard'. Period
I could listen to Atherton and Nasser talk cricket all day.
When comparing to Steve smith, need to remember he is A) unbelievably strong through the leg side and will barely ever miss the straight one and B) has probably the best judge/feel for his off stump in the world. He won’t play outside off if he doesn’t need to, you will very rarely see him defending to cover/extra which is generally a result of playing at deliveries which a batter didn’t need to. This combination is why he can be so successful batting covering all his stumps, unless you can do the same it’s probably not the “best” way to bat
He is balanced and secure because of his open stance. Sky's pundits are just pushing their side-on stance agenda again. So, so boring
Yes, his judgement is best in the world, he shuffles so much that he doesn't even need to play on the off side which is much more riskier than playing the ball on the body. But it's not for everyone, he is just confident about his technique, he is mentally strong and has got an unbelievable eye. Really rare to see players like him. Marnus plays a bit like him but I don't think he would be able to score again on tough pitches, it's just not his game. Don't want to take credit away from him but he has scored half of his runs after getting dropped. Luck can run out anytime
But then you are susceptible to the leg side line as seen in the BG series
@@GauravYadav-bf7qj we can expect a lot of great things from marnus, just some of his bad county games cannot tell much, yes a little bit of luck was with him, which is good, but he has a great technique and resilience
@@hardikgupta9795 i mean he can but he is trying a bit too hard to copy Smith, in my opinion
this is cracking content, worth taking a look at whether the batting averages have gone up or down in comparison to the LBW%. That might show if it’s a response to nibbly pitches or just poor technique 👍🏼
I reckon in the present era batsman are worried about the one that nips away from middle and leg and hits top of off so you could presumably assume their stance first up is middle and off covering their off stump
But they can certainly take that middle and leg guard so that won't take yr head outside that off stump line in the modern era many batsman shuffle towards off stump end result being nicking a fifth stump outswinger or the one that shapes in they can wait fr the bowlers to bowl on middle and leg and leave those innocus nuts outside off stump
One thing that strikes me is how elegant Atherton's position at the crease looks in that clip.
You know its funny: I haven't played for like 20yrs either but I grew up watching those guess and their technique... Always thought highly of Atherton, Ramprakash & Thorpe. (Even Butcher was good to watch) Atherton always had economy of movement, looked like he had time to play his shots. Ramps and Thorpe were super to watch.
There's literally no one in the current England team I enjoy watching, not even Root.
@@anthonyjackson1853 Stokes has an elegance about him that I enjoy tbh
And Root is just class
“There is no right or wrong method. But this stance is just completely wrong” - Mark Butcher
He is right though
@@hannibalking85which bit?
Sam robson in tears after this
I was thinkig that. a bit harsh to focus so much on 1 player and absolutely rip him to shreds on tv
The other way of looking at it is that he's getting some fabulous advice and coaching from three knowledgeable guys for free. Having said that, it must be uncomfortable for him to watch.
@@bartlettbigx word
@@jacobcorr337 it's an example man...he should take it positively and score runs
As always, the team of Nas, Athers and co are fantastic. Very insightful and educative.
*Mark Butcher having a baby*
Doctor: I can see the head
Mark: Where is it? Is it outside the line of the off stump?
Doctor: ...
Mark's wife: wat
Mark: It's already falling over, it doesn't make sense, I don't want this kid
😂😂loved it
That my friend is the funniest Cricket joke, i've ever heard🤣🤣
I'll go as far as to say that it's just wrong.
hilarious 😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That wicket of Smith by bumrah on leg stump when Smith didn't realise he was out just describes how even test masters are going bit more towards off
Smith has done that for almost his entire career though. Although to be fair hes going across even more now
Atherton knows when to pull a mickey out when he commented on Naseer that most of his runs have come to third man off outside edges. However, at the same time, he knows when not to be over critical on current batsmen's technique. A genuine commentator who knows what he is talking about.
Yeah I thought that too... Athers and Nasser are my favourite pommie commentators because of their analytical approach and good sense of humour...
He is a no nonsense guy
Foakes gets into a position where his head is outside off and he's nicking a ball on sixth stump, all after taking an off stump guard.
I think that’s just a mental thing early on, it was only his fourth ball.
After steve smith succeeded in cracking that code everyone thinks they can repeat this but failing measurably
@@satanicmc because Smith has those hands,they just find the ball with a straight bat and a solid head position, everyone mimics the feet,not the fundamental,and I do believe that not everyone can have those hands.
@@sunset1394 spot on. Smith backs himself to hit the ball off his pads, it is his natural shot and his feet set up to enable that. Through the off side, you are right, his ability to shift his hands and stay balanced means he can adjust, aided by his playing back and across giving him a smidgeon more time than if he used a front foot press.
I started watching some of the older players in the 1960's and 70's...they played a lot more like Smith...Ian Chappell is an example, Mike Brearley too where the stylish front foot cover drive off the quicks was not really played...but they did drive full balls from the quicks down the ground more off a very small shift of their weight forward but still off the back foot. Very much like Smith and even a little like Steve Waugh.
Yes the new generation players are defending the deliveries just outside the off-stump, which is old generation players might have been a cut shot.
But at the same time, new generation players are scoring deliveries on middle and off-stump, which the old generation players might be defending.
So both have their pros and cons.
Can you do another session with one of the county coaches who are teaching this?
"This lad is LBW candidate"🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Laughed so hard.😂😂
All I know is you have to be an exceptional player in order to hit every ball angled in at you if you’re on off stump. As a left arm in swing bowler I’d love batsmen batting there all the time
I've been trying a trigger movement that finishes on middle-and-off as I've been very recently coached (and contrary to what I was coached to do when I was younger).
This video has taught me a lot. As I suspected, I reckon I'm usually getting it wrong and ending on off, and going out LBW all the time. Thanks lads.
Still, you really, really needed to get someone in to explain why it's coached that way now.
As an old fart, who played in the late 60's and 70's, I can honestly say that no one in those ancient days (lol) ever took guard further than leg stump. Watching from America, where I live now, until I watched this video, could not for life of me, think why the game looked so different.
Hello eric! what do u think about game these days...any fav players..or team outside eng??
I played in the fifties onwards and watched Peter May, Colin Cowdrey, The West Indian 3 W's etc, also Richie Benaud. In In those days batsmen had the bat on the ground and only lifted it as the ball was about to be delivered or on its way. Now they all stand holding the bat up like in baseball. Looks inelegant. I missed watching cricket for years while in Canada. Can someone please explain to me how and why this developed. I can't find the answer anywhere.
@@normangoldstuck8107 How and why ? Simply because of the proliferation of limited over matches. Where emphasis is on scoring runs. 4s and 6es draw crowds or that's the perception. So the game of cricket has been bastardized to a form of baseball where upcoming cricketers compromise on technique and focus on power. You would recall that even in the 90s era scoring sixes and fours weren't so easy and playing shots across the line of the ball / hitting balls on the up was considered technically incorrect. The emphasis on technique is not just for flair or that it looks good. It's to survive a torrid bowling attack where the pitch and conditions are suiting the bowler. So while these modern batsmen can get away with poor technique in the limited over games ; they suffer whenever there's tough batting conditions.
@@BinoBaba Thanks. Explains why they play such poor shots in test cricket and there are often batting collapses.
In my day test crickets wore shirts with rolled up sleeves and flannels not elasticized trousers. No advertising logos as well.
@@normangoldstuck8107 I am young and watched cricket in the 90 early 2000s growing up. T20 RUINED THE GAME, I Notice this new stance watching a game recently after a number of years.
This is great content. Cheers to the team really for bringing up something like this!
I love Nasir Hussein such a great person and Michele Atherson ....such a great commenters
Great work guys, such a good video.
Absolutely brilliant, need more of this!!!
Man, this is such top class and awesome analysis. Bloody brilliant to watch. People only talking cricket and talking with a great technical understanding and in depth knowledge of the game. Big Kudos to you guys. Haven't seen such intellectual discussion in india on any thread or forum.
It’s not just the feet and head position it’s the hand speed as well. AB is a great example of this hand eye coordination
I remember reading Dexter's advice about batting besides the ball, not behind it, in a column which was, coincidentally, written by Atherton, and it is such good advice even at amateur level that I play at. Also the context to that advice, if memory serves, was Mark Ramprakash who had sought Dexter's advice. Ramps was in a midst of a slump, I believe. That advice worked out pretty well if you look at Ramps' county record.
"Let's bring in a man who scored all his runs through third man' *queues in Nas* Athers has all the jokes. That was hilarious.
Also the best deep dive into batting technique I've seen in years. More of this please.
I look at someone like Sibley and Burns' technique and wonder how they score any runs at all. It just looks all over the place.
Really enjoyed this discussion.
I would appreciate a discussion about the wide batting stances these day which seem to result in the batsman power hitting the ball from the crease line and reduces the ability to move forward or back flowing from a more balanced stance.
Another interesting comparison would be Derek Randell's walkabout before the ball was bowled, and Steve Steve Smith's walkabout waving his waving his bat like a baseball bat - the pros/cons of a moving flow into the shoot.
Thanks Tom
Spot on about the wider stance to generate more power. You'll also see that more bottom hand is used too, which comes at the expense of control.
It’s come in from SA and Aus where the ball doesn’t move about so much. Graham Smith, Steve Smith, Kevin Pieterson all do did it. You have to have great eyes.
Pietersen if I can recall correctly had a big front stride, hence getting him out leg before was a bit more off a challenge since a lot would hit his pad outside the line. Smith moves around a lot, most modern batsman play much deeper with a statuary stance.
This is what happens when you are inspired by Steve Smith
ikr , steve smith is a freak, people should stop trying to copy him
It works for him doesn't necessarily mean that it will work for all
@@AlecBown I've seen people point at Marnus and say that copying Smith works, but if you look at their actual techniques, they're still very different. The way Marnus plays his shots has more in common with Tendulkar than it does Smith. It's just masked well by idiosyncrasies like his pull shot leave.
No, it's what happens when technique suffers from T20 with its pursuit for fast runs - stand and deliver and bludgeon the ball through/over the leg side.
@@twrampage Labuschagne has a much better offside game than Smith
What a brilliant video. Agree or disagree with what they are saying, you cannot but deeply admire the knowledge and sheer observational skills of these three. What a relief to hear this compared to the meaningless dribble of most pundits (self proclaimed experts or people that are brought in front of a micro just because they look good or sound good). I did not like Atherton as a player, but hats off to his skill here.
The whole point of the off stump guard is to *not* have your head outside the off stump, but have a very well balanced stance, facing straight down the off stump in the line of the delivery, which is what the example shows (I have no idea why Athers and Butch are saying they're "outside off" when quite clearly they aren't).
Balance is key, and playing a ball under your nose is a lot easier than playing one outside off, moving away. That said, I'm a lefty, so this all works in my favour for a regular RHO bowler.
Really interesting conversation with great broadcasters, followed by 2 dreadful Surrey dismissals.
@Nasser Hussain would be really interesting to get alternative points of view for balance:
Are there any notable players who are successful with this technique?
&, is it a technique that, perhaps, is suitable in certain conditions - but probably not UK conditions in early summer!
Kohli. Compare him in 2014 and now. Especially his two england tours. Highly beneficial for him. But that dont mean it works for everybody.
The 2 dismissals at the end have summarized the whole video👍🏻
I never got out edged, my stance was outside leg stump but my head ended at off stump and I would get LBW every time. I just fixed it by keeping head still though that reduced the percentage of my cover drive shots that I used to be good at but now my leg side has improved and I don’t get lbw anymore. Batting is all about staying and making runs.
Really enjoy listening to Nasser, Athers, Rob Key and co. Fascinating stuff and great banter
While the move towards players taking off stump guards is contributing to the increase in LBW. I think that we also need to highlight the massive increase in player analysis done by each team that is leading to batters struggling due to the lack of free balls. This is leading batters to overly align their techniques to their specific strengths at the cost of a more balanced game.
Interestingly, I've had this theory for a few years now. Legside dominant players do better in test cricket whereas in ODI you need a 360 game. Alistair Cook, Graeme Smith, Pujara, even Steve Smith to some extent don't have great cover drives but are excellent at clipping off their pads. So getting over to the offstump does limit your offside play but it doesn't matter in Test cricket because you can just leave it. You then practice a straight drive, leg glance and a pull shot and make sure you're excellent at those 3 shots and then you've got yourself a very successful career! I don't think Graeme Smith's technique would have allowed him to hit an outside off yorker past point/third man in a modern T20 death overs game.
On the other hand, offside dominant players such as Ganguly, Sehwag, Jayasuriya, etc often got out pushing away at balls outside offstump and getting caught in swinging/seaming conditions but were excellent ODI players.
The off side dominant players you mention all grew up on sub continent pitches that didn't bounce or seam very much so playing through the off side is less risky.
It’s all about where the batsman feels most comfortable, however to be up there with the best in the world having a 360* game is a must.
@@nasserhussain4902 best in the world at test cricket,20/20 both? Buttler is a prime example of being amazing at white ball cricket but struggles at test level because his technique struggles against the moving ball as his eyes are not level.
@@plym1969 Exactly, having that balance, where your technique allows you to be able to adjust when playing the different formats, is a great skill to have,
I'll give you the complete exception to what you've claimed: Matt Prior. Offside player, brilliant in tests, surprisingly useless in white ball.
Great analysis... although I'd be interested as to whether more wickets overall are being taken. If the rate of wicket-taking remains the same, then the mode of dismissal is kind of irrelevant. If players are upping their average, the changing modes of dismissal are neither here not there, but if their susceptibility to LBW is increasing the rate of wickets, there's a problem.
This is just brilliant. Test cricket is a joy to watch with these broadcasters.
This is the best channel on cricket techniques!
I hope Mike Atherton is keeping well. Loved his technique as a kid.
Was just thinking that... So much to take note of when watching him play. Think he's my favorite england opener.
Realized that I'm getting into watching old school cricket a lot more and wished I had watched a lot more of Greenidge.
This is great analysis from the team.
It would be interesting to know if average scores are lower as a result of this shift in technique. The technique change should mean less wickets lost to bowled and potentially caught behind. If average scores are the same, then it’s just a shift in method of dismissal due to the technique and as a result not that big an issue? Keen to understand your thoughts on this/if this was discussed @nasserhussain @skysportscricket
Maybe also check the Strike rate average to see if there is any drastic changes
It would be interesting to know if bowled+LBW have become more frequent
Scores are down in general the county championship has changed with pitches and conditions and ultimately the quality of batting has declines as shown in the england test team
Fascinationg discussion from three really knowledgeable batsmen. Many thanks.
This is an exceptional analysis of a feature of the current approach to batting that I have observed at various levels that has come increasingly into vogue. I wonder if a contributing factor is the growing impact of the shorter version of the game in which the 'leaving' the ball is not an option in the decision making process, for obvious reasons. Hence, the the player is fully committed (or premeditated) to hitting the ball, whether it pitch in the line of the stumps or outside. This approach appears to transfer from the limited overs game plan into the longer version and as result the player's technique is compromised. I could only imagine how many LBWs Terry Alderman would have collected against this approach to batting. Thanks everyone for what is a most interesting and intelligent analysis of the art of batting.
I'm glad to join this conversation but unfortunately my view is different on this
Most successful batsmen like Viv Richards, Ricky Ponting Lara, Tendulkar, Kholi, Aravinda De Silva, Babar Azam, Kane Williamson to name few, cover the stumps to play all around the wickets..
If you analyze how they have been successful, you will find the following things in common
* At the stance, the knees are slightly bent with feet rooted on "balls of the feet" (this will enable players to move the feet forward and back quickly and generate more power) and the back is bent too
* Front elbow is closer to the body, and bat closer to the back shoulder
* Head pauses on top of the toes with eyes parallel to the ground - this will help with your 180° view to pick the line of the ball early and the length too. This helps to roll your eyes around well to play on side as well as off side equally well
* Bat angle is directed to first or second slip positions
* At stance, the width of the two legs are as same as the shoulder width and it will be more advantageous to have a slightly open front toe too. Also the front leg is slightly crossing towards off side at the point when bowler releases the ball. This will get a better balance.
If you carefully study, you will notice all these conditions in all successful players
*The most important of all is to keep the balance to move the head over the toe without moving feet.
If you don't do this, your balance is compromised and you cannot pick the line and length early to play with freedom. Result will be a good candidate for LBW.
** It is important to note that all these findings are backed up by sound biomechanical techniques..
If you manage these causes the results will fall in, whereas if you concentrate on the results you will be confused as to how they become LBW candidates.
Also specifically for bottom hand players playing front of the wicket - It is advisable to release the back leg early rather than releasing the bottom hand to hit the ball under the eyes
All successful batsman had these things naturally in them or adopted them knowingly. Therefore covering the wickets with the correct technique and balance will be far more beneficial than opening the wickets and getting out to slips. There are much more benefits to playing the ball covering the wickets, but it is not easy to describe all of them here..
By Anusha Samaranayake - former SLC national coach
Great points made here i agree with u but the issue is plp standing on off stump thn their head is usually outside off stump thus causing imbalance when playing balls that are straight or in swinging. But i agree covering the stumps with a balanced stance is the best opens up all kinda options and shots. Head is the key.
Calm down
How are those batsmen who currently bat on leg or middle and leg stump faring as a comparison to the off stump guard batsmen?
Add the quality of bowlers, wickets, outfield size and umpire to the equation. The quality of the game has been falling ever since t20 came out.
I'd love to hear these three discuss old vs new techniques for how to play the short ball.
Unfortunately there aren't many genuinely good players of the short ball these days. Modern players have become too reliant upon their helmet (which has effectively given them a false sense of security) and many are getting their head in a bad position and/or taking their eyes of the ball. Its why batsmen are getting struck on the head so often these days, even though there are so fewer genuinely fast bowlers and way less short balls bowled than there used to be.
Athers and Nass are the best cricket Pundits across the globe.
its doubtless mr sharma and what's your take on ind vs eng series
its doubtless mr sharma and what's your take on ind vs eng series
Especially Nasser
Some advantages of standing middle and off is you can pull a lot tighter towards fine leg, and you can better exploit an off-side biased field by hitting the ball onto the on side. I agree it's more dangerous, but it might be a risk taking for top order batsmen to score faster. For tail enders a traditional set up to lessen the chance of lbw would be favorable.
I didn't even know this was a trend, but it's what I find myself doing ever more in order to widen the opportunity for my stronger onside shots.
That Pope dismissal at the end illustrated it perfectly. He was utterly lost with a ball that had he been side on with his head over off ought to have been blocked easily OR clipped away to the on side. His head is in line with about a 4th or 5th stump. Had the ball followed the same path and the stumps moved two stumps to off then it would've been almost certainly not out going down leg.
They were right, too, about Steve Smith. Yes he moves a long way, but his movements typically open up MORE scoring shots plus keep him well aware of his off stump, so an entirely different situation (although he's not in the sort of devastating form he was a few years back).
The reason batsman are starting further across their stumps is to cover the nick & fourth stump line. (I'm a level 3 coach in Australia, trust me I know what I'm talking about) When they showed the LBW dismissals the first time, all the batters were trying to hit the ball too straight if you understand that. When the ball is moving, or really in general when there is a quick bowler bowling, as a right-hander facing right arm over, a ball pitching on middle, should really go somewhere between the umpire and mid-on. Simple angles. That example is what hitting straight as a batsman truly means. All these players are making it way too complicated these days, if you are an aspiring cricketer feel free to message me on Facebook (same name).
There are numerous other things that these players are ding wrong but that's the main one. Their head is too far across the stumps, and consequently they are trying to hit the ball 'too straight' have a great day everybody!
hlo. hope you are doing great.. i wanted to ask you some questions regarding my stance and trigger movement but there were alot of Bailey Foster on facebook.. i did not know which one were you..is there any other way where i should contact you!
@@muhammadjawadsultan7049 I have 15 friends; my bio is 'whos joe' feel free to msg me
Love the analysis.this is great
Couple of things, old mate on the left’s head wasnt outside off stomp, he was trying to stay still and watch the ball closer on a green top, the idea is also that if everything out side your eye line is missing off stomp that means you can throw hands at it knowing its not hitting stumps and everything at you can be defended or flicked through the onside, labuschagne and smith are the masters of this where even an off stump line is too straight to them, the guy on the left missed a straight ine and was fired, if alec stuart had cime forward and was caught in front he’d be fired too, the best advice when avoiding lbw is use the bat
nerds of cricket :)
best cricket analysts of the modern era.
The difference between Steve Smith and the rest is that for Smith any ball even near the stumps would be worked towards the leg side. I’m very surprised by this new technique though.
I can just imagine the carnage Waqar Younis would’ve caused against these batters. Full and fast and straight at the stumps.
Great video Sky Sports!
Smith also has much better/faster hand-eye coordination than most other batsmen.
I personally stand on off-stump for four reasons:
1. I am a good flicker. I have more space to flick good straight balls.
2. The pull shot is my best shot. When facing faster bowling, I don't have time to get inside the line of each ball. If you are facing good bowling and a ball is pitched short in the middle-stump region, you have time to give it a good whack if you are standing on off-stump.
3. I see the ball more clearly. It is more comfortable for my neck to look at the hands of the bowler. I used to get LB's all the time while standing on leg-stump. Now, I rarely ever do.
4. Leaving good balls is so much easier.
I've only started this habit recently, but it has been really effective; especially as mainly a back-foot player. I encourage others to actually have a go at it. You avoid nearly any chances of edges from good balls outside off-stump.
Hii mate did u face any problems with in swinging deliveries or straight pitched up balls after changing?
Fascinating insight..... as a quickish bowlerwho could nip it around in my youth, would love to have seen people taking off stump guard..!!
Hashim Amla is also doing the same as Alex Stewart. You can watch his innings in this county season.
08:17 just look at his mischievously evil face before teasing Nassar 🤣. Pure Gold
Robson looked like he overbalanced a bit and has a very side on front foot, recipe for LBW. But I believe the intent is to reduce the amount of movement when facing quick bowling. So instead of a trigger that takes you to off you start there, ideally with a slightly opened front foot to access the straighter delivery. The modern player is trying to minimize movement to allow for more time to play. Great video boys.
Robsons head as butcher deciphered was outside off stump so while clipping a inswinger past midwicket he is bound to get beaten
Think its come from the T20 age where its easier to hit to leg, doesn't always apply to 4 to 5 day cricket
This is the best commentary line up these days.
I wish they had pulled up some film of Robin Smith, text book how to take leg stump guard to open up the off side for scoring shots
Yet Robin Smith had a major issue with overbalancing and getting out LBW, caught at mid wicket or getting bowled as he tried to get his feet out the way but didn't have time.
He was at his best when his front foot did not go so far towards point but took a smaller step, his head did not overbalance and stayed level.
this is just making me think of where I start
I've only been LBW once from about 15 or so innings (tail ender hence the small number xD)
but I do tend to start on middle, so maybe bringing myself back to leg will not only help me see it better and thus help my batting, but remove all risk of LBW
and would keep it open for one of my two good shots, being a cut shot (the other being a sweep for the 0 people who care xD)
have to try it next season, defo
have you tried the straight or off drive - especially with a bigger heavier bat - matter of just timing it for a boundary.
are we gonna ignore the first slip, both hands on belly
Fantastic content. Great analysis from Nasser!! Top notch.
I used to take middle and leg then changed to middle in about 1988. I always kept my head above my feet - like a boxer that way moving your feet is easy and you keep your balance. Off stump guard means straight balls get hit off your pads and balls on leg or just outside are hard to hit.
and if you miss a straight one - boom LBW.
Atherton is the most brilliant commentator in the modern game
very insightful and deep interesting analysis by the trio. Love the English commentators for their analysis
The smart thing about blocking the stumps is that you're forcing the umpire to make a decision. Used to be if you missed the ball the bowler hit the stumps and there was no doubt you were out. Now if you miss then the bowler hits the pads and the umpire has to make a decision. It *could* go either way, but in my experience umpires are quite reluctant to give a batsman out if there's even a sliver of doubt.
The downside is, it makes it harder to play straight balls without necessarily making it easier to play balls moving away from you.
Are more runs being scored on the leg side than before (typically fewer fielders)?
Batting has seen the differences and we have learnt thanks.
*Mayank Agarwal from Karnataka* who's on Ind test xi, he always plays beside the ball & *both he&klr* always make sure to keep their right eye on that off stump. & now the results are in front of u.
All 3 used to nick the ball outside off stump.
Walk down to counter lateral movement of the ball, than moving yourself laterally
not to anybody above average pace and in conditions with helpful movement and bounce!
A big batting technique fault is when the bat comes down from the backlift in an arc rather than straight. This is why players often end up in the correct position (sometimes holding the pose) but the ball has already hit their pads (or stumps). It's fairly basic really if not necessarily easy to change - though you would think high level cricketers might be able to avoid this.
If that’s a fault then I guess bradman had awful technique right?
Definitely agree that there's no mode of dismissal better or worse than other, but the outside edges towards slips still have probabilities of dropping short or dropped catches whereas LBW dismissal has no such window of survival and with the DRS now, bowling side won't leave out even the half chances for LBW.
I think the key point isn't the end position, its the lack of movement before that. As Ath says being "too robotic" which is so important in any hitting sport
In a country like England where ever since I can remembera large majority of wickets fall to edges behind. I think the players are naturally adapting their techniques to counter that.
But it seems like they're still getting nics behind.
I put a lot of that down to poor foot movement and poor shot selection against the swinging ball.
How to explain this video to Steven Smith???
You didn’t watch the entire video did you?
Really good analysis. In my view this is the impact of T20 cricket where the batters are trying to clear the leg and hit to cow corner all the time. I agree with Nasser about the many ways to score runs however there is a lot to be said for the old techniques, they have worked for hundred of years, I am not saying there is no place for unorthodox techniques but all the greatest players have used pretty orthodox methods: Bradman (obviously), Tendulkar, Gavaskar, Ponting, Lara, Gooch, Border et al.
yes and the bigger bats - the reduced ground sizes and bigger bats make a monkery of the contest between bat and ball
Athers just seems like the ultimate voice of reason. He's rarely if ever wrong about anything. His opinions are always so fair and well judged.
Nasser should compare the lbws percentage with caught behind +maybe 1st and 2nd slip percentage. Perhaps the second percentage is much lower than the increase in lbw percentage. The second thing to look at is whether the percentage of balls bowled on off or outside off going for runs has gone down. If that remains the same, these two stats taken together, would allow me to disagree with what our experts are asserting.
A lot of this would have to do with white ball cricket being able to make shots on the leg side in particular boundaries
It also means when death bowling bowlers have to get it right or they will hit it in the onside or if they don't get the line right when bowling offside yorkers etc it's easier to hit boundaries on the offside
Alot of reward especially in white ball cricket is hitting to the onside, which generally are shorter boundaries then hitting straight, much easier to hit from a 5th or 6th stump to the onside whilst batting on offstump then batting on middle and leg (more traditional) and trying to hit on to the onside
the counter argument is : show us the number of dismissals in being Bolwed. Because as the LBW goes up, one would assume the Bowled goes down.
Main probelm is the front leg coming over as well. Then you're in all sorts of trouble. If you can clear that front foot out the way and come back and across on your back foot then youre pobably okay. Get too square and you can knick off, but you're access to scoring opportunities is greatly increased. Risk/Reward. There's also no technique that exists that can stop you from getting out.
This is soo interesting. Would love to see this with Denly or someone who does it. In the debate.
1. What were the scores and % of LBW dismissals against those scores versus history? 2. Time in the saeaon and conditions. 3. T20 cricket contribution. Will be interesting to add those facts.
Thanks to steve smith, there is no right or wrong way batting. Only thing matters is you score runs. Dhoni to was very unorthodox yet he scored more than 10k+ runs in odis.
You don't necessarily need good technique in limited overs
MSD was pretty orthodox - you are looking only at a few of his shots in ODI and inferring he is unorthodox. - he could and did play traditional test cricket.
The ben foakes dismissal proves that they also not protected against the outside edge because you could have left that if you were on middle stump but since you have taken guard on off stump and are falling over, you dont know where your off stump is and had to poke at it.
I’m 14 don’t have a good technique but I take a guard on middle stump - never been out lbw - only bowled and edge to slips with no foot movement now.
Nasser is a fantastic analyst.
Loved the Analysis 💖
Sky Sports conversations are gold 🥇🥇
Finally posted a video