Science proves nothing wrong with football...

READING the “Your Shout” section in last week’s The

Cricket Paper (June 3), I noticed that a reader disagrees with the contemporary trend of playing other sports within the warm-up. As a sports science student, I would like to post a contrasting opinion:

In 2007, Ian Jeffreys published his “RAMP” theory for warming up. This acronym stands for “Raise, Activate, Mobilise, Potentiate”. In essence; you need to increase heart rate, blood and muscle temperature and metabolism before stretching and performing sport-specific exercises. A light-hearted yet spirited game of football, I think, is a fantastic way to achieve this.

Provided that the players behave themselves, there is not much reason to suggest that there is a greater risk of injury than other warm-up activities. Certainly, in the cited case of Glenn McGrath in 2005, it was not the game of rugby that injured him; it was the “stray” cricket ball left lying around which caused the ankle injury. A coach as vigilant and responsible as I am sure the writer is would have identified the hazard and removed it.

In addition, in his account of England’s latest Ashes victory “Broadside”, Stuart Broad pays testament to how games of football have brought the England squad closer together.

Given the modern cricketing calendar in which a group will be spending time together, a unifying factor such as football, which can simultaneously have a cathartic effect is surely something to be embraced?

Ultimately, the onus is on the coach and what they deem “responsible”.

It is my view that when managed correctly, football in both training and the warm up only serves to strengthen the modern cricketing unit.