Those dancing feet may look great but stepping out hasn’t won everyone over
Garfield Robinson finds that even the greatest of batsmen can disagree over the benefits of going down the track
“Is it turning much?” the young Brian Lara asked his batting partner on his arrival in the middle. Told it wasn’t, the up-and-coming batting star promptly danced down the pitch, “bang!” Four. The following delivery he was down the pitch again, and again he smacked the ball to the boundary.
Having struck two out of two balls for four, the left-hander who was soon to become one of the game’s best ever batsmen saw no need to alter his approach. Third ball he was down the pitch again. This time, however, he was aghast to see the ball turn and could only look on helplessly as ball evaded flashing blade. He was stumped for eight. Three balls, eight runs, and the wicket of the opposition’s batting star. Any team would happily take that.
The West Indies were in trouble in Cape Town in January 2015. Starting their second innings 92 runs behind, they lost two wickets for just 27 when Marlon Samuels joined Leon Johnson in the middle. The Jamaican batting stylist enjoyed dominating spin and was never reluctant to skip down the pitch.
He was in the process of turning around his team’s fortunes when he ventured down the wicket to hit Simon Harmer for his third six, when he offered a catch to the mid-on fielder. He was 74, was in no trouble apart from those of his own making, and had he stayed a while longer, as batting coach Stuart Williams agreed, the West Indies might not have lost the game.
It is widely accepted that one requirement of being regarded a good player of spin is the ability of the batsman to “use his feet”. To hang back in your crease, we are told, is to be asking for trouble.You are likely to be dominated and placed under immense pressure by a spinner if you allow him to dictate terms. Get to the pitch. Don’t allow him to settle into any kind of rhythm.
But can we be absolutely sure this is the best approach? How many times have we watched with bewilderment as a batsman needlessly loses his wicket by skipping down to the spinner?
Wouldn’t it have been better for him and his team had he decided to stay put? It might be that forgoing this method means scoring less quickly and therefore not being able to dominate or subdue an opposition bowler. But, on the whole, should it be a regular tactic?
Listen to what cricket’s greatest allround player had to say on the matter in his autobiography, Garry Sobers: “I think I left it (the crease) once or twice when I was young and got myself stumped, and I rarely ventured out of my ground after that.
“They talk about good batsmen going down the wicket to spin bowlers but I have always looked at it from the other point of view – there are so many different ways of getting out, why increase them by leaving the little safe haven that belongs to you?
“Why go all the way down there when
There are so many different ways of getting out, why increase them by leaving the safe haven that belongs to you?
you can play it off the back foot with more time and have a bigger area into which you can hit the ball…”
Sobers claims to have been stumped only once in his senior career, and it was for 145 against England in Guyana.
The game may have moved on since Sobers’ day, and maybe such a method is frequently useful in the shorter formats, but there is certainly some logic to the great man’s view. Running at the spinner might indeed gain the batsman some runs and also disrupt the spinner’s plans, making him easier to negotiate. But nobody can deny that there is undue risk in venturing down the pitch. The question then is this: do the possible rewards outweigh the inherent risks?
Batsmen using their feet to spinners is cricketing orthodoxy that has long been preached and practised. It is a long tradition in cricket. But, not all traditions bear up under empirical scrutiny. Until the emergence of Moneyball, it was widely accepted in baseball that stealing bases and bunting were important ways of manufacturing runs.
But then evidence was unveiled that showed that those techniques were mostly wasteful. For example, it was found that “broadly speaking, an attempted steal had to succeed 70 percent of the time before it contributed positively to run totals.”Yes, stealing bases will lead to some runs, and it can be thrilling to watch, but it is much more likely the runner will be thrown out. There will be instances when attempting to steal may be the smart move. In the main, however, the risk is much too great to justify the possible reward.
More often than not, going out to the spinner involves some premeditation. Shane Warne noticed, after viewing hours of tape, that Carl Hooper, who had launched a stirring assault on the legspinner during a few ODI matches in the West Indies, ran at him only after looking down at himself in his stance.
Premeditation means the batsman is violating one cardinal rule of batting: that of playing each ball on merit.
Having said all that it can be thrilling watching a batsman regularly using his feet to the spinners. Brian Lara and Michael Clarke were excellent players of the turning ball. Both were surefooted and quick on their feet. Both regularly employed the method of venturing out of their crease to play spin. Both were a joy to watch. But even them, as good as they were, lost their wickets a few times going down the pitch to spinners.
Australia were heavily beaten in every Test of their 2012-13 tour of India. Clarke, by some distance, was the visitors’ best batsman. In the first Test in Chennai and the second in Hyderabad he put on masterful exhibitions of nimble-footed excellence against the spin of Ravichandran Ashwin, Ravindra Jadeja and Harbhajan Singh. Those witnessing his performance might as well have watching Fred Astaire or Mikhail Baryshnikov.
But he lost his wicket, albeit after scoring 130, in the first innings of the first Test when he ran down the wicket to Jadeja, didn’t quite get to the pitch, and offered a catch to the long-off. He also had had a few lucky escapes during that same innings and again during his innings of 91 in Hyderabad.
As wonderfully as he batted, could he have stayed at the crease longer and scored more desperately needed runs had he abandoned his preferred method of playing spin?
For sure, the above will be regarded as heresy in some quarters. And there is really no telling whether it is more effective for batsmen to leave their crease to play the spinner or to remain safely behind the line. For now it can only be conjecture and perhaps there needs to be some kind of study.
As for me, I am with Sir Garry.