Starmer In Jobs Push.....right Oh!
News2 mins ago
Phil Hughes Rip
72 Answers
Just flashing up on Sky News that 2 days after being struck by a delivery, Phil Hughes has sadly passed away.
Australia and the cricketing world mourns, such dreadful news.
Australia and the cricketing world mourns, such dreadful news.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ChillDoubt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I played much cricket in my younger days and in those far off days we wore only caps, gloves and knee pads.
What I would like to ask is, has there been a change in the rules that allows dangerous bowling?
IT Botham said yesterday that when he played batsmen were coached on how to play such a delivery or duck it, he said that the quality of the protective equipment today has lead to an increase in the number of players who just let the ball strike them.
What I would like to ask is, has there been a change in the rules that allows dangerous bowling?
IT Botham said yesterday that when he played batsmen were coached on how to play such a delivery or duck it, he said that the quality of the protective equipment today has lead to an increase in the number of players who just let the ball strike them.
AOG
\\\The bowling of fast short pitched balls is dangerous and unfair if the umpire at the bowler's end considers that by their repetition and taking into account their length, height and direction they are likely to inflict physical injury on the striker".[\\
the problem with the bouncer is that it is difficult to control, unlike other forms of bowling.
It is a ball short of a length "Banged" intoi the ground intending to rise sharply at the head or upper part of the batsmen.
If it is on a length and rises up sharply it becomes a dangerous and potentially lethal projectile.
Not in the spirit of cricket.
\\\The bowling of fast short pitched balls is dangerous and unfair if the umpire at the bowler's end considers that by their repetition and taking into account their length, height and direction they are likely to inflict physical injury on the striker".[\\
the problem with the bouncer is that it is difficult to control, unlike other forms of bowling.
It is a ball short of a length "Banged" intoi the ground intending to rise sharply at the head or upper part of the batsmen.
If it is on a length and rises up sharply it becomes a dangerous and potentially lethal projectile.
Not in the spirit of cricket.
Look, I come from an era of no protection other than your pads, box and, as Brian Close once said, "You've a bat, bl--dy well use it."
For those vague of history, just google the Bodyline series of 1932-33 and you realise that the use of intimidatory bowling was a bit more than now!
The point on the hats and protection (look at the thigh pads, the shoulder pads, elbow guards etc etc) and the point that letting the ball hit the body is so common now-adays, the bat kept well out of the way for if there's a click there can be a catch and it's walkies time. So technique does help....
There's also the role of the umpire, persistent bouncer bowling is not permitted and if it gets to be more than two in an over, the umpires will step in, warn and then, if necessary, ban the player from bowling for the rest of the innings.
This was an unfortunate accident, if it had been a 1/4 of an inch either side, he probably would have been okay as it was his vertebral artery that was caught square on and it split like a water-leak, flooding the brain. It will force some re-thinking of helmet design and that's fine, perhaps a lower lip over the neck but ultimately turning your head away from the ball is asking for trouble..... There has only been one other death in 1st class cricket from this, so it does need putting in perspective even though it is so tragic.
For those vague of history, just google the Bodyline series of 1932-33 and you realise that the use of intimidatory bowling was a bit more than now!
The point on the hats and protection (look at the thigh pads, the shoulder pads, elbow guards etc etc) and the point that letting the ball hit the body is so common now-adays, the bat kept well out of the way for if there's a click there can be a catch and it's walkies time. So technique does help....
There's also the role of the umpire, persistent bouncer bowling is not permitted and if it gets to be more than two in an over, the umpires will step in, warn and then, if necessary, ban the player from bowling for the rest of the innings.
This was an unfortunate accident, if it had been a 1/4 of an inch either side, he probably would have been okay as it was his vertebral artery that was caught square on and it split like a water-leak, flooding the brain. It will force some re-thinking of helmet design and that's fine, perhaps a lower lip over the neck but ultimately turning your head away from the ball is asking for trouble..... There has only been one other death in 1st class cricket from this, so it does need putting in perspective even though it is so tragic.
The bouncer is fine, ludwig, it's a legitimate weapon to make the bowler think what's coming next. I would not one to lose this element and I speak as an ex batsman - no cap, even facing Fiery Fred when I was a schoolboy - he wasn't as bad as his other opening bowler for the MCC, Bob Platt, who was getting them to swing a mile. I much rather face speed and bouncers than swing bowling!
DTC
\\\\For those vague of history, just google the Bodyline series of 1932-33 and you realise that the use of intimidatory bowling was a bit more than now! \\\
That was a different concept....bowling short balls on the legside with a packed legside field....one new what was coming.Frowned upon even then.
\\\\as it was his vertebral artery that was caught square on and it split like a water-leak,\\\
I didn't know that it was trauma to his vertebral artery....that is unusual.
\\\\Look, I come from an era of no protection other than your pads, box and, as Brian Close once said, "You've a bat, bl--dy well use it."\\\
Me too, but Brian Close's bruising was to his upper body and shoulders, not to his skull.
Swing bowling has it's problems, but is slower than the bouncer and one has more time to adjust.
\\\\For those vague of history, just google the Bodyline series of 1932-33 and you realise that the use of intimidatory bowling was a bit more than now! \\\
That was a different concept....bowling short balls on the legside with a packed legside field....one new what was coming.Frowned upon even then.
\\\\as it was his vertebral artery that was caught square on and it split like a water-leak,\\\
I didn't know that it was trauma to his vertebral artery....that is unusual.
\\\\Look, I come from an era of no protection other than your pads, box and, as Brian Close once said, "You've a bat, bl--dy well use it."\\\
Me too, but Brian Close's bruising was to his upper body and shoulders, not to his skull.
Swing bowling has it's problems, but is slower than the bouncer and one has more time to adjust.
That was what they were reporting on Radio 4 this morning, Sqad. They interviewed the Ozzie team trainer, so I think that's a credible source.
Close took enough towards the head. We forget that not many bowlers approach the speed of Wesley Hall and Griffiths, their speed could reach close to 100 mph over the 22 yards and they used the bouncer, usually no more than one an over as bouncers are not quite as quick....... the earlier point that with all the extra protection now, there's a tendency to take the thud of the ball is a very valid one. I grimace often at some of them onto the body, memories of my wonderful misjudgement coming flooding back!
Close took enough towards the head. We forget that not many bowlers approach the speed of Wesley Hall and Griffiths, their speed could reach close to 100 mph over the 22 yards and they used the bouncer, usually no more than one an over as bouncers are not quite as quick....... the earlier point that with all the extra protection now, there's a tendency to take the thud of the ball is a very valid one. I grimace often at some of them onto the body, memories of my wonderful misjudgement coming flooding back!
Absolutely correct, Randy.....remember Johnners and "The Batsman's Holding, the Bowler's Willey and Lillee, caught Willey, bowled Dilley." Not that John Snow, Chris Old, Shoaib Akhtar, Wakar Younis, Mohammed Zahid, Bob Willis or Agnew were ever short of pace and, of course, they never used the bouncer....Ahem.
I would point out that there's a far more dangerous position and that it is fielding silly short mid-off or on, or silly short leg. The fielder only has milliseconds to react to a full-on shot coming at them. At junior cricket level, it's absolutely daft because the bowling isn't as good. When I was ten, one of my school friends was at silly short leg and took one square on the temple from a full-on hook. Out for the count for a few minutes and then got up....he's probably suffering from Parkinson's or dementia today.
I've no issue with them, as I said, the umpires are there to regulate and then if they start bowling too many, you know they are coming and connection on the ball results in the ball flying a long way up the stands or out of the ground...take it away and you would destroy a lot of the Test/3 day game. Just for clarity for non-cricketers looking in, at limited overs games, they are deemed as no-balls as they are usually unplayable and that is not within the spirit of that form of cricket, the demarcation line being a maximum bounce of shoulder-level.
the bouncer is part and parcel of a fast bowlers armoury and is accepted as part and parcel of the game, just as the batsman's hook shot to counter it. The batsman also has the option to duck under it.
It used to be considered unsportsmanlike to deliver them to tail-Enders or 'rabbits' but as it is used so prolifically these days even the lower order batsmen have coaching in either playing it or ducking it.
99.99% of the time Phil Hughes would have hit that delivery or ducked under it.
It has been a one in a million chance that the ball struck him where it did. Quarter of an inch either way and it hits the rim of the helmet or the back of his neck.
Every professional cricketer but especially the Aussies will know that Sean Abbot will have nothing to reproach himself for, but that doesn't mean that it won't affect him for the rest of his life. He will doubtless get all the support in the world, whether or not he can get over it is another matter.
Dreadfully sad for all concerned.
It used to be considered unsportsmanlike to deliver them to tail-Enders or 'rabbits' but as it is used so prolifically these days even the lower order batsmen have coaching in either playing it or ducking it.
99.99% of the time Phil Hughes would have hit that delivery or ducked under it.
It has been a one in a million chance that the ball struck him where it did. Quarter of an inch either way and it hits the rim of the helmet or the back of his neck.
Every professional cricketer but especially the Aussies will know that Sean Abbot will have nothing to reproach himself for, but that doesn't mean that it won't affect him for the rest of his life. He will doubtless get all the support in the world, whether or not he can get over it is another matter.
Dreadfully sad for all concerned.
Chilli...well written post.
There are bouncers.......and there are bouncers.
The harmless bouncer......the vicious bouncer.....and the *** dangerous bouncer and there is no way of knowing which it is to be until it has hit the pitch. The bowler has very little control or indeed no control at all on which it is to be.
DTC tells me that the vertebral artery was burst and this is indeed a rare occurrence,but will occur again unless restrictions are made.
I do not feel that the "bouncer" plays an important part in the enjoyment of cricket and i do not feel that cricket would suffer from it's banning.
There are bouncers.......and there are bouncers.
The harmless bouncer......the vicious bouncer.....and the *** dangerous bouncer and there is no way of knowing which it is to be until it has hit the pitch. The bowler has very little control or indeed no control at all on which it is to be.
DTC tells me that the vertebral artery was burst and this is indeed a rare occurrence,but will occur again unless restrictions are made.
I do not feel that the "bouncer" plays an important part in the enjoyment of cricket and i do not feel that cricket would suffer from it's banning.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Time For A Limit On Angry Posts
ChatterBank16 mins ago
News28 mins ago
News30 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.