October 26, 2009

Posted by Cricinfo at in Bowling

Mystery and Magic: Iverson, Ramadhin, Gleeson and Mendis

From S.Giridhar and V.J. Raghunath, India

	Australian bowler John Gleeson demonstrates his grip © Cricinfo Ltd

A prison cell during World War II: An Australian prisoner of war is spinning a ping-pong ball to pass time. Iverson is trying out different grips to flick and turn the ping-pong ball against the wall. He finds he can turn the ball both ways by flicking the bent middle finger on either side of the ball and keeps practicing. When the war is over, Iverson unleashes this in Sheffield Shield. Called to play against Freddie Brown’s English team in 50-51, he takes 6 for 27 in the second innings of the third Test in Sydney…..

Iverson is the pioneer, the “first man ever” in this story about right-arm mystery spinners. If Bosanquet introduced the googly to add magic to leg spin and if Saqlain discovered the doosra to spice up offspin, then Iverson it was who first showed the world the magic of imparting spin either way with fingers in a manner difficult for batsmen to fathom.

How rare is the mystery finger spinner? The title of our article itself contains the names of all the well-known exponents of this art form. There are over 150 spinners in Test history but Iverson, Ramadhin, Gleeson and Mendis occupy the table of mystique – the Harry Potters of cricket.

Today’s torch bearer: Just a few matches into his international career, a lethal delivery of his that turns less than the width of a bat has already been christened the “carrom ball”. The buzz around the ground when Ajantha Mendis is called on to bowl is very different – the air of great expectancy is such that the excitement simply boils over. Uncannily, there is a military connection here too, for Mendis comes from the Sri Lankan Army.

There is a truly wonderful close-up photograph of Iverson’s grip in the Wisden Almanack. And we who have watched Mendis’ grip in great detail over TV would be completely forgiven if we thought the hand holding the ball in that photograph was that of Iverson. The grip is all about how using the thumb and middle finger the ball will be flicked or propelled. It will be the middle finger that will decide whether the ball will go one way or the other. Not much turn but that lethal amount enough for an edge, LBW or bowled. Bowlers who know what is involved in delivering the ball, will be the first to acknowledge that to propel a cricket ball over 20 yards with the middle finger imparting spin calls for extraordinarily strong fingers. It is probably many times harder than the flipper which is squeezed out between thumb and finger.

The Magician’s Demeanor: Sonny Ramadhin brought a mystique to his bowling. Sleeves buttoned up always, wearing a cap when bowling, fast whirring action, Ramadhin created a Houdini-like atmosphere when he bowled.

Iverson of Australia played just one Test series in 1950-51 in which he took 21 wickets. An injury and he was gone for ever. Yet twenty years later when an unknown bowler called Gleeson was spotted in New South Wales, they said, “look at Gleeson, he is bowling Iversons!” The lure of mystery is something irresistible. Perhaps that was the reason Gideon Haigh the cricket historian wrote his painstakingly researched biography of Iverson - a biography not of a cricketer who played just five Tests or who took his own life many years later but of a pioneer who gave cricket something new.

Ramadhin appeared on the world stage around this time but played for a full decade. In 43 Tests, Ramadhin took 158 wickets. Bowling in tandem with the left-arm spinner Alf Valentine, Ramadhin caused havoc in England. His match figures of 11 for 182 in the famous series win against England in 1950 and his partnership with Valentine immortalized him in calypso. Ramadhin bowled his off break with his middle finger down the seam (a conventional off spinner would have this across the seam) and surprised batsmen with the odd ball from the leg with no apparent change of action. The hype over his disguised leggie mesmerised the English batsmen who were even more tied to the crease than usual – doubt and demon freezing their minds. However Down Under, the Australians decided to play him with better footwork and go down the wicket to play him off the pitch, a ploy that made him much less of a problem. In his second tour of England in 1957, Ramadhin started sensationally by spinning England out in the first innings of the first Test in Edgbaston. But in the second innings, May and Cowdrey made a then record third-wicket partnership of 411. They played a lot with their pads stretched forward, playing outside the line and treating him as an off spinner, ending his ascendancy forever. An amazing facet of Ramadhin’s bowling is that he got a whopping 61.5 % of his dismissals entirely by himself —that is he got them bowled or LBW or C&B. In this aspect he is No. 1 among all bowlers – fast and slow - with 150 or more wickets.

Johnny Gleeson started late – and was in late twenties when he made his debut in Sheffield Shield cricket. Catching the eye of Benaud and Bradman, Gleeson was pitchforked into the Australian team. Off a long run, Gleeson spun the ball both ways but used as a stock bowler by Lawry he lost his nip soon. Gleeson played 29 Tests for 93 wickets and on only three occasions did he take a five-for in an innings. Uncharitable though it may seem, Gleeson among the four mystery spinners appears the most prosaic. Perhaps we are biased by the fact that we saw him bowl against India in 1969 along with Mallet and found Mallet to be the more dangerous. He seemed accurate enough but not dangerous and the Indians seemed to pick him. Borde the stalwart Indian batsman said that was because Indians read the bowler’s hand rather than off the pitch.

And after Gleeson, for a long time - 36 years to be precise – there was not a whiff of the mystery spinner till Mendis burst on the scene. In nine matches he has 42 wickets; he already has a ten-wicket haul in a Test match. The picture of Dravid completely bamboozled by the carrom ball that knocked his off stump is fresh in everyone’s mind. But the TV is an inexorable enemy. Every bit of his action is being minutely examined. His googly anyway was easier to pick as it came of a clearly loopier trajectory. Pakistan played him so well recently that he was dropped. The pressure is only going to increase. The problem with these mystery spinners is that the minute they are sorted by batsmen they seem to wither away.

We can do no better than conclude with these words of Gideon Haigh: “….when mystery wears off there must be a residue of skill and resilience. Indeed, many international cricket careers now unfold like whodunits solved in the first 30 pages; after that, the player is a quarry on the run, trying to stay a step ahead of his opponents…..The acid test of Ajantha Mendis, then, is not what he is doing now, but how his game is standing up in two years' time.”

Comments (12)

October 24, 2009

Posted by Cricinfo at in Bowling

Mystery of the missing wrist-spinners

From R .Giridharan, India

	England has had plenty of quality finger spinners like Derek Underwood, but where are the wrist-spinners? © Getty Images

An arrogant cricketing official once dismissed a young Kapil Dev, “There are no fast bowlers in India”. One wonders whether aspiring wrist-spinners in England, New Zealand and South Africa were rebuffed in similar ways. This article is a humble attempt to identify the factors that conspired against the emergence of any worthwhile wrist spinner from these countries.

Nature, of course, is the first stumbling block. The wickets in England and New Zealand are soft and green and the outfields moist, breaking the heart of any wrist spinner. Overcast skies encouraged captains to prefer gentle wobblers over the tweaker. In South Africa, wickets are harder, but loaded with juice that the quicks can exploit. Currie Cup, the premier domestic competition was played for long with two balls, thereby keeping the ball newer for longer periods. The quicks therefore remain in the hunt throughout.

The three teams believe in keeping things tight, drying up easy runs and throttling the opposition, especially when spinners are bowling. Spinners are expected to play second fiddle and perform effective hold-ups while the quicks rest, refresh and recharge. Finger spinners fit the bill admirably. Indeed, Lohmann, Verity, Lock, Laker, Underwood, Giles, Panesar (Eng), Tayfield, Symcox, Boje (SA), Dipak Patel, Bracewell, Vettori (NZ) all made their way into the playing eleven as personifications of accuracy, before carving their own niche. The aggressive, predatory worldview of the wrist-spinner would probably be discarded in such a milieu.

Cricket in these countries is seen more as a craft and a science. A finger spinner who wears down the batsman by constantly hammering at his weakness is a natural choice. The greater reliability and predictability of the finger spinner allied with his greater destructive potential on a wearing wicket offers a package that is customised and therefore immediately embraced.

Wrist-spinners ride the chariots of rebellion. Their mental aggression belies their small frames and gentle image of a spinner. Their desire to make things happen, at times makes them profligate, an anathema to risk-averse captains. They are their own men and a coach’s nightmare, unless the coach is a patient and wise soul.

The game’s biggest oddities are wrist-spinners, Chandra (with a deformed hand), Paul Adams (frog-in-a-blender action), Ajantha Mendis (carrom-ball grip) to name a few. Formal coaching structures in conservative establishments prevalent in these countries are likely to frown upon such mavericks. Wristwork is often associated with oriental magic, a view accentuated by the plethora of wrist spinners emerging from the subcontinent as well as the artful hockey players.

Wrist-spinners are generally smaller in build, sloppier in the outfield and more likely to be genuine rabbits with the bat. There are notable exceptions like Kumble and Warne, but MacGill, Chandra, Hirwani, Qadir, Mendis, Bob Holland, Danish Kaneria do reinforce the stereotype. Thus the overall utility of a wrist-spinner when benchmarked against conventional yardsticks would be lower.

Cricket, like any other discipline, thrives on role models. The home-grown models like Denis Compton, Ken Barrington and Mike Atherton were peerless batsmen and used wrist spin as a pleasurable past time. Even Johnny Wardle, the most seasoned English purveyor of this art, bowled finger spin at home. The leading overseas practitioners were two Pakistani allrounders, Mushtaq Mohammad and Intikhab Alam apart from the peerless Garry Sobers. Thus a role model for a specialist wrist spinner did not exist in England.

Parallels can be drawn with the Indian experience where, till the emergence of Javagal Srinath, India’s new-ball bowlers were allrounders of varying genuineness. New Zealand and South Africa are profoundly impacted by the old art. Anil Kumble, Mushtaq Ahmed and Shane Warne have played county cricket in recent times and may be a revolution is taking place silently.

Many facets of wrist spin are counter-intuitive and are, unsurprisingly, shunned by orthodoxy. Wrist spin requires a mix of art and adventure sport. Zimbabwe could unearth a Paul Strang, grassroots cricket in India and Kapil Dev could help the country shed its aversion to pace. A venture capitalist is required in England, South Africa and New Zealand.

Comments (21)

October 12, 2009

Posted by Cricinfo at in Bowling

The chinaman bowler - odd man in

From S.Giridhar and V.J. Raghunath, India

	South Africa's Paul Adams is one of the most successful chinaman bowlers © Cricinfo Ltd

We set off to do a story on offspinners and left-arm spinners – similar to what we had done some months back on legspinners. We had hoped that our favourite mystery and left-arm chinaman bowlers will find adequate space. To our dismay we found that many of the names that rolled deliciously off our tongues just did not have enough wickets to qualify under stodgy criteria such as minimum number of wickets, etc. So we said, to hell with all that – let us just enjoy ourselves writing about our favourite chinaman and mystery bowlers – the non-conformists, conjurors and sleight-of-hand purveyors.

The left-arm chinaman is a mirror image of the right-arm leg break – bowled by turning the wrist so that the ball turns the opposite way to left-arm finger spin. When bowled back of the hand, it becomes the googly, it turns the other way. We identified 10 chinaman bowlers as we trawled through the history of the game. Even if you were to add up all the wickets taken by the chinaman bowlers it would be less than a combined tally of Bedi and Underwood. There are 45 left-arm spinners who have more than 40 wickets each but just four chinaman bowlers who meet this criterion. The strike-rate of the chinaman bowler is superior (a wicket every 70 balls as compared to 79 for the orthodox left-arm); the bowling average is similar, 31.6 as compared to 31.2. The difference is that while the 45 left-arm spinners have taken over 4800 wickets in 1605 matches, the 10 chinaman bowlers have played only 184 matches to take 427 wickets.

Old timers had the great fortune to see the peerless Garry Sobers bowl a lot of this stuff. In fact they were so fortunate that they saw that genius bowl left-arm fast, slow orthodox and chinaman all on the same afternoon. His 235 test wickets are a wonderful mix of all three. In the fifties, Johnny Wardle played for England. A maverick – and that sat badly in England – he bowled orthodox finger spin in England, but served up chinaman and googlies abroad. He bowled the way his heart dictated and he bowled really well - 28 Tests, 102 wickets at a strike rate of 65 balls per wicket. His average of 20.39 is the best for any post-war spinner who has over 100 wickets. In our statistical analysis, he is second-best among left-arm spinners since 1900 (min. 50 wickets) which is awesome. But he rubbed the administrators and his captain Peter May the wrong way. He would have played a lot more games for England but for May’s preference for his Surrey team-mate Tony Lock.

Time for a lovely story: Johnny Martin who played for Australia in the sixties bowled his chinaman very slowly through the air. In a Sheffield Shield match, Martin beat a batsmen all ends up and struck him on the back foot in front of the stumps. To his utter disgust, the Umpire turned down his appeal. Martin asks the umpire: “What’s wrong, ump, isn’t he in front?” Umpire: “Yes son, he is”. Martin: “Then why isn’t he out?” Umpire: “Because the ball wouldn’t have reached the stumps, Johnny!”

Why is it that most of the chinaman bowlers are from Australia? Is there something in the Australian air that makes spinners bowl back-of-the-hand wrist spin rather than finger spin? Just as they have given cricket so many famous legspinners from Mailey to Warne and MacGill, so too have they provided us a line of chinaman bowlers, from Fleetwood-Smith to Hogg. Strangely, Australia hardly has a worthy presence among orthodox left-arm spinners.

	Chuck Fleetwood-Smith is sadly best remembered as the bowler who leaked the most runs in an innings © The Cricketer International

Fleetwood-Smith (10 Tests, 42 wickets) in spite of some sterling performances in the 1930s is unfortunately best remembered as the bowler who conceded the highest number of runs in an innings - one for 298 out of an England score of 903 for 7. This was The Oval test where Hutton made 364.

Much later, Lindsay Kline (13 Tests, 34 wickets) and Martin (eight Tests, 17 wickets) had their unforgettable moments too: Kline took a hat-trick against South Africa in 1957 but his moment of glory was as a No. 11 bat for Australia in the famous 1960-61 series against West Indies. Coming in as the last batsman he stayed for more than 100 minutes with Slasher Mackay to earn Australia a draw in Adelaide. More than the fact that he lasted against Hall, Sobers, Worrell and Gibbs for that long, what was amazing was that he was practicing at the nets in the afternoon against similar bowling for more than an hour as if anticipating what he would be called upon to do later that day! Immediately after, he was dropped for the final Test – typical of Australian cricket, no sentiment at all.

Martin’s moment came in the same series. After the famous Tie in Brisbane, Australia won the second Test comfortably in Melbourne, thanks to Davidson and Martin’s bowling. In a golden spell, Martin removed Kanhai, Sobers and Worrell in four balls. Had he done it in three, it would surely have ranked as the grandest hat-trick ever!

Time once more to pull the leg of the chinaman bowler: This story was told with great relish by Dileep Sardesai. In the fourth Test in Barbados of India’s landmark tour of West Indies in 1971 – the series belonged as much to Sardesai as it did to Gavaskar – India were 70 for 6 and Sardesai was left with Solkar to repair the damage. Sobers, the West Indies captain, had Inshan Ali their chinaman bowler on at one end. Now, for the Indians this slow bowler was a far happier proposition and not wanting Sobers to change him, Sardesai and Solkar decided that in every Inshan Ali over they would deliberately appear to be beaten by the odd delivery, as though they had failed to pick him. Sardesai chortled that the extended spell to Inshan Ali actually helped the Indian cause. Knowing Sardesai, this could well be a true story!

Not much need be said about the chinaman bowlers of the last 25 years. We have watched them in close detail on TV. None more so than Paul Adams of South Africa, perhaps the only bowler to have ever had his face towards the umpire while delivering! His action – called frog in the blender – caused great consternation to the English batsmen when he was first unleashed. But batsmen sorted him out in time, because although Adams bowled good length and line he became too predictable. Nevertheless, by the time he finished he had 134 wickets in 45 matches. More recently, we have seen Hogg – tongue hanging out – bowl for Australia. Katich bowls too but we think that he should be bowled a lot more by Ponting.

It is surprising that the sub continent that produced left-arm orthodox spinners (Vinoo Mankad, Bishan Bedi, Dilip Doshi and Iqbal Qasim come to mind), does not have a single chinaman bowler in its Test history. The one chinaman bowler who could have played for India was a wonderfully gifted bowler from Hyderabad – Mumtaz Hussain. A contemporary of Gavaskar, Mumtaz promised a lot when he made his name in university and Ranji Trophy cricket with a mesmerizing mix of orthodox left-arm, chinaman and the googly. He was so difficult to read that the keeper had to devise a set of hand signals to read him. Sadly within a couple of seasons Mumtaz had greatly reduced his chinaman and bowled mainly orthodox finger spin. Soon – for it was the time when Bedi ruled – Mumtaz faded away into the anonymity of first-class cricket. It is probably the closest that India came to having an international chinaman bowler.

Comments (23)

September 23, 2009

Posted by Cricinfo at in Bowling

The art of swing

	Wait until that thing grows older © Getty Images

Reverse-swing has emerged as a key weapon in a fast bowler’s repertoire, and has grown in prominence with the advent of the limited-overs game. The likes of Brett Lee, Umar Gul and Lasith Malinga have used the art to be lethally effective in the death overs. But what is reverse-swing, how did it evolve and, more generally, what makes the ball move around in the air? SM Arsalan Arif Khan from Pakistan offers a guide to swing bowling.

Many times in international matches we hear commentators use term “reverse swing” through the end of an innings. But most of the people don’t know what it is, except for grasping the fact that the ball somehow tends to reverse in a certain way when it gets old. Reverse swing is essentially an art. It is generally applied when the ball is old and rough with the help of extreme pace, even moderate sometimes (if executed properly), and get it to work lethally.

But before a bowler can think of reverse-swing, he must first go through the basic procedure of tracing his steps toward the root of swing, as the ability to swing is an art in itself.

What is Swing?

When a ball is released from the wrist, it habitually moves in the air and bounces directly proportional, or sometimes vice versa, towards or away from a batsman when a pace bowler is in operation. Swing merely consists of aerodynamics, which I’ll come to later.

It is a known fact that most fast bowlers strive for this sort of variation because it is a serious cause for concern for batsmen. Imagine yourself driving on a lane and encountering a vehicle moving to the left, but suddenly in full speed it decides to move in your direction. The judgment and reflexes then, of you as a batsmen or a natural human being, rely on your instinct; sometimes you survive the variation, sometimes you don’t. Batsmen gradually become accustomed to playing general swing, which is easier to judge and also gets predictable. Such swing is likely to occur in the first ten or 15 overs of a match when the ball is still hard.

However, recently, with the game constantly evolving, new-ball bowlers have discovered a way of swinging the older ball, especially when it’s dusty and scruffy. The movement, in this case, makes it more difficult for the batsmen to judge. But to attain it, there are a number of factors to consider.

The Role of the Cricket Ball

If you see a lot of cricket, or play in clubs, you will realize that fielders continuously shine the ball with their trousers or towels. The cricket ball has two sides across the seam. When players shine the ball, they deliberately leave one side rough while adding glossy sparkle to the other. The rubbing helps one side of the ball smoothen while the opposite is deliberately left to deteriorate through routine wear and tear. This is where aerodynamics come in, because the dual surface enhances a change in rhythm of flight from the bowler’s wrist to the batsman. The aerodynamics mean that the shiny side is prone to travel quicker through the air while the rough side works as a break pushing the ball in its direction.

The Seam Position

The stitching you notice around the cricket ball is called a seam. The seam acts like a helm for fast bowlers. All fast bowlers grip the seam vertically, with the middle and index fingers on either side, with the ball resting in the third finger and thumb. The idea of enhancing your swing is to hold the seam as straight as possible: The straighter the seam is at the point of delivering the ball, the greater the chance to swing it. And if the ball is old with one side shiny, the chances of variation will increase.

What are inswing and outswing?

Most bowlers get confused here. To move a ball in a typical fashion away from a left-handed batsman, the rougher side of the ball will be facing leftwards at point of release: notice the seam should be darting toward second slip. And it is understandably the other way round for an inswinging delivery; the rough side should be on right at point of release and the seam should be darting at an imaginary leg slip.

What is reverse-swing?

Once the ball turns older and more tattered, it will instigate a movement in the opposite route to where it would originally swing, disregarding the change in the bowler’s grip. For example, with the grip for an outswinger, the ball will move towards the batsman in the air while an inswinger will move away from the bat. Such variations usually occur very late after the ball is released, therefore it is extremely difficult for batsmen to judge the deviation in split seconds. Batsmen usually pick the changes in direction while in the air to confront the issue. It is not easy to execute revere swing, as they say bowlers need to be pace it at a minimum of 80 mph or above. Former Pakistan international Sarfraz Nawaz is known to have founded reverse swing during the late 1970s, and he passed his knowledge on to Imran Khan.

Mechanics

There have been plenty of theories about why, but here's the simplest explanation from former England bowling coach Troy Cooley: “Reverse swing is all to do with the deterioration of the ball and the seam position in flight. As the ball becomes rougher, it will take on a different characteristic as it deteriorates. So if you present the ball as an outswinger, the ball has deteriorated so much on the rough side that it takes on the characteristics of the shiny side. Which means a natural outswinger will become an inswinger and conversely, an inswinger into an outswinger."

How does it work?

Considering the fact that reverse swing generally occurs after 40 overs, it is tailor-made for the older ball. However, some of the England bowlers were able to reverse-swing the ball within 20 overs during the 2005 Ashes; Brett Lee managed it in 30 overs at Adelaide. But how can they manage to do this so early in the innings?

One reason could be the ball. In England, Test balls are manufactured by Dukes, while in Australia and parts of the sub-continent the Kookaburra brand is usually used. Like footballs, each manufacturer’s cricket balls are different. Some have more pronounced seams while others deteriorate slower, all of which have an influence on how the ball will move in the air.

Another theory is how some players are able to rough the ball up faster than other teams. In England's some years back, Steve Harmison and Andrew Flintoff both banged the ball hard into the pitch. Their fielders often threw the ball back to wicket-keeper Geraint Jones on the bounce from the outfield, all of which contribute to the deterioration of the ball. Regardless of all this, batsmen the world over know what to expect when the ball starts to get older.

Comments (31)