Whenever a bowler is hit for a boundary modern cricket
commentators shower all kinds of cliches to describe the shot and
when they seem to return to their senses, they make a sorry remark on
the bowler that he should be bowling in the right areas. With batting
dominating, 'bowling in the right areas' is becoming the new cliche
contemporary cricket commentary. It certainly gives the impression
that the commentator knows what these so called right areas are. But
unfortunately, they never make any sensible suggestion, so I assume
that like the poor bowler and his captain, they also do not have any
idea of where the 'right area' might be on the pitch.
So in my experience the 'right bowling areas' is a myth created by our modern cricket commentators, who want to sound educated in cricket. The biggest enemy of a bowler is the monotony of his bowling, no matter how elegant it appears from the commentary area. The biggest ally a bowler can have in the middle of the bowling spell is the variability and a sense of surprise in his bowling.
 |
| Ranji invented leg-glance to deal with the leg-side bowling |
Lets
try to narrow down on these 'right areas' by first isolating the bad
areas and start with the 'bad line to bowl'. Down the leg side is
never considered good. This is simple because a slight error and the
delivery will be a wide. Traditionally, umpires do not give LBW to
balls pitching outside or even in the line of the leg stump. Finally,
there may still be some stigma of the bodyline series. Then too much
outside of the off stump is also not good, because it gives enough
room to the batmen to play the shot. Moreover, the batsmen can decide
to leave the ball. So unless the bowler can move the ball in, there
is not much point bowling outside the off stump.
Next, the length of the ball. Bowling too full or too short is bad. Usually they recommend 'good length' which is something like two third of the length of the pitch. Short balls without much pace only invite well executed pull shots. Too full is rather easy to play if it is not combined with swing.
So, is that it then, that bowl around the off-stump at about two-third of the length, the so called 'corridor around the off and the middle stump'. But I am sure all bowlers know this. This is what they practice. This is what the coaches train for.
However, it is not true that a ball bowled in the 'right areas' is going to give you a wicket or at least will trouble the batsman every time you bowl it. Evidently, balls pitched well within the 'right areas' are smacked for easy boundaries and at times even balls pitched in the so called 'bad areas' get you a prized wicket. In fact, I did a little survey myself on the hawk-eye data that is available for some matches on cricinfo website to confirm this.
So if you have played cricket at any serious level you know that in reality there are no right areas. Once a batsman knows what the bowler is going to do, he can execute any shot on any delivery. So the biggest enemy of the bowler is to become predictable.
Along the same lines, there is no perfect ball which can give you a wicket every time you bowl it. You may get some success on few occasions but soon batsmen will have a strategy to play that ball for maximum score. The innovation of leg-glance by Ranjit Sinhji was first such instance and development of a number of new shots in recent times, including the 'switch-hit', gives clear indications that batsmen can come up with an antidote to any delivery given some time.
Next, the length of the ball. Bowling too full or too short is bad. Usually they recommend 'good length' which is something like two third of the length of the pitch. Short balls without much pace only invite well executed pull shots. Too full is rather easy to play if it is not combined with swing.
So, is that it then, that bowl around the off-stump at about two-third of the length, the so called 'corridor around the off and the middle stump'. But I am sure all bowlers know this. This is what they practice. This is what the coaches train for.
However, it is not true that a ball bowled in the 'right areas' is going to give you a wicket or at least will trouble the batsman every time you bowl it. Evidently, balls pitched well within the 'right areas' are smacked for easy boundaries and at times even balls pitched in the so called 'bad areas' get you a prized wicket. In fact, I did a little survey myself on the hawk-eye data that is available for some matches on cricinfo website to confirm this.
So if you have played cricket at any serious level you know that in reality there are no right areas. Once a batsman knows what the bowler is going to do, he can execute any shot on any delivery. So the biggest enemy of the bowler is to become predictable.
Along the same lines, there is no perfect ball which can give you a wicket every time you bowl it. You may get some success on few occasions but soon batsmen will have a strategy to play that ball for maximum score. The innovation of leg-glance by Ranjit Sinhji was first such instance and development of a number of new shots in recent times, including the 'switch-hit', gives clear indications that batsmen can come up with an antidote to any delivery given some time.
 |
Glenn surprised everyone.
He bowled not just in the corridor
but in the corridor of uncertainly
|
So in my experience the 'right bowling areas' is a myth created by our modern cricket commentators, who want to sound educated in cricket. The biggest enemy of a bowler is the monotony of his bowling, no matter how elegant it appears from the commentary area. The biggest ally a bowler can have in the middle of the bowling spell is the variability and a sense of surprise in his bowling.
Unfortunately, this part of
bowling never makes it to the statistics and we think that Glenn McGrath was a great bowler because he consistently bowled in the
corridor of the uncertainty, but I think you should watch him again.
And not just Glenn, pick videos of any successful bowler and you will
find 'unpredictability' was the main weapon in their armor.
right arm over
Arvind
