Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Cricket Training, Fitness and Injuries => Topic started by: ProCricketer1982 on January 20, 2019, 07:12:50 PM
-
Thoughts peeps
Normally I basiclaly stand with my back big toe on middle on the crease line to face up vs everything from pace to medium (spin just behind). However, I’ve been trailing after watching tests standing half way back in my crease.. to say it’s made life easier is an understatement.
I’ve found suddnely it’s a lot easier and anything that a bowler would think is back of a length or length is easily back foot punched or pulled. However, I’ve seen Mr Balance and Mr Handscombe... they look bloody awful
So, does anyone bat like this at ‘our’ level or is it just too darn risky with crappy wickets ??
I’ve done extreme pace and with swing to see if simply pitching it up swinging would get me and it doesn’t seem to.
Just kinda thinking it feels a little too good to be true currently
-
I have the crease line in the middle of my feet or slightly towards my back foot in my stance, have always done this. The only times I will deviate from this is a) new ball bowler swinging big with the keeper back, id come out of my crease to nullify swing and disrupt length. b) towards the death overs where I basically walk all over the place to open up angles and again disrupt the bowler
Could make a case for going deeper on hard wickets with quickish bowlers aswell. Depends where your strengths are
I wouldnt want to go too deep too often as there might be driving opportunities missed, depends on pitch/bowler
-
Something I have been thinking about, but not quite confident enough in the wickets and standard of umpiring to give it a go
-
I think there are more professionals playing deep inside the crease than we realize. Most back and across trigger players do end up deep in the crease after their trigger, e.g. De Villiers, Steve Smith, Rahane etc., to name a few and they do quite good, though only Handscomb takes the flak for the same technique just because he is starting deep and not triggering but if you think when ball is released, his position from the stumps might not be so much different as the back and across trigger guys ....
-
I cut the crease in my stance/line is on the inside of my back foot, so maybe not as far back as you.
I am an opener and have batted like this for years, it definitely gives you that fraction more time, I find the most important thing is that it turns more deliveries into short balls which is my strength. That's what's it's about doing what you can to to make things in your favour.
I will say that the bowlers I struggle with most because of it are the dobbers who swing it miles.
It also depends on the standard you play because genuinely good bowlers will be able to adjust anyways.
-
As an opener who plays the hook and pull at anything slightly short tried this gave me more time to see the ball inc late movement but was always aware of stepping on the stumps never comfortable with it mainly due to uneven bounce and getting done LBW.
-
So, you won't read about this in a 1950s coaching manual, but most professional batsmen practice one-foot weighting, which is why you see the big back-and-across movement before the ball is released. It simplifies and speeds-up the foot movement phase of the shot.
Its slowly starting to filter down into amateur cricket, I'm coaching it to the juniors I work with.
-
As an opener who plays the hook and pull at anything slightly short tried this gave me more time to see the ball inc late movement but was always aware of stepping on the stumps never comfortable with it mainly due to uneven bounce and getting done LBW.
Very similar to myself. Standing deeper therefore gives me a few more short balls to go at and time at our level
-
@SLA one foot weighting- do you mean back-loading? As per power hitting/ baseball thoughts?
-
@SLA one foot weighting- do you mean back-loading? As per power hitting/ baseball thoughts?
There are similarities, but the purpose is different. Back-loading and a rigid front leg are techniques used to involve the core muscles in hitting and add power and bat-speed, whereas one-foot weighting is used to simplify decision making/decrease the amount of separate movements you have to make before hitting the ball.
For example, if you start with your weight balanced across both feet, the sequence of events before you hit the ball is:
Front foot shot:
Put weight on back foot -> lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
Put weight on front foot -> lift back foot -> push back foot back -> plant back foot -> play shot
Whereas if you already have all your weight on the back foot, the sequence is shorter:
Front foot shot:
lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
lean in to cut/rotate to pull -> play shot
Of course, this requires your back foot to be planted in a position from which you can comfortably play a back foot shot without any additional foot movement, eg, slightly back and across, a position from which you can defend, drive, glance, cut and pull all without moving your feet. If you watch pros, you'll see they don't actually move back to play back foot shots.
-
There are similarities, but the purpose is different. Back-loading and a rigid front leg are techniques used to involve the core muscles in hitting and add power and bat-speed, whereas one-foot weighting is used to simplify decision making/decrease the amount of separate movements you have to make before hitting the ball.
For example, if you start with your weight balanced across both feet, the sequence of events before you hit the ball is:
Front foot shot:
Put weight on back foot -> lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
Put weight on front foot -> lift back foot -> push back foot back -> plant back foot -> play shot
Whereas if you already have all your weight on the back foot, the sequence is shorter:
Front foot shot:
lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
lean in to cut/rotate to pull -> play shot
Of course, this requires your back foot to be planted in a position from which you can comfortably play a back foot shot without any additional foot movement, eg, slightly back and across, a position from which you can defend, drive, glance, cut and pull all without moving your feet. If you watch pros, you'll see they don't actually move back to play back foot shots.
Over the last season I implemented a similar idea into my technique, only having the weight over the front foot, as it meant I was in a stable enough position to play any front foot shot i liked without moving my feet, and I naturally played my cuts/pulls off the front foot (ricky ponting style) anyway. This meant my head was stiller throughout the shot, meaning I hit the ball better. The only possible weakness was the wide flashy drive, so I told myself not to play it as it's a high risk shot anyway, so now I just leave those deliveries.
When I felt I was playing well and had got myself in I would then sometimes start to move about a bit to put off bowlers, but only really when trying to push for runs.
Another consequence is I do look quite crabby now, but I don't mind that.
-
There are similarities, but the purpose is different. Back-loading and a rigid front leg are techniques used to involve the core muscles in hitting and add power and bat-speed, whereas one-foot weighting is used to simplify decision making/decrease the amount of separate movements you have to make before hitting the ball.
For example, if you start with your weight balanced across both feet, the sequence of events before you hit the ball is:
Front foot shot:
Put weight on back foot -> lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
Put weight on front foot -> lift back foot -> push back foot back -> plant back foot -> play shot
Whereas if you already have all your weight on the back foot, the sequence is shorter:
Front foot shot:
lift front foot -> lean forward -> plant front foot -> play shot
Back foot shot:
lean in to cut/rotate to pull -> play shot
Of course, this requires your back foot to be planted in a position from which you can comfortably play a back foot shot without any additional foot movement, eg, slightly back and across, a position from which you can defend, drive, glance, cut and pull all without moving your feet. If you watch pros, you'll see they don't actually move back to play back foot shots.
Not sure I agree with the weighting principles you are suggesting here.
If, for example your weight is on your front foot and you lean to the ball with your head, your weight shouldn't move back then forward, although you might use power from your back leg to move forward.
The de-weighting of your front foot can allow a batter to move into position better, but it reduces your back foot options.
As for where you stand in your crease, Haydon used to bat out of his crease, Strauss well back. Two different but successful methods. Changing your position is personal, but worth experimenting with.
-
Not sure I agree with the weighting principles you are suggesting here.
If, for example your weight is on your front foot and you lean to the ball with your head, your weight shouldn't move back then forward, although you might use power from your back leg to move forward.
It does, that's how the human body works.
Try it. Stand with your weight on both feet. Now lift your right foot up. The very first thing that happens - before you can lift your right foot - is that you shift your weight onto your left foot. Its physically impossible to lift your right foot without first shifting your bodyweight off it, if you tried it, you'd just crumple in a heap. Of course, this is all so natural to humans that we don't even notice we're doing it.
-
But when you bat you aren't lifting your front foot. Your head is leaning to the ball and you topple into position. It isn't the same.
Try it.
Batting is leading with your head, not leading with your foot. Putting your foot to the pitch if the ball is the biggest misnomer in batting. It is head over the ball.
-
Over the last season I implemented a similar idea into my technique, only having the weight over the front foot, as it meant I was in a stable enough position to play any front foot shot i liked without moving my feet, and I naturally played my cuts/pulls off the front foot (ricky ponting style) anyway. This meant my head was stiller throughout the shot, meaning I hit the ball better. The only possible weakness was the wide flashy drive, so I told myself not to play it as it's a high risk shot anyway, so now I just leave those deliveries.
When I felt I was playing well and had got myself in I would then sometimes start to move about a bit to put off bowlers, but only really when trying to push for runs.
Another consequence is I do look quite crabby now, but I don't mind that.
Yes, its possible to do it the other way round (sometimes call front-foot dogging), but as you've noticed, it cuts out your ability to play a cover drive. You can play straight quite easily though. A lot of bowlers see a batsman putting their weight forward and instantly bang it in short - but obviously this is exactly what a front foot dogger wants, as his back foot is already de-weighted and he can bounce back into a pull shot very easily. A better strategy is to bowl full and wide.
De-weighting the back foot is actually recommended against spin (the front foot press), as it encourages the batsman to always move their back foot first, which is never a bad idea against spin, as it encourages you to either take a decent stride back or make a 1-2 shuffle down the pitch - both good tactics.
-
But when you bat you aren't lifting your front foot. Your head is leaning to the ball and you topple into position. It isn't the same.
Try it.
Obviously you lift your front foot, it doesn't slide along the floor - (besides even to slide your foot, you'd need to deweight it first).
Even a "topple" (which is terrible technique) requires you to de-weight and lift your front foot first, otherwise you'd just fall on your face.
-
Obviously you lift your front foot, it doesn't slide along the floor - (besides even to slide your foot, you'd need to deweight it first).
Even a "topple" (which is terrible technique) requires you to de-weight and lift your front foot first, otherwise you'd just fall on your face.
If you think the "topple" is terrible technique I am not sure we will agree on this...
What you are suggesting will make your head move up and down which makes batting very hard, because picking up the ball is much harder when your head is moving.
-
If you think the "topple" is terrible technique I am not sure we will agree on this...
What you are suggesting will make your head move up and down which makes batting very hard, because picking up the ball is much harder when your head is moving.
The topple is a terrible visualisation, it encourages an unnecessary delay in shifting the weight followed by a rapid, uncontrolled stab forward as you try to catch up with your momentum. No professional cricketer bats like this or has ever batted like this. I hope you're not teaching this to kids.
and you can shift your weight perfectly effectively whilst keeping your head completely still - a common ABC practice for younger kids is to balance a bean bag on their head whilst alternating the foot they are standing on, and sometimes catching a tennis ball while they do it.
-
Nearly every pro batter uses the head to the ball technique. Very few use the front foot deweighting technique.
From Douglas Jardine to KPs book on cricket various versions of the topple are described.
-
Thoughts peeps
Normally I basiclaly stand with my back big toe on middle on the crease line to face up vs everything from pace to medium (spin just behind). However, I’ve been trailing after watching tests standing half way back in my crease.. to say it’s made life easier is an understatement.
I’ve found suddnely it’s a lot easier and anything that a bowler would think is back of a length or length is easily back foot punched or pulled. However, I’ve seen Mr Balance and Mr Handscombe... they look bloody awful
So, does anyone bat like this at ‘our’ level or is it just too darn risky with crappy wickets ??
I’ve done extreme pace and with swing to see if simply pitching it up swinging would get me and it doesn’t seem to.
Just kinda thinking it feels a little too good to be true currently
I do a version of this, with the difference being that I stand on off-stump. I think there are two keys to this strategy:
1) Keeping good balance (making sure head does NOT fall over to off side, which will make you miss balls on your legs or balls that swing in late).
2) assume/visualize the full straight ball, that you will look to play to mid-on. Everything else is easier (you can leave outside your eyeline, and can pull anything short - which is such an instinctive shot that you don't need to think about it).
I've heard people criticize this strategy by saying "but if you miss it,you'll be LBW"...I still prefer this because its much easier to work on making sure you DON'T miss the full straight ball (by focusing on points 1 and 2 above), and you minimize the ways you can get out.
-
Nearly every pro batter uses the head to the ball technique. Very few use the front foot deweighting technique.
From Douglas Jardine to KPs book on cricket various versions of the topple are described.
I'm afraid your wrong. Obviously all batsmen lead with their head when playing forward, that's been a standard coaching mantra for many decades, That's not the same as "toppling", which is the act of voluntarily losing balance and then sticking your foot out to catch yourself in an uncontrolled manner.
To be clear: every batsman de-weights their front foot before moving it, because it is physically impossible to not do this. This is just basic physics.
I would bet £100 than 95% of professional batsmen de-weight their front foot before the ball is released when playing pace bowling. This is simply modern batting technique. I can't think of a single test batsman who doesn't do it. I haven't seen footage of every single professional batsman so there might be some anomalies, but I doubt it.
-
As I said at the top of the page. We aren't going to agree.
But I won't be making up stats to prove my point.
-
As I said at the top of the page. We aren't going to agree.
But I won't be making up stats to prove my point.
No problem, as I said, things quite often take their time to filter down to amateur cricket, so it's not entirely surprising that you have never heard of it.
-
No problem, as I said, things quite often take their time to filter down to amateur cricket, so it's not entirely surprising that you have never heard of it.
Yet another pioneering idea straight out of Beige Shorts & No Bats CC.
I love your way of explaining things too, just pretending you're superior to everyone who disagrees with you even when you're proved wrong.
-
No problem, as I said, things quite often take their time to filter down to amateur cricket, so it's not entirely surprising that you have never heard of it.
So your vast experience and knowledge has come from working with which pros and teams to provided this insight?
-
Yet another pioneering idea straight out of Beige Shorts & No Bats CC.
I love your way of explaining things too, just pretending you're superior to everyone who disagrees with you even when you're proved wrong.
I haven't been proven wrong though, I explained my point, Buzz interjected incorrectly to tell me I was wrong, but it turns out he is simply a bit rusty on his basic physics and thinks its possible to pick up your foot whilst still having your weight on it, which, obviously, it isn't.
-
So your vast experience and knowledge has come from working with which pros and teams to provided this insight?
eh? Who said I worked with pros? Just watch them on the tv and you'll see what I mean, idiot.
-
No problem, as I said, things quite often take their time to filter down to amateur cricket, so it's not entirely surprising that you have never heard of it.
Sniggers. Right. Chappell wrote about deweighting years ago. It has been discussed on here several times.
But it will filter down to amateurs eventually.
P.s. ever wonder why Ali Cook the most famous proponent of deweoghting struggled to hit a straight drive?
-
Sniggers. Right. Chappell wrote about deweighting years ago. It has been discussed on here several times.
But it will filter down to amateurs eventually.
P.s. ever wonder why Ali Cook the most famous proponent of deweoghting struggled to hit a straight drive?
All the more mysterious why you are confused by basic physics, then.
You've made several statements on this thread that are demonstrably erroneous. You should probably retract them and apologise.
-
Two decent club players.
Zero deweighting
https://youtu.be/C2BG24E32ZU
https://youtu.be/Qqn8uQ9miIQ
-
But when you bat you aren't lifting your front foot. Your head is leaning to the ball and you topple into position. It isn't the same.
Try it.
Batting is leading with your head, not leading with your foot. Putting your foot to the pitch if the ball is the biggest misnomer in batting. It is head over the ball.
Yep lead with your head and the rest will follow.
-
Two decent club players.
Zero deweighting
https://youtu.be/C2BG24E32ZU
https://youtu.be/Qqn8uQ9miIQ
Slogging !!
-
Two decent club players.
Zero deweighting
https://youtu.be/C2BG24E32ZU
https://youtu.be/Qqn8uQ9miIQ
Where’s Dave gone??
-
And a couple of average pros...
https://youtu.be/BG12B_cFQxM
https://youtu.be/VntutI8sqaA
Maybe with the second there is a marginal de-weighting, but not really.
Both are using the crease well (to return to the original post!)
Oh, here is my favourite, Kane Williamson. https://youtu.be/IJpQQY2G6Gw
I think Joe Root has a front foot de-weighting, but videos of him batting are closely controlled by the powers of the ECB.
-
I think as ever the discussions are going cross purposes and terminology rather than actions are largely being argued about. Your descriptions of different conditions incorrectly assume the laws of statics rather than the laws of dynamics is you want to get all physicy about things. There's no free lunch with batting and no single best technique or approach and different things suit different people. True most pros would generally describe having around a 60:40 rear foot weight bias but that is just a feel and a description they seem to tend to use and certainly not full "de-weighting" which very few use. Easy solution of course to end SLA's law* is to post a video or picture breakdown of what you describe as we are clearly not enlightened amateur joeys (bonus points for spiffing own net video)
*Godwin's SLA's Law
As an online SLA CBF discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler everyone else involved being called an idiot and shouted down approaches 1
This post from @DorsetDan made me De-weight from my current grumpy state, and topple into a state of temporary giggles..
-
Where’s Dave gone??
Last time I spoke Winchester way but his back (if memory serves me correct) is showing signs of heavy Bergans and tabbing all his life
-
I’ve got a few bowler mates who I can bribe to bowl at me and I’ll give them a new cherry (dukes) to bowl with.. should test me out as they’ll swing like foook
If I get pinned I’ll know it’s not any good vs swing.
Current vs the machine I’ve not been hit on he pads but time will tell.. I’m just interested if anyone has or does it because I certainly find it far easier and can actually be more destructive as it’s harder to bowl dry
-
eh? Who said I worked with pros? Just watch them on the tv and you'll see what I mean, idiot.
Sorry I feel my previous post may have been a little facetious, but seen as we were told that one foot weighting filtering to the amateur game I felt it was needed to clarify.
I like think I’ve got a reasonable and varied cricket knowledge. From coaching under 5s to sharing breakfast with some of the greats of the game while they talk about how they used to get the ball to reverse (yes the cheated).
I’m not saying I know it all far from it, but I can honestly say I’ve not heard the term “one foot weighting” used by any pro or ex-pro I’ve worked alongside. And I’m lucky enough to have worked in various countries and in a variety of roles even feeding analysis to some of our favourite TV commentators.
The topple method as Buzz describes isn’t perfect as it does promote a unstable movement, but gives a much better representation than getting young players to move their feet first, as that often leads to young players not transferring weight into the ball correctly.
I subscribe to a simple methodology of if you can transfer your weight into the ball and provide the face of the bat along a bat path that gives maximum opportunity to strike the ball you aren’t going to going far wrong.
But thanks for your input @SLA
Yours,
Idiot
-
Gone a bit mad since I last read this thread
Good luck with the practice anyway Adie, will be interested to hear your findings. Always like a bit of innovation in batting
-
Well, this thread is tremendous. Still waiting for the day when I hear or read anyone invoke 'the laws of physics' while also having the slightest idea what they're talking about...
On the topic of standing deep in your crease, I used to do it when I was younger and felt it worked well to give me a bit of extra time and get on the back foot more easily. Stopped doing it as much because I'm much better off the front foot than back and find being a little out of the crease works better for the majority of bowling/pitches I get these days. Can only see it being a problem with full/swinging balls if you stick to it rigidly and the bowlers adjust to bowl fuller to you, a la Gary Ballance, but if you think on your feet in that situation and move back to normal then you often get a few nice half volleys.
-
would there be any issues with the idea working more/less in certain batting conditions/wickets? like being able to give yourself time on a really spinning wicket in the sub-continent/or on a fast bouncy track in Aussie - but not using it on a slow swinging wicket in the UK (in April for example!!)
also as a very bang average (and i am being generous!!) amateur cricketer - please can someone explain de-weighting to me - however if this causes more disagreements ;) then i am happy to remain oblivious as i am too old to change from the 'head first and all else follows' method!!! - which has always done me fine
-
I'm a back and across merchant, child of my time perhaps, but I've always tried to use the crease rather than choose part of it to occupy. For instance, you pull or cut someone convincingly to the fence, you pretty much know the next one is going to be fuller, so instead of going back and across I go forward and across and set myself up in the same way in an attempt to turn the next ball into a half volley. Likewise if the ball is zipping about a bit, I move myself across my stumps so I'm batting off off-stump so I know what I can let go. To be honest, I've not really thought about this that much until I read the question, just go with what feels right on the day.
-
Growing up in the North West where wickets particularly early season are likely to offer assistance to the seam bowlers, batting deep in your crease is more likely to bring more problems than benefits. At test level, Dawid Malan probably best demonstrates this, along with the assessment from Ed Smith that he is best suited to away tours than he is playing in home conditions.
I often bat out of my crease to a bowler who is getting lateral movement to both negate that movement and to make it easier to get the front foot outside the line of off stump, but otherwise take my stance with my back foot just inside the crease which I feel gives me the best starting position to get fully forward or fully back depending on the length of the ball