Print

[AdClem]

What do you make of Ed Smith's view that..."...In focusing too much on stillness, you risk jeopardising the other things that make batting work: fluidity, naturalness, being in sync with the ball"?

The article is here: http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/679917.html .

Here's a bit more: "...in the thousands of hours I've spent talking to professional batsmen about technique, the most common theme is that they believe good form derives from keeping the head still. Who am I to argue with such an overwhelming majority?

Nonetheless, here is my conjecture. The feeling of your head being still, so often a symptom of good form, is actually an illusion. Your head is moving. But it is moving in a balanced, controlled manner. After all, your body has to move if you are to play shots, and by definition (given that your head is attached to your body) your head must move with it. "Stillness" is a quality many feel convinced lies at the heart of their game. But I suspect a more accurate term is poise. Poise captures the idea of balance within movement."

[AdClem]

I'll just throw this into the mix.

When I play squash, I certainly don't keep my head still.  And for those who say 'yes but that's a much slower-moving ball, which isn't coming directly at you', what about waiting to receive a tennis serve?  That's more analogous to batting - fast, unpredictable line, length and angle, with the possibility of spin - and yet look how many pros sway quite dramatically in anticipation of the 'delivery'.

[praguetaz]

I think this fits in quite nicely with a recent thread about stance.... I believe keeping the head still and level is to help pick up the line and length of a ball bowled in at you but then this must be negated by those who have a trigger movement as the ball is released....

[Buzz]

I think there is a difference between being still at the point of delivery (a must in my view) and being rigid and stationary through the run up and delivery (recipe for disaster).

personally I think it is a good debate, but the reality is that all players have a still head at the point the ball is released by the bowler. If your head is moving around then it is much harder to pick up the line/length of the ball, let alone react to movement of the pitch/in the air.

[procricket]

100 per cent stillness at point is vital everything else isnt

[Akewstick]

I think there is a difference between being still at the point of delivery (a must in my view) and being rigid and stationary through the run up and delivery (recipe for disaster).

I agree.

Something that's working for me recently is not thinking "keep your head still" but knowing how it feels to fully, instensely, obsessively WATCH THE BALL, if I'm thinking WATCH THE BALL! My head automatically goes dead still at the point of delivery as my eyes widen and I put all my mental energy into fixating on that ball coming down. I think instinctively our bodies know that to really be able to clearly see something that's little and fast moving, your head needs to be still to get the best view. If I think about it like that - stay relaxed and ready to move but watch that ball as hard as you can, the dilemma of "have to keep mobile" versus "head must be still", my instincts take care of it themselves.

This is step 847 in my understanding of what "watch the ball" means.

[AdClem]

I'm always pleased to read your opinions Buzz, and I know you're a strong advocate of keeping the head still.  I agree that this is complementary to the earlier thread on stance Praguetaz - which I didn't want to hijack, but which had got me thinking specifically about stillness.

Depth perception is helped by stereopsis, the way the brain uses the different position of two forward facing eyes (parallax) to estimate the range of a distant object - rangefinder cameras use it for focusing.  Animals also use motion parallax to achieve the same thing - think of a bird bobbing its head up and down.  Imagine a small red sphere, about 9 inches in circumference, approximately 7 feet off the ground, at a distance of say 22yds.  By moving your head you get a better perception of its distance and location.

Just playing Devil's advocate, but should we be moving our heads more?

[Akewstick]

Animals also use motion parallax to achieve the same thing - think of a bird bobbing its head up and down.  Imagine a small red sphere, about 9 inches in circumference, approximately 7 feet off the ground, at a distance of say 22yds.  By moving your head you get a better perception of its distance and location.

If I imagine a cricket ball hanging on a bit of string 22yds away and I had all the time in the world to get the best possible gauge of it's position, I would move my head a little, but when it's flying towards you and you have... 0.7 of a second is it? When I think about what'd give me the best chance of picking it up, I definitely feel it's a still head.

[AdClem]

...imagine a cricket ball...flying towards you and you have... 0.7 of a second is it? When I think about what'd give me the best chance of picking it up, I definitely feel it's a still head.

That's totally reasonable.  But, while I know it's not cricket, what about my tennis analogy?  I don't know how many fractions of a second a tennis player has to react, but the ball can travel at close to 140 mph.  Watch Sampras vs Krajicek in Us Open 2000: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36wpnYByAMA .  At no point does either player have a still head.

[Buzz]

I'm always pleased to read your opinions Buzz, and I know you're a strong advocate of keeping the head still.  I agree that this is complementary to the earlier thread on stance Praguetaz - which I didn't want to hijack, but which had got me thinking specifically about stillness.

Depth perception is helped by stereopsis, the way the brain uses the different position of two forward facing eyes (parallax) to estimate the range of a distant object - rangefinder cameras use it for focusing.  Animals also use motion parallax to achieve the same thing - think of a bird bobbing its head up and down.  Imagine a small red sphere, about 9 inches in circumference, approximately 7 feet off the ground, at a distance of say 22yds.  By moving your head you get a better perception of its distance and location.

Just playing Devil's advocate, but should we be moving our heads more?

good point - but would the depth perception be given by the fact that you have the bowler running in, the arm moving through the arc of the delivery action and then the release? - all those will help with perception (and why chucking is much harder to react to as a batsman). Plus as I said you shouldn't be rigid though the run up so there will be an opportunity for your eyes to gauge depth.
Finally, typically the ball is being released from a similar point (not many bowlers release the ball from behind the umpire as a variation these days...!)

next time you have a net try batting with your head moving up and down through the delivery.. good luck!!

[AdClem]

next time you have a net try batting with your head moving up and down through the delivery.. good luck!!

  Thursday.  I'll make sure I'm well padded.

I completely get what you're saying about the bowler running in.  That is going to provide the initial cues.

[brokenbat]

I think the stillness batsmen need to think about is, the same stillness that boxers have. Are they bobbing and weaving, and moving around? Absolutely. But is their head falling around while they move? No. Eyes remain level, whether you move back, forward, side-ways. The head stays in the same position. I think that is the stillness of head we need.

[edge]

That's totally reasonable.  But, while I know it's not cricket, what about my tennis analogy?  I don't know how many fractions of a second a tennis player has to react, but the ball can travel at close to 140 mph.  Watch Sampras vs Krajicek in Us Open 2000: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36wpnYByAMA .  At no point does either player have a still head.

The ball does travel faster off a serve in tennis, but the reaction time is a little longer. Also, I'd say that the pair of them fall into the category of a trigger-type movement, at the point the serve is hit they are very still and balanced! Same goes for top squash players, they move, pause to pick up the ball and then react to it.

Think Akewstick's point of concentrating on watching the ball properly forcing you to keep your head still is a good one - not something I've thought about previously, but I'd definitely say that when I'm watching the ball better, my head position is much better as a result.

[AdClem]

Apologies Buzz.  I didn't realise you'd covered this already.  Just found your thread from 2013.

For what it's worth, you're right about bobbing up and down.  Anyway, my problem is timing.  I'm rushing my shots, with the result that I'm often making contact in front of my pads, so my shots have no power.  I think I'll re-read the thread on bat tapping.  That might slow me down a bit.  Any other suggestions?

[Buzz]

nothing to apologise for - ideas and opinions change over time and 2 years is a long time...

If you are rushing your shots - think about how you grip the bat and relax your bottom hand, this will help you go slightly softer at the ball and that could tweak your timing challenges