Bringing fine leg up

[NSWCROW]

????????

Pretty much a sure-fire way of having a 4 hit on you.

BAN SHORT FINE LEGS !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Cooldude]

I agree, short fine leg's been shit for years.

Even more suicidal against Dilshan, who has so many ways to score off fine leg

 

[mediumsizered]

It is a poor tactic which is guaranteed to cost you runs.

Clarke really has trouble setting a field in ODIs. Such a contrast to his Test captaincy, which so far has been quite sound.

 

[Outshined]

Granted having a short fine leg does buy you another outfielder at deep cover/midwicket, but the amount of runs from inside edges/flicks off the pads is ridiculous, especially given the limited number of catches that fly through there. It's a nothing position, with some small merit.

More to the point, it's ok to have a short fine leg if your bowlers can keep the fecking ball outside/on off stump!

 

[Tassieboy]

Not as bad as having no second slip in the 3rd over when it's swinging quite a bit!

 

[MisterMarcus]

If our bowlers could pitch it outside off then short fine leg would be no problem.

 

[Mancey]

If our bowlers could pitch it outside off then short fine leg would be no problem.

Yeah i'm sorry guys.....this^^

Unless its runs from french cuts or ramp shots (which you just have to suck up tbh), good bowling should negate the need for a deep fine leg.

Deep fine leg is a fielding position for poor bowling. During the fielding restrictions having one of your precious outside the circle sweepers down there is a criminal waste.

 

[courtjester]

Nah, disagree. If you're trying to bowl yorkers or attack the stumps, you need a fine leg.

 

[Mancey]

A good yorker at the base of off stump is pretty much impossible to hit fine, more likely to be dug out to 3rd man.

If fine leg is up in the fielding restrictions you're better off bowling it just outside off and choking them in the covers, or try to get them whipping through mid wicket imo.

In the mandatory PP when you're only allowed 2(?) outside the circle, a deep fine leg is a massive luxury.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

The tactic is fine if you have bowlers who can bowl to a plan.

I'm not convinced ours have this ability atm in the one day team.

 

[Cooldude]

Batsmen are getting really good at working balls outside off to fine leg nowadays though, it's an area they target if fine leg's up

 

[MisterMarcus]

Batsmen are getting really good at working balls outside off to fine leg nowadays though, it's an area they target if fine leg's up

So let them try to target it.

They're pretty low percentage shots, working full deliveries on middle and off behind square on the leg side.

 

[Cooldude]

They pull it off more often than not, tbh. They just need to get it somewhere there for it to be four, you'd have to be dead unlucky to be caught by the short fine

 

[MisterMarcus]

They pull it off more often than not, tbh. They just need to get it somewhere there for it to be four, you'd have to be dead unlucky to be caught by the short fine

Pretty big risk of chopping on or getting out LBW if you're constantly trying to whip balls on middle/off past fine leg......

 

[Cooldude]

You can't get lbw unless you bowl at the stumps, and if you bowl at the stumps with fine leg up it's suicide. Having fine leg up means having even less lbws tbh and if you try, you're likely to **** up more

Not sure about chopping it on, you really don't see it that often.

 

[Mancey]

So short fine leg critics...you have one fielder at deep fine, where's the other fielder outside the circle during the first 10 overs?

I get the feeling I could pick easier spots to hit a boundary than whipping yorkers on off stump down to fine leg for 4...no matter what field you suggest

 

[Cooldude]

So short fine leg critics...you have one fielder at deep fine, where's the other fielder outside the circle during the first 10 overs?

I get the feeling I could pick easier spots to hit a boundary than whipping yorkers on off stump down to fine leg for 4...no matter what field you suggest

Only if you're good enough to keep the yorker length going and actually keep it outside off, most bowlers stray in either line or length. and if you get it wrong, then you make it easy for them to work it down fine leg

If you keep bowling yorkers outside off stump it'd make it difficult for them to hit a boundary anywhere in front of square, too. It's a mute point. The point is setting a field that restricts runs the most taking into account margin for error for the bowlers, having fine leg up leaves very very little margin for error

 

[Mancey]

Would suggest bowlers are far more likely to give width outside off allowing boundaries to deep cover and point, than allowing boundaries to deep fine.

Can't bowl yorkers every ball

 

[Cooldude]

TBH it makes it so predictable where you're gonna bowl when you have fine leg up, clearly it'd gonna be wide outside off, any decent batsmen would be all over it

With fine leg back and trying to defend other boundaries, at least you give the bowlers the option to attack the stumps full length which keeps the batsmen guessing