Development of junior batsmen

[gbatman]

Quality balls is a good point, and I know for some time there has been a rising concern about the increased use of Speedarm throwers in training. Link for those who aren't sure what I mean.

It might be good for an older coach who's not as mobile or may have dodgy shoulders to be able to throw some balls down to his young charge, but it's just not going to replicate the real thing of a bowler coming down who's balls can vary from brilliant to wayward and everything in between, and the batsmen needing to be prepared for all possibilities.

There's no artificial method of launching a cricket ball down a wicket that gets even close to facing a bowler. I reckon batsmen are probably facing significantly less quality bowling these days for sure. I'm not sure what the solution to it is. More net bowlers? Less gym more bowling? I don't know.

 

[Caesar]

How science is cracking the code behind Steve Smith's batting success

Part way through an innings, Steve Smith made the incredible decision to change the way he would bat. It was a decision that altered the course of his career.

www.abc.net.au

 

[corbies]

Watched my mate play on the weekend , was just local cricket b grade .

Saw 3 what I would call kids bat . All of them basically mimiked Steve Smith , trying to straight work balls to leg etc
Collectively they lasted about 10 overs against modest at best bowling .

People bemoaning our batting standards from the top down , buckle up its going to get way worse before it gets better for a lot of reasons already posted and people dont need to read me bang on about it as well.

Smiths a freak and great for the Australian side but I think he will actually be detrimental to already poor batting standards through the levels, especially in Juniors .

Kids at local B grade level have always played this way. They're never strong enough to hit straight or drive through the offside so of course they try and hit everything through the leg side.

 

[Gethelred]

The only reason we are churning thru bats is simply because in the words of Bono “we still haven’t found what we’re looking for” personally I would pick and stick with Head because I think he’s potentially the next Test Captain

I've not once felt comfortable with Head batting in test cricket; his entire innings, it feels as though he is fighting himself to stay in, to graft, holding back and forcing himself to play each ball on the merits or to leave it. His game is strokemaking, and he has yet to find the mindset/discipline required, IMO.

Looks like a player whose pull is instinctive trying to avoid playing the shot, with every shot he possesses. There's only so long you can fight your instincts.

 

[Gethelred]

Kids at local B grade level have always played this way. They're never strong enough to hit straight or drive through the offside so of course they try and hit everything through the leg side.

It's part of why a kid that still plays straight at 19-20 is going to be a good player, provided they don't overemphasise coming forward to the detriment of all else.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I've not once felt comfortable with Head batting in test cricket; his entire innings, it feels as though he is fighting himself to stay in, to graft, holding back and forcing himself to play each ball on the merits or to leave it. His game is strokemaking, and he has yet to find the mindset/discipline required, IMO.

Looks like a player whose pull is instinctive trying to avoid playing the shot, with every shot he possesses. There's only so long you can fight your instincts.

Perfect description

He's a dasher who is trying to find a more robust way of succeeding at test level. Hasn't found a natural tempo yet.

Has realised though that he can't just play carefree and pull it off. There aren't many Gilchrists or Sehwags.

 

[Aussie_boy]

Head is one of those batsmen that is just never ‘in’. Guess that explains his poor conversion rate. Marnus has an average conversion rate but at least you feel like he’s in control out there... until he gets out.

 

[The Speaker]

Head is one of those batsmen that is just never ‘in’. Guess that explains his poor conversion rate. Marnus has an average conversion rate but at least you feel like he’s in control out there... until he gets out.

And he's got a sturdy way of showing that he's in and in control, unlike (for example) the Marshes. They also take their time to get in, but when they get there, they look at ease with whatever's thrown at them, rather than getting on top of it, so to speak. It's like a worst of both worlds.

 

[Partridge]

For some reason when you are coached, you are told to take notice of where the fielders are. I attended a coaching class with the great Barry Richards, and he said not to worry too much about where the fielders are, take more notice of where the gaps are. Made sense to me

That's amazing, when you stop and think about it, it's so much more logical.

 

[Marcel Proust]

They're The Same Picture

 

[ScrappyCoCo]

That's amazing, when you stop and think about it, it's so much more logical.

A lot more positive way of thinking too.

 

[western royboy]

There's no artificial method of launching a cricket ball down a wicket that gets even close to facing a bowler. I reckon batsmen are probably facing significantly less quality bowling these days for sure. I'm not sure what the solution to it is. More net bowlers? Less gym more bowling? I don't know.

Sidearm is a lot closer than a bowling machine - with current restrictions on bowling loads and the general dearth if players both are essential - BM is for technique refinement - no more no less without the cues from the arm if you are trying to get anything more out of it you’re wasting your time. After a lifetime of throw downs my right shoulder is thoroughly rooted

 

[thejockey]

Always think with bowling machines you need someone who is good feeding the balls in .
Someone who will give subtle changes of length and line , otherwise its way too predictable.

So many guys go in smash 80 half volleys and get found out against proper bowling with poor balance and footwork.

 

[western royboy]

Always think with bowling machines you need someone who is good feeding the balls in .
Someone who will give subtle changes of length and line , otherwise its way too predictable.

So many guys go in smash 80 half volleys and get found out against proper bowling with poor balance and footwork.

I disagree with that use - you’ve got no cues to work off - it’s potentially dangerous - there’s generally enough variation to make it a challenge but you’re trying to refine technique and make it a muscle memory think

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

With bowling machines it depends what you are comparing it to

Bowling machine or facing bowlers? Bowlers better

Bowling machine or facing a good thrower? Thrower better

Bowling machine or facing a weak thrower? Bowling machine better

Bowling machine or not doing any batting? Bowling machine better

Bowling machines are something that are there if you need but should never be instead of facing bowlers or quality throws. I agree with thejockey - if you are using a machine, add some difficulty/decision making to it. Either by subtly adjusting the machine as balls are fed, setting fields etc.

 

[thejockey]

I disagree with that use - you’ve got no cues to work off - it’s potentially dangerous - there’s generally enough variation to make it a challenge but you’re trying to refine technique and make it a muscle memory think

Worked for me and improved my game plus other teammates I played with. Its not for for everyone .
Better then planting your front foot and smashing half volleys , which a lot of people do .

 

[MisterMarcus]

Watching my son play junior cricket reminded me of this thread and all the comments about how poorly kids are being trained now.

I was no great strokemaker as a junior, but I did have a good defensive technique and a calm temperament which allowed me to at least hang around and form partnerships to support the 'better' batsmen. I've tried to bring up my son the same way and spent ages over the years teaching him defense, leaving, patience, etc.

At Under 10s and even Under 12s, it's mostly hit-and-giggle T20 games which favour brute-force slogging over technique, and it was a real uphill battle trying to reinforce proper technique to him when all his mates were slogging quick 15s and 20s. Why learn how to play a punch down the ground or a cover drive when you can just close your eyes and tee off over fine leg?

Now he's playing Under 14s which is more serious stuff, where they're playing 2 day 40-over-a-side games and can bat as long as they want. The number of kids in his team who still have horrible techniques and "go big or go home" T20 attitudes is shocking. My son is still very much finding his feet at Under 14s, but he's already seen as one of the 'better' batsmen, simply because he can actually stick around for more than 10-15 balls and won't brainlessly throw his wicket away with a dumbarse shot.

The coach tries his best to reinforce "You've got 40 overs boys, play yourselves in, leave the sucker balls, play sensibly and straight and the runs will come". But it's clear that most of them have spent too much time learning Quick Runs Over Technique at lower age levels, that it's almost too late for them to change.

 

[Yoda_]

Watching my son play junior cricket reminded me of this thread and all the comments about how poorly kids are being trained now.

I was no great strokemaker as a junior, but I did have a good defensive technique and a calm temperament which allowed me to at least hang around and form partnerships to support the 'better' batsmen. I've tried to bring up my son the same way and spent ages over the years teaching him defense, leaving, patience, etc.

At Under 10s and even Under 12s, it's mostly hit-and-giggle T20 games which favour brute-force slogging over technique, and it was a real uphill battle trying to reinforce proper technique to him when all his mates were slogging quick 15s and 20s. Why learn how to play a punch down the ground or a cover drive when you can just close your eyes and tee off over fine leg?

Now he's playing Under 14s which is more serious stuff, where they're playing 2 day 40-over-a-side games and can bat as long as they want. The number of kids in his team who still have horrible techniques and "go big or go home" T20 attitudes is shocking. My son is still very much finding his feet at Under 14s, but he's already seen as one of the 'better' batsmen, simply because he can actually stick around for more than 10-15 balls and won't brainlessly throw his wicket away with a dumbarse shot.

The coach tries his best to reinforce "You've got 40 overs boys, play yourselves in, leave the sucker balls, play sensibly and straight and the runs will come". But it's clear that most of them have spent too much time learning Quick Runs Over Technique at lower age levels, that it's almost too late for them to change.

I think this comes down to coaches and availability of decent coaches.

I had a top level coach come to my cricket club years ago, he was the one who took Meg Lanning from a prodigy to one of the worlds best. My (very) amateur club had not experienced the dedication it took to go from talent to production.

These kids as you mentioned are just told by mum and dads (I presume) to slog and 'stand out' for the praise rather than the actual technique that serves a much better long term purpose.

 

[big_e]

For 99% of kids, playing cricket is simply to have fun. Don't over-think it.

 

[western royboy]

Watching my son play junior cricket reminded me of this thread and all the comments about how poorly kids are being trained now.

I was no great strokemaker as a junior, but I did have a good defensive technique and a calm temperament which allowed me to at least hang around and form partnerships to support the 'better' batsmen. I've tried to bring up my son the same way and spent ages over the years teaching him defense, leaving, patience, etc.

At Under 10s and even Under 12s, it's mostly hit-and-giggle T20 games which favour brute-force slogging over technique, and it was a real uphill battle trying to reinforce proper technique to him when all his mates were slogging quick 15s and 20s. Why learn how to play a punch down the ground or a cover drive when you can just close your eyes and tee off over fine leg?

Now he's playing Under 14s which is more serious stuff, where they're playing 2 day 40-over-a-side games and can bat as long as they want. The number of kids in his team who still have horrible techniques and "go big or go home" T20 attitudes is shocking. My son is still very much finding his feet at Under 14s, but he's already seen as one of the 'better' batsmen, simply because he can actually stick around for more than 10-15 balls and won't brainlessly throw his wicket away with a dumbarse shot.

The coach tries his best to reinforce "You've got 40 overs boys, play yourselves in, leave the sucker balls, play sensibly and straight and the runs will come". But it's clear that most of them have spent too much time learning Quick Runs Over Technique at lower age levels, that it's almost too late for them to change.

One of my favourite coaching learnings came from Arsene Wenger who when asked what he looked for when scouting for youngsters for the Arsenal academy was “I’m looking for technique, I can coach everything else, but if they haven’t got technique by the time they’re 15 or 16…then they’ll never have it”

For 99% of kids, playing cricket is simply to have fun. Don't over-think it.

It’s a fine line, I would say you enjoy it more if you can play at least semi properly.

Most kids eventually leave the game before ever playing senior cricket because they don’t enjoy it and it’s largely down to not being able to play.