Technique versus Handling Pressure

[whats_at_stake]

I found this comment from MS Dhoni really interesting.

"People talk about technique but the better players are the ones who respond to the pressure."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/spectacular-collapse-denies-england-its-first-major-oneday-tournament-win-20130624-2ora7.html#ixzz2X87FgUsQ

What are people's thoughts on this? Would you rate someone like say a MS Dhoni who had a more uglier technique but perfomsin crunch situations over someone like a AB De Villiers who has crumbled under pressure however has a lovely technique (note I am referring to ODI cricket in this specific example).

Thoughts?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Results are what counts.
Technique can help get those results. Some players can get better results with poor technique. The players who get criticised over their tehnique are usually those who are failing to produce, and have technical flaws.
He's right though, regardless of format you would always take the guy who performs over the guy who looks good and fails - even if they score a polished nine.

 

[Cooldude]

Probably 30% technique and 70% mental

Gonna bring out an ol' whipping boy, but I'm sure Phil Hughes is an extremely determined character everytime he goes out to bat, but if you have technical deficiencies then no matter how willing you are you're gonna be vulnerable

Steve Waugh was the epitomy of someone performing through sheer will power even though he doesn't hook or pull

 

[western royboy]

Under pressure - you will do whatever comes naturally or has been ingrained in you to become an instinctive reaction. Cricket, hell all professional sport is all about putting yourself under that pressure time an time again so that when it really does matter your reaction is the right one.

Most of the great players all have technique, but the all have the right mental application. And at the elite level not much of it comes naturally.

 

[Zach Package]

more than 90% mental i reckon, at any level.

repetition and practice is what allows you to focus under pressure, because proper technique, bowling or batting will just be second nature.

 

[Mateyman]

Results>style
At ODI level, obviously you'd take Dhoni every time - technique also isn't as important in ODIs (partly due to the nature of ODI pitches as well). But in tests (outside India), Dhoni hasn't really performed that well.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Skill = Technique + Pressure

 

[The Passenger]

It's about results.

What having a good technique does is give you something to fall back on when you are under pressure or not in great form. You often see blokes with poor technique have really long extended periods with low scores.

Not hard and fast rules, and there are plenty of guys with great techniques that have struggled for long periods.

But ultimately it's about mental application. 90%+ in the brain. All the guys that have got to test cricket have plundered runs in junior cricket, grade cricket (or it's equivalent dependant where they from), and provincial cricket, and often against good bowlers. But at that top level it's a different beast because the standard of bowlers goes up a notch again, but moreso the pressure is unrelenting. They are (generally) no poor bowlers for whom you can pick off and rack up easy runs against.

 

[djrossie16]

More people should bat like Chanderpaul and Katich

 

[JimDocker]

At the top level, you cannot get by for long with a suspect technique.

Falling back on doing the simple things well is what players do under pressure. A solid basic technique is the start.

Players at the top level need to perform under pressure. They normally do it better with a solid technique.

That is what makes me laugh sometimes when people call for youth to come in. I heard it constantly when WA were struggling a couple of years back.
Kim Hughes said he had been watching the next lot of players and said none of them had the technique to go up a level as they all tried to play off the front foot too much which would have them in major strife at first class level. Especially at the WACA.

 

[courtjester]

I have both. Brilliant I am.