Substack

Sunday, November 25, 2007

Is Micheal Hussey "spectacular"?

What is common to Micheal Hussey, the three Brads - Haddin, Hogg, and Hodge, Stuart Clark, Phil Jacques, and now Misbah ul Haq? For a start, they are all cricketers who have achieved spectacular success in their baptism to international cricket. They are also distinct in so far as they have all amassed substantial first class experience before their international success.

A close observation of all these aforementioned players reveals certain similarities. All of them do the simple things better than the others. None of them are spectacular in the way we associate this adjective with! Hussey and Co play straight and exhibit excellent shot selection, while Clark and Co bowl straight and let the batsmen make the mistakes. While the former makes full use of bad bowling, the latter takes wickets when batsmen make mistakes. And unfortunately there is plenty of both on offer nowadays by all teams!

Having watched these batsmen, I have observed that they rarely get out in front of the wicket, a statistic that underlines their shot selection capabilities. They price their wicket dearly and will never throw it away. The bowlers have to get them out, and this requires a good ball or good bowling spells, again very rare commodities! The fact that they get out mostly to good balls is highlighted by their general mode of dismissal - bowled, leg before, caught behind, or caught in slips. Similarly, Stuart Clark is a classic example of a bowler who bowls wicket to wicket, plays on the patience of the batsman and wears him out before snaring him. During the recent India-Australia one day series, Brad Hogg's bowling discipline was repeatedly manifested in the remarkable bunching of balls bowled by him.

Now these prized attributes - shot selection, batting and bowling straight, control over line and length, perseverance and patience - are all functions of experience. The more you play the game, at a reasonably appropriate level, the more you are likely to perfect these skills. Such batsmen are more likely to be successful in tests and bowlers more successful in the shorter versions.

With plenty of bad balls and batting mistakes on offer, and scarcity of good balls and bowling spells, the probability of the clear headed, technically competent test batsman and bowler succeeding increases substantially. I am not saying there is no need for talent, for without talent nobody can survive even in the weaker domestic leagues. Anybody who prospers in the grind of a domestic league, is more likely to imbibe these attributes and the mental toughness that can translate this experience to success at international level. But, with a reasonable amount of talent, and the right amount of experience and ability to inculcate the lessons of that experience, we have the ingredients for a successful test batsman and bowler. The power and safety offered by modern cricketing gear fortifies these ingredients.

Do we have a lesson here? Especially for the Indian selectors, with their current obsession with youth and new faces? What are the conclusions to be drawn from the success of these players? Is technique and some of the good, old fashioned attributes of batting and bowling making a comeback, after a period when raw talent and power, and hand-eye co-ordination appeared to be taking over? Or is it simply that we are passing through a phase when there are very few good bowlers, or a golden age for batsmen? Is Micheal Hussey and all that he exemplifies, the new definition of the "spectacular"?

No comments: