Use of helmets hampers development of proper technique

Batsmen of today are unable to play quality seam and spin. It's the delivery that moves late that asks questions of them. They have no answers. Most seaming tracks or pitches with vicious turn have bounce and this makes the good length move closer to the batsmen. This shift in good length and late movement foxes most players of today. Why?

The game has changed in many ways. Batsmen now use heavier bats, their back lifts have become more exaggerated than before. Helmets have altered technique. Wickets once known for their spite and character have been destroyed to make way for higher-scoring games.

Under such staid circumstances where the shift in the game has been from back-foot to front-foot and from side-on to square-on, when today's batsmen are thrown onto a seaming track they start gasping for air.

Stand-out performers

Within this rot V.V.S. Laxman and Rahul Dravid stand out when it comes to contemporary batsmen. This is because till he was seventeen Dravid did not use a helmet and neither did Laxman till he was fifteen. Their instincts were moulded into proper technique without the comfort of protection. This makes them the last of our greats with a solid technical foundation built on superb back-foot play, the perfect balance and the ability to play late and play each delivery without committing themselves.

That's what made them so good against the quicks, seamers and spinners alike on challenging wickets. Both used light bats and both conquered the world of challenging pitches at will. Whilst it's essential to know how to play off the back foot on seaming tracks, for one to be able to play late and off the movement, back-lift and the weight of the bat matter as much. A higher back-lift and a heavier bat make it difficult to make the last-minute adjustments required to play good seam.

Of late, maybe because of the changing need to get quicker runs, batsmen have become more aggressive and an increasing number have started to use heavier bats with higher back-lifts. Though this high back-lift helps deliver greater impetus, it leads to a looser game.

Batsmen normally get around 1/3 of a second against the quicks to decide a shot and because of the extra distance the bat has to travel to meet a normal good length delivery, batsmen with bigger back-lifts are forced to commit that fraction of a second earlier than usual to make the desired contact. Because the momentum through the downswing of the bat is far greater than that of a normal batsman, once committed it becomes difficult to change the shot.

Further as the good length moves closer and the deviation off the wicket also moves closer, the batsman has lesser time to make last minute adjustments. On good batting tracks the big back-lift is an asset but on seaming tracks it becomes a grave liability.

Every child is born with an inherent instinct which is used in his development as a cricketer. Take this basic test: walk up to a man and just as you get near him bend down fast and drop your hand near his knees. Don't touch him. Stay a foot away.

The man will buckle and try and instinctively protect his groin by shoving his hands down. Try the same with a woman and you will find that she will barely react. Why?

It's because the man's instinct, evolved since childbirth, takes over. This is not the case with women. The player with the helmet is like the lady who will not flinch and the player without the protection is the man who will always move to defend himself.

This is exactly the case with cricket. This basic instinct of the child is used by the coaches and moulded into proper technique. And that's why it's absolutely necessary, keeping in mind that batsmen of today have a problem with the seaming and spinning delivery that we try to find out if we are making a mistake at the time of moulding instinct into technique with our youngsters.

Dravid, Laxman, Bradman, Richards and Gavaskar to name a few: all learnt their game and moulded their instinct into technique without a helmet, and that's why they became complete players on all kinds of wickets whilst the batsmen of today moulded their instinct into technique wearing a helmet and lost the ability to play like the stalwarts of old.

Owing to the extra protection have these batsmen become lazy and now have to commit themselves on the front foot? Have they forgotten how to play off the back-foot as a result? These are questions which remain unanswered.

Back-foot play was essential in the days before helmets. There was not a single batsman in the world that played the quicks on fast wickets off the front-foot. It was essential both to protect yourself from bodily harm and to stay on the wickets long enough to get runs. This of course changed with the introduction of helmets.

The fast bowlers thereafter lost their sting and the batsmen lost the knack of playing back. Playing off the back-foot is easier said than done. It's a discipline that needs to be inculcated from the very beginning. Many batsmen believe that just going back will ensure that the rest of the body will automatically fall into place but that's far from the truth.

The position of the toe when the back foot moves across is crucial. The toe facing point locks you into place for playing in the arc from the bowler to point. It ensures you stay side on and play straight. If you need to play to backward of point, or past gully, then it's better to open the toe just a mite further. If you want to play on the on-side then face the toe towards cover, it will force your leading shoulder to mid on and open your chest out.

Compounding errors

A trivial mistake leads to compounding errors. Many try and play to cover with the toe of their back foot facing cover. No sooner that this happens than you become open-chested, the natural downswing of the bat is now from third-man to mid-on. To play to mid-off instead of playing straight which you would have done had you been side-on now you find yourself playing inside out. This inside-out angle increases when you play to covers. You have compensated one error with another.

Once your instinct gets used to such error-riddled techniques, even the slightest fault in judgment gets you out. Consistency in scores becomes unattainable. In order to get power of the shot, the complete weight of the body needs to be transferred onto the back foot. Many batsmen, being front-footed are hesitant to commit to their weakness and get caught in no-man's land when they try and play back.

Please don't confuse the shuffle with back-foot play. The shuffle stops you from locking yourself into a front-and -across position. As explained earlier that's doable on slow wickets but disastrous against both pace and seam on quicker tracks.

The shuffle forces you into position and as you are well balanced at the time of delivery, it gives you the extra split second required to position yourself post delivery. The seaming ball needs to be seen onto the bat and that's the reason back-foot play is so essential to thwart the late movement.

Unless the batsman is used to playing back, he tends to hang the bat out. That's always suicidal. Batsmen with expansive back lifts have this tendency of hanging their bats outside the off stump on seaming tracks. You have to play close to your body at all times, Most back-footed players have shorter back-lifts over which they have complete control at all times and are masters at working the ball around their hips.

My gut feeling is that after a proper comparison between cricketers of the two different eras, namely pre-helmet and post- helmet learning years, we will find that proper technique can only be inculcated without the use of helmets by youngsters. The cricket world has to shift to the back foot and unless that happens, seaming tracks will continue troubling batsmen.