Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike  If batsmen played the way you suggested (not play square of the wicket shots) you have unwittingly endorsed the selection of fast-bowlers to dry up the runs. |
You're reading what you wanted to read rather than what I wrote...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachael all a batsman need do to avoid getting "beaten for pace" on the cut or pull is forget playing square of the wicket to the new ball |
That said... before fast draining, hard wearing loams under covered wickets undermined the very basis of the game (the pitch) the batsmen did NOT (by and large: there were exceptions) see scoring square of the wicket as a major part of Test cricket... which was not a problem as with the odds favouring the bowlers far more than they do today, seamers generally fancied their chances of getting wickets. Rather than wanting to dry up runs (leading to stalemate) the seamers wanted to get the batsmen playing at the ball so that they could beat the bat and effect a dismissal: they tended to pitch the ball up far. far more than most bowlers do today... and to positively invite the drive.
The result was attractive (often free-scoring) cricket based on surviving good balls and punishing bad ones... and all with a straight bat.... but that doesn't mean no-one scored square of the wicket. What it did mean was that such shots were mostly played against the older, softer ball.... most commonly when the attack was tired after a wearing day on a pitch with limited bounce and carry.
Sadly, such attacking bowling (as with attacking glovework) appears to have died forever with the covering of the wickets... and now, when pitches DO demand such bowling.... only very old-fashioned bowlers like Vaas seem to thrive... and only very old-fashioned batsmen like Jayawardene seem able to counter them.