Ton Up & Commentators standard spiel on Ashley Giles

[DaveGillespie]

My maiden hundred. Pathetic really, that I've been on this board so long and have only now managed 100 posts, but I like to think I only contribute when I have something of worth to say. Having got that out of the way, indulge me if you will, whilst I vent my spleen.

I have listened to the BBC online commentary for Surrey/Middlesex for 3 games so far this season - Surrey v Sussex, Middlesex v Nottinghamshire and the Middlesex v Warwickshire match which commenced today. The first two were commentated on by a fellow who, whilst a very run of the mill commentator and possessed of a slightly too "cosy County Championship" attitude, was more than acceptable considering that this commentary comes as nothing more than a pure bonus to me, staving off boredom whilst in work as it does; I was unaware that the BBC covered any sort of Cricket anymore. However, today's game is being covered by a different chap, one who trotted out the well worn and woefully inaccurate standard spiel about Ashley Giles' bowling. You know, the one that goes something along the lines of:

He's never really been a big spinner of the ball, Giles, has he?

Not only is this just plain wrong, but it misses the point completely and shoes a shocking lack of understanding regarding the basic principles of spin bowling. There are technical reasons why Giles doesn't apply quite as much energy to the ball as he might, specifically that his front leg is not braced at the point in his action where he pivots. This means he doesn't have a 100% firm base from which to pivot, and hence doesn't apply as much energy to the ball as he otherwise might. But, despite this flaw, he does manage to apply a thoroughly respectable number of revolutions to the ball. The point which has been missed but the commentator is that the chief aim of finger spin bowling, and indeed all spin bowling, is not to turn the ball, but rather to deceive the batsman in the flight. Sideways movement is the icing on the cake, but is largely useless without deceiving the batsman in flight.

For those unaware of the finer points of cricket ball physics, in order to cause a cricket ball (or indeed golf ball, tennis ball, football etc.) to dip more than usual in flight and, in the case of a cricket ball, pitch on a shorter length than it might at first appear, a significant amount of overspin (topspin) must be applied to the ball. Obviously, in order to get the requisite amount of overspin on the ball, a finger spinner like Mr. Giles must sacrifice some sidespin in order to apply the requisite topspin, therefore making it appear as if he may not be spinning the ball all that much. But, quite to the contrary, he is imparting a considerable amount of spin on the ball, but subtly this is largely overspin rather than sidespin.

To prove my point that overspin is more important than sidespin, accompany me down memory lane to the first two tests of England's series against Sri Lanka in December 2003 at Galle and Kandy respectively; predictably, both were raging turners. Let me present the records during these two tests of Messrs Ashley Giles, Gareth Batty, Kumar Dharmasena and Upul Chandanda.

   Name	   O	 R   W  Ave   RR  SR
   Giles	  132.3 349 16 21.75 2.63 49.69
   Batty	   83.2  259 6  43.17 3.11 83.33
   Dharmasena 90	228 4  57.00 2.53 135
   Chandana*  24	48  0  infin 2.00 infin
 * - Chandana only played in 1st test

If memory serves me correctly, Dharmasena and Chandana both turned it a mile but came away with scant reward from their efforts. Admittedly, they had to bowl in tandem with Muralitharan, but both were given plenty of overs in which to ply their trade, Dharmasena in particular. Both came away with respectable economy rates but little else; no wickets in Chandana's case and only 4 in two matches at a ludicrous strike rate for Dharmasena. Crucially, both were able to give the ball little air and dip, particularly Chandana who, despite being a wrist spinner, has a crucial flaw in his technique where he fails to "rock" back prior to delivery and hence finds it difficult to generate overspin. Both were outbowled by Gareth Batty; Gareth Batty, ladies and gentlemen. Take a moment to think about that. Surely the ultimate indignity for a subcontinental spinner bowling at home against England, to be comprehensively outbowled by the second English spinner. Meanwhile, the King of Spain slowly worked his way through the Sri Lankan lineup by bowling a disciplined line, showing great control of length and utilising the conditions.

All this relates to my main point. If I, a humble Cricket watcher, can figure all this out, why can't a single English commentator or pundit? The answer, ladies and gentlemen, is that the second class treatment meted out to spinners in the County Game extends to the opportunities offered to them when they retire. Our newspapers and commentary boxes are stuffed full of batsmen, with the occasional county level dobber and even fewer gems such as Gus Fraser. If these bastmen don't understand seam bowling, which they patently do not, what hope have they to pass valid comment on the subtle arts of spin?

Spleen vented.

[Rachael]

Perhaps you should vent your spleen more often if it comes out this coherently Dave :-)

I assume from the fact that he does better on pitches where the ball can "bite" that Giles actually gets enough top-spin on his deliveries to get them "kicking" significantly off the pitch on any track on which he can get the ball to "bite" (rather like a top-spun serve in tennis does on clay)

My question is this: does whatever purchase Giles can get from the track actually directly get him a lot of his wickets (does he actually deceive them off the pitch).. or is the benefit to him less direct (e.g. batsmen finding it harder to time the ball meaning he can risk slower deliveries and giving the ball more air and thereby increase his scope for deceiving batsmen in the flight)?

[DaveGillespie]

As far as I see it, Gilo operates basically on flight and bounce. I'm not so sure about "bite" in terms of bounce, but he gets more bounce than the average spinner anyway given his height. When you add in the fact that the heavily topspun delivery descends on a steeper trajectory than a normal delivery, it will get extra bounce in addition to that which he gets from his naturally high action. Therefore, not only is there potential for the batsman to be drawn forward, but also for them to be beaten by the extra bounce once they get there. Even when not beaten in the flight, batsmen are often trouble by Gilo's extra bounce, as evidenced by the fact that a high proportion of his caught dismissals come when the batsman is attempting to sweep or play some other cross batted shot and the extra bounce causes the top edge to be taken. Remember, bounce is no less effective than sideways movement when finding the edge of the bat - it just looks less impressive on TV.

So to answer your question Rachael, I believe that the purchase Giles gets off the track in terms of bounce does contribute directly to a lot of his wickets. The extra bounce (or lack thereof, on a track with dodgy bounce) means the ball arrives at a different part of the batsmans body than might normally be expected, thus effectively providing a variation in length as well.

[Teatime FatCat]

Dave, I'm a slow left armer, just like 'our Ashley' - I am also not a big spinner of he ball at all, because I have an imperfect action, and don't pivot as much as I could, thus bowling up and over a braced front leg. However, because I have big broad shoulders and strong arms I do get significant revolutions on the ball and get a lot of curve and dip on the flight of the ball. This is precisely what gets me wickets at second and third team level. Also, on the right pitch I have enough revolutions on the ball to get some turn when it grips.

I'm now in my thirties, and am reluctantly coming to the conclusion that I will neither play for England, nor turn the ball massively. I will be concentrating on flight and guile and will continue to 'gull' young batsmen out who expect spinners to turn the ball square, and play their shots accordingly!

It's refreshing to hear that there is more to spin bowling than just giing it a rip! Good on yer Davie Boy!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by DaveGillespie

When you add in the fact that the heavily topspun delivery descends on a steeper trajectory than a normal delivery, it will get extra bounce in addition to that which he gets from his naturally high action.

The greater bounce from the steeper trajectory is as significant in tennis as it is in cricket.. but my point about the "bite" (and variability of "bite") is that the revolutions on the ball should cause the ball to "spit" off the pitch (possibly not so much as to be noticed by the average pundit watching TV, and certainly not enough to be spotted on the ground... but enough to introduce a fairly random element to the pace and tracejtory after pitching).

In tennis this "spitting" off a good length is highly visible when the male clay court specialists (and strangly enough Tim Henman) are serving (especially right handers trying to drag players wide from the advantage court and vice versa): the dip is quite noticable (the ball dropping on the tramline a good 3'-4' short of the corner) but the "spit" then kicks the ball slightly further out but (most noticably) faster and flatter than a "normal" bounce.

As with cricket the trick is to either get so close to the pitch of the ball that the variability in trajectory is less pronounced.. or so far back (often 15' or more) that you've time to adjust appropriately.

Originally Posted by DaveGillespie

a high proportion of his caught dismissals come when the batsman is attempting to sweep or play some other cross batted shot and the extra bounce causes the top edge to be taken. [...] The extra bounce (or lack thereof, on a track with dodgy bounce) means the ball arrives at a different part of the batsmans body than might normally be expected.

I guess it's variability of bounce (and pace of the deck) rather the scale of the bounce that counts: consistent high bounce (as Giles gets on fast bouncy wickets) should really be quite playable for strokeplayers with a good eye (something commentators always seems to fear on such pitches). You may be right, of course, in suggesting that uneven bounce off a dodgy track is the only reason he seems more successful on "turning" wickets... but if the tennis anaolgy is right then I'd suggest the revolutions on the ball are actually caopable of generating uneven bounce even on a very "true" spinners-track.

[DaveGillespie]

Indeed. Giles extra bounce has proved very effective on tracks with even the slightest hint of dodgy bounce, and even those without. Given his accuracy, Giles is obviously very good at exploiting rough outside the right handers leg stump which creates uneven bounce, turn and "spit" all its own. See the glorious dismissals of Chris Cairns and BC Lara both done up like kippers by El Gilo.

It's probably pertinent to mention at this point that I was a critic of Giles when he was bowling rubbish during the home series against SA in 2003, but his performances since then suggest he is well on the way towards mastering his craft. And we've all seen the trouble those accursed Aussies have with left arm spinners. Vettori, Price.....

[Andy Mellon]

I understand your comparison, i've often watched the tennis players and how they get the tennis ball to bounce forward and flat and low with top spin and high and not so far forward with back spin. I've tried to replicate it a couple of times in the nets and it certainly is possible to vary bounce by using spin from what I've managed to do, so I'm pretty sure that decent spinners use it as a powerful weapon in their armoury.

Still, at club level, I find the best way to get wickets is to vary your pace. I can't imagine i'm the most subtle at pace variation, but I'd say a good number of my wickets (and certainly the ones i've enjoyed the most) have come from the slower ball. Hollioake in the 20:20 showed this to be a deadly weapon until his signals got spotted by Jeremy Snape.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Totally agree with you there Dave, I too was in the vanguard of gilo's harshest critics. But if he's getting a few wickets at this end of the season on green tops, he'll certainly be in with a shout with a few come the ashes.

And he can bat. Maiden test 50 this summer anyone ?

[Teatime FatCat]

Me too, but then I was critcising his accuracy and pants bowling, rather than his ability to 'rip' it - and at that stage the criticism was deserved. Thankfully he's got a lot better.

Hasn't he already got a test 50?

[DaveGillespie]

He has 3 test 50s. And several First Class hundreds. I reckon there's a test hundred in him at some stage.