Inswing/Outswing bowlers ?
Niranjan Vasan
Firstly, is there is a distinction like an inswing bowler or an outswing
bowler ? I mean, can you categorize every fast bowler as an inswing
bowler or an outswing bowler ? Some guys do manage to swing it both ways
pretty easily. If there are seperate categories, then I guess the
following would hold good :
Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
Outswing bowlers : Kapil Dev, Dominic Cork, Fanie de Villiers, ...
Any corrections, additions ??
Niranjan.
Rosebud
Generally, with lower grade bowlers, the ones with a marked chest on action
tend to be inswing and the ones with a marked side on action tend to be out
swing. This is because their natural arm arc is fairly vertical with a
very high arm for inswing and slightly lower arm action with a
corresponding arc for outswing.
In addition, the position of the seam and the condition of the ball also
play a part.
More experienced bowlers often tend to get used to bowling with a neutral
action, with the seam vertical. In this way, if the brand new ball is
going to swing dramatically, they will keep control of it in the first few
balls they bowl.
These remarks apply to RH (right handed) bowlers. The outswing arm action
is achieved by bringing the bowling arm across to the left thigh and
rotating the seam of the ball towards first slip for the outswinger. Or
they may adjust the seam towards the batsman's bum and complete their
delivery with the arm anywhere from inside their right thigh or even
outside the right thigh for inswing. The ideal ball for the RH bowler
bowling to a RH batsman is the outswing which swings late. Sir Richard
Hadlee is a great advocate of dragging the fingers down the back of the
ball to create backspin.
You will see the bowlers polish one side of the ball. For normal swing (we
will not cover 'Reverse Swing' here) the rough side is facing in the
direction in which the ball is to swing. This rough surface, aided by the
seam which is inclined to this side, causes a swirling vortex of air which
sucks the ball in the intended direction. A mistake I often see is for
bowlers to rotate the seam too far which defeats the purpose; a slight
incline in the direction the ball is to swing towards is sufficient. The
fingers should drag down at point of delivery so that the ball rotates with
the seam as a vertical equator and not wobbling. Watch the slow motion
replays of some of the great internationals and observe the control they
get over the spin they impart with the seam appearing to be a light
coloured line around the ball.
True express pace bowlers tend not to swing the ball much at all because
the pace of the ball is a greater force than the suction caused by the
swing physics. However when such express pace bowlers or quicker bowlers
do get swing, this is generally late because the swing does not happen
until the ball is slowed sufficiently by the air.
Also, there is no point in trying to swing the ball while bowling short.
The ideal swing bowler bowls the ball to a good length or even slightly
full of a good length. This entices the batsman onto the front foot and
into driving which allows the ball to move enough to catch an edge. Keep
in mind, the objective is to move the ball no more than just about half the
width of the bat.
To my mind, a good RH bowler even at Sydney First Grade level should be
able to bowl both the outswinger as a stock ball and vary it with the
inswinger for shock value. The surprise inswinger is even more devastating
if bowled from slightly wider in the crease and/or as either an inswinging
Yorker or as a bouncer which follows the batsman. W.Younis has the best
example of the former and C.Walsh is the master of the latter.
To the best of my knowledge, Imran Khan seemed to be the bowler who first
perfected the Reverse Swing. I watched him do some amazing things with the
old ball about a decade ago, and he passed on the skill to some of the NSW
bowlers of the time like Michael Whitney and also to the modern Pakistani
bowlers. I understand the principles of Reverse Swing, but have never
practiced it or coached it to anyone so I will avoid commenting on it here.
I welcome any criticisms or comments on the above. I hope I got it right
and am not confusing anyone.
@--}---
Niranjan Vasan <nva...@iastate.edu> wrote in article
<33AA08...@iastate.edu>...
Paul Husbands
In message <01bc7d4d$96c86300$61703dcb@drose>
"Rosebud" <dr...@removethisnovation.com.au> writes:
Hi Rosebud
I agree with everything that you have said with one exception...
I don't know what standard Syndey First Grade is but I would expect
any of our under 16's to be able to swing the ball both ways.
It's not exactley rocket science is it!
Paul
Rob Malpass
In article <33AA08...@iastate.edu>
nva...@iastate.edu "Niranjan Vasan" writes:
>Firstly, is there is a distinction like an inswing bowler or an outswing
>bowler ? I mean, can you categorize every fast bowler as an inswing
>bowler or an outswing bowler ? Some guys do manage to swing it both ways
>pretty easily. If there are seperate categories, then I guess the
>following would hold good :
This is a bit of a minefield. I think you'd be better off confining any
labelling to pace or spin. Very few bowlers (the best ones) genuinely
swing it both ways. The only bowler (genuinely) that I can remember swinging
it both ways recently was Phil Newport of Worcestershire. Probably the most
*famous* bowler who swung it both ways was Bob Massie (see Lord's test 1972).
>
>Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
No doubt I'm going to get picked up on this but here goes... To me Imran
was more a seam bowler than a swing bowler. Having said that, he was
king of the reverse swing in the early 1980s. Srinath when I saw him last
year didn't swing it one iota, but a fine seam bowler.
Not seen Walsh for a while, but he's more of a seam than a swing bowler.
>
>Outswing bowlers : Kapil Dev, Dominic Cork, Fanie de Villiers, ...
I think you've missed the best and most genuine outswing bowler in recent
years, Terry Alderman from Australia. All those three are correctly genuine
outswing bowlers.
On the subject of swing bowling, has anyone seen a bowler capable of bowling
an outswinger with the old ball, i.e. reverse outswing?
Mohsin Ansari
Rob Malpass (R...@getiton.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
: No doubt I'm going to get picked up on this but here goes... To me Imran
: was more a seam bowler than a swing bowler.
Imran's most famous delivery is his in-dipper, which was differentiated from inswing in
that it came in more quickly, more sharply, and very late.
Having said that, he was
: king of the reverse swing in the early 1980s. Srinath when I saw him last
: year didn't swing it one iota, but a fine seam bowler.
when I last saw him Srinath had a wild inswinger with the new ball. With the old ball, he's
very ordinary
: On the subject of swing bowling, has anyone seen a bowler capable of bowling
: an outswinger with the old ball, i.e. reverse outswing?
I'm not sure, but maybe Wasim Akram. Actually, I think Wasim has the ability to bowl both
inswing and outswing.
Donald Rose
Sorry Rob, I cannot agree. As an Umpire, I have often seen mediocre
bowlers swing the new ball both ways quite wildly.
Secondly, most bowlers are either natural outswing or inswing bowlers to
right hand batsmen.
Thirdly, Malcolm Marshal had an very chest on action which should be a
natural inswing action yet he bowled a very effective outswinger.
--
@--}---
Rob Malpass <R...@getiton.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<866822...@getiton.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <33AA08...@iastate.edu>
> nva...@iastate.edu "Niranjan Vasan" writes:
>
> >Firstly, is there is a distinction like an inswing bowler or an outswing
> >bowler ? I mean, can you categorize every fast bowler as an inswing
> >bowler or an outswing bowler ? Some guys do manage to swing it both ways
> >pretty easily. If there are seperate categories, then I guess the
> >following would hold good :
>
> This is a bit of a minefield. I think you'd be better off confining any
> labelling to pace or spin. Very few bowlers (the best ones) genuinely
> swing it both ways. The only bowler (genuinely) that I can remember
swinging
> it both ways recently was Phil Newport of Worcestershire. Probably the
most
> *famous* bowler who swung it both ways was Bob Massie (see Lord's test
1972).
>
> >
> >Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
>
> No doubt I'm going to get picked up on this but here goes... To me
Imran
> was more a seam bowler than a swing bowler. Having said that, he was
> king of the reverse swing in the early 1980s. Srinath when I saw him
last
> year didn't swing it one iota, but a fine seam bowler.
> Not seen Walsh for a while, but he's more of a seam than a swing bowler.
>
> >
> >Outswing bowlers : Kapil Dev, Dominic Cork, Fanie de Villiers, ...
>
> I think you've missed the best and most genuine outswing bowler in recent
> years, Terry Alderman from Australia. All those three are correctly
genuine
> outswing bowlers.
>
Donald Rose
I completely agree with you and disagree with Rob Malpass. I see many
bowlers who bowl outswing with the occasional inswing. What is more rare
is the very late swing which the very best internationals can generate.
'Banana benders' are generally not a great challenge for even average
batsmen to deal with. In fact, in my view, most bowlers swing the new ball
especially when the atmosphere is a bit heavy. It is the bowler who can
tame the swing and make it do his bidding that gets noticed by
representative selectors.
I know that my son tends to worry about swing spraying his opening balls
about so he holds the seam bolt upright and tries to just get his line
right, hit the seam and look for the mystery bounce off the seam for the
first over. He then will experiment with his natural outswing (he's a
slinger and most slingers bowl outswing). If that's working, he does know
how to bowl inswing which he tends to reserve for his yorker or for left
handers because inswing is not his stock ball.
Since you asked, Sydney First Grade can be a very high standard of cricket.
This is where guys like the Waughs, Taylor, McGrath, Bevan, Slater and Co.
play when they are not playing for N.S.W. or Australia. Having said that,
their clubs would be thrilled to see them for more than an occasional match
because of their representative commitments. A great many of the First
Grade players have played overseas and there are a good sprinkling of ex
Sheffield Shield and even ODI and Test players going around First Grade. I
heard one player who played in England describe the top First Grade teams
as comparable to English minor county teams. I don't know if that's a fair
comparison, but for it even to be made indicates the standard.
@--}---
Paul Husbands <paul.h...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<199706202...@zetnet.co.uk>...
Rob Malpass
In article <01bc7e63$4820c320$54703dcb@drose>
dr...@removethisnovation.com.au "Donald Rose" writes:
>Sorry Rob, I cannot agree. As an Umpire, I have often seen mediocre
>bowlers swing the new ball both ways quite wildly.
>
I can't think of anyone in Test Cricket who swings the new ball both ways.
Jonathan Aldous
R...@getiton.demon.co.uk (Rob Malpass) writes:
>In article <33AA08...@iastate.edu>
> nva...@iastate.edu "Niranjan Vasan" writes:
Probably the most
>*famous* bowler who swung it both ways was Bob Massie (see Lord's test 1972).
>>Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
>>Outswing bowlers : Kapil Dev, Dominic Cork, Fanie de Villiers, ...
>On the subject of swing bowling, has anyone seen a bowler capable of bowling
>an outswinger with the old ball, i.e. reverse outswing?
Australia has two good outswing bowlers at the moment in Andy Bichel
and Damien Fleming. Neither are in England at the moment!!
Also Waqar Younis can bowl reverse outswingers, to left handers!
--
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Jon Aldous /'He who laughs last /
/s34...@student.uq.edu.au / thinks slowest.' /
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
Donald Rose
I'm a Bichel fan even if he doesn't play for NSW. Hope the poor blighter
heals and comes back stronger than ever.
Regarding Aussie swing bowlers, how about Dale?
--
@--}---
Jonathan Aldous <s34...@student.uq.edu.au> wrote in article
<5olclg$vsu$1...@nargun.cc.uq.edu.au>...
Rob Malpass
In article <5olclg$vsu$1...@nargun.cc.uq.edu.au>
s34...@student.uq.edu.au "Jonathan Aldous" writes:
>R...@getiton.demon.co.uk (Rob Malpass) writes:
>
>>In article <33AA08...@iastate.edu>
>> nva...@iastate.edu "Niranjan Vasan" writes:
>
>
> Probably the most
>>*famous* bowler who swung it both ways was Bob Massie (see Lord's test 1972).
>>>Inswing bowlers : Imran Khan, Srinath, Walsh, ...
>
>
>>>Outswing bowlers : Kapil Dev, Dominic Cork, Fanie de Villiers, ...
>
>
>>On the subject of swing bowling, has anyone seen a bowler capable of bowling
>>an outswinger with the old ball, i.e. reverse outswing?
>
>Australia has two good outswing bowlers at the moment in Andy Bichel
>and Damien Fleming. Neither are in England at the moment!!
>Also Waqar Younis can bowl reverse outswingers, to left handers!
Very funny - I think this proves my point. Now the $64000 question... Can
anyone explain why "reverse outswing" is "impossible" ?
Tony Cardone
>>On the subject of swing bowling, has anyone seen a bowler capable of
bowling
>>an outswinger with the old ball, i.e. reverse outswing?
>
>Australia has two good outswing bowlers at the moment in Andy Bichel
>and Damien Fleming. Neither are in England at the moment!!
>Also Waqar Younis can bowl reverse outswingers, to left handers!
guys, guys, guys. You all have short memories ! How about the sultan of swing
Terry Alderman. 80+ wickets in 12 tests in England. Swung the ball both ways,
old and new. Stitched up Gooch good and proper (along with all the other
poms).
Cheers
Tony Cardone
Donald Rose
Younis, Walsh, perhaps Akram. Bichel was a loss because he has
this skill.
I've seen Younis bowl a series of outswingers and then that deadly
inswinging yorker of his to great effect.
Generally, the outswinger especially if it swings late, is the most
effective swinging ball when the ball is new. As a result, most
openers of international standard concentrate on this almost to
the exclusion of bowling an inswinger.
The quality of batting at the highest levels tends to punish
wayward bowling therefore the higher the level, the more the
bowlers focus on one stock ball and only introduce variants with
some caution.
However just as we see somewhat irresponsible, swashbuckling
batting at lower levels, we also see bowlers attempt a wider
variety of bowling deliveries, sometimes without conscious intent.
@--}---
Rob Malpass <R...@getiton.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<866924...@getiton.demon.co.uk>...
Jim Garner
"Donald Rose" (dr...@removethisnovation.com.au) writes:
> However just as we see somewhat irresponsible, swashbuckling
> batting at lower levels, we also see bowlers attempt a wider
> variety of bowling deliveries, sometimes without conscious intent.
>
> @--}---
>
> Rob Malpass <R...@getiton.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
>>
>> >Sorry Rob, I cannot agree. As an Umpire, I have often seen mediocre
>> >bowlers swing the new ball both ways quite wildly.
>> >
>>
>> I can't think of anyone in Test Cricket who swings the new ball both
> ways.
Anybody can swing a new ball -- you don't have to be Test class to do
that, either way. The skill lies in late swing, swing plus dip or a swing so
small as to be unnoticeable.
Methinks the reason that Test bowlers tend to swing the ball only in one
direction is IMOH that the batsman is forced to play the ball mostly in
the direction of the swing. This means that with only one direction of
swing, the ball will be played mostly in one direction and the fielding
side then can cut off a high proportion of the shots. Swinging the ball
the other way occasionally is a good surprise weapon, but doing much of it
will give away runs.
The surprise is relative anyway. The actions of outswingers and
inswingers are quite different, so it's not difficult for an experienced
batsman to pick out the wrong 'un.
--
Jim Garner, Freelance editor, writer and dogsbody
an...@freenet.carleton.ca http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~an410
(613) 526-4786; 759B Springland, Ottawa, ON K1V 6L9 Canada
VISA soit qui mall y pense
Donald Rose
Well said, you have obviously played cricket.
--
"Happiness for a bee or a dolphin is simply to exist:
for a man it is to know and to wonder."
Jaques-Yves Cousteau, 1910-1997
VALE The world is now poorer
Jim Garner <an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in article
<5oqd55$r...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
Donald Rose
Bless you. How quickly we forget.
--
"Happiness for a bee or a dolphin is simply to exist:
for a man it is to know and to wonder."
Jaques-Yves Cousteau, 1910-1997
VALE The world is now poorer
Tony Cardone <Tony.C...@roads.sa.gov.au> wrote in article
<5onaj8$c...@gemini.roads.sa.gov.au>...
Robert Baker-Self
In article <5onaj8$c...@gemini.roads.sa.gov.au>, Tony Cardone
<Tony.C...@roads.sa.gov.au> writes
>guys, guys, guys. You all have short memories ! How about the sultan of swing
>Terry Alderman. 80+ wickets in 12 tests in England. Swung the ball both ways,
>old and new. Stitched up Gooch good and proper (along with all the other
>poms).
>
ball both ways and *didn't* use vaseline and suncream?
Naah - Australia have had some great bowlers over the years,Lillee,
Thommo, ... but Alderman wasn't one of them. Headingley 1989. Weather
alternating between pissing it down and just being overcast. Alderman
wearing more suncream than would be neccessary in India in the hot
season.
Not saying English bowlers haven't done the same (though lip ice is more
our style..)
On the topic btw, I think the point is, that most bowlers naturally
swing it one way or t'other and it's harder to get it to go the other
way, and it's the first thing that goes when everythings not wonderful.
Me? I bowl big away-swingers. I get comparatively few wickets from
edges, partly due to the class of cricket in which I play (low) but
mostly because the batsmen adjust early. Rather than work on the
assumption that the ball is going to be straight and getting out when it
swings, they assume that it swings and get out when it cuts back. I get
c. 2 wickets an innings (a good 60 odd percent of my average hall) with
my off cutter
- Robert
-- Robert Baker-Self :: Rob...@fiddlers-green.demon.co.uk
Journeyman swimmer and COBOL programmer extraordinaire
Paul Husbands
> The surprise is relative anyway. The actions of outswingers and
> inswingers are quite different, so it's not difficult for an experienced
> batsman to pick out the wrong 'un.
I agree with this comment.
As a left-arm over seamer, my natural ball is to swing in to the
right handed batsman. However, I can easily bowl and away swinger by
bowling more chest on.
The change of action is very obvious so it maybe a good suprise ball
but I don't use it that often. Normally when there is a new batsman
at the crease and the other guy has told him that I am bowling
in-swingers so he's least expecting it to go the other way.
Paul
Phil. G. Felton
In article <199706292...@zetnet.co.uk>, Paul Husbands
<paul.h...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
How can the position of your body at delivery have anything to do with the
deviation of the ball from a straight line? Once the ball has left your
hand the only forces that will cause it to deviate from a straight line
are gravitational and aerodynamic forces. I think you're confusing the
line you are bowling with swing. By your terminology I could bowl out
swingers by going round the wicket! If you're talking about truly swinging
the ball this can be done changing the orientation of the ball with no
change in action.
Phil.
Donald Rose
Thanks, I think you have proved my point about many bowlers
being able to swing the ball both ways.
In Sydney, one of the things which marks a bowler out
for first class potential is the ability to deceive the batsman
by altering his direction of swing without changing his action too
obviously. The two obvious changes are for a RH bowler to cause
his arm to become as vertical as possible and/or become more
'chest on' at point of delivery. Good batsmen subconsciously
spot these changes. Generally it is the mark of the bowler
destined for higher honours to be able to swing the ball either
way and disguise this well.
My son is a quite competent bowler if not up to first class
standard, and he spent last year getting his action as vertical
as possible (he's a slinger) and then creating the swing with
the position of the seam and by dragging his arm down beside
his right thigh instead of it passing past his left thigh (he's RH).
At the moment it is our off season but he has had a few nets
and the two batsmen who practice with him are saying that
he is now very deceptive. He just received an invite to play
in Sydney's top grade so he will get the chance to try out
his skills against near Test quality batsmen, at least at the
start of the season.
Obviously bowlers are not neanderthalian brutes who leave
furrows as their knuckles drag on the ground (well, maybe
some are). There is a lot of thought and skill in bowling well.
--
"Happiness for a bee or a dolphin is simply to exist:
for a man it is to know and to wonder."
Jaques-Yves Cousteau, 1910-1997
VALE The world is now poorer
Rosebud
Paul Husbands <paul.h...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<199706292...@zetnet.co.uk>...
|
| > The surprise is relative anyway. The actions of outswingers and
| > inswingers are quite different, so it's not difficult for an
experienced
| > batsman to pick out the wrong 'un.
|
| I agree with this comment.
|
| As a left-arm over seamer, my natural ball is to swing in to the
| right handed batsman. However, I can easily bowl and away swinger by
| bowling more chest on.
|
| The change of action is very obvious so it maybe a good suprise ball
| but I don't use it that often. Normally when there is a new batsman
| at the crease and the other guy has told him that I am bowling
| in-swingers so he's least expecting it to go the other way.
|
| Paul
|
|
|
|
|
James Matthew Rice
In article <felton-3006...@pgfelton97.princeton.edu>,
Phil. G. Felton <fel...@princeton.edu> wrote:
>In article <199706292...@zetnet.co.uk>, Paul Husbands
><paul.h...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> > inswingers are quite different, so it's not difficult for an experienced
>> > batsman to pick out the wrong 'un.
>>
>> I agree with this comment.
>>
>> As a left-arm over seamer, my natural ball is to swing in to the
>> right handed batsman. However, I can easily bowl and away swinger by
>> bowling more chest on.
>>
>> The change of action is very obvious so it maybe a good suprise ball
>> but I don't use it that often. Normally when there is a new batsman
>> at the crease and the other guy has told him that I am bowling
>> in-swingers so he's least expecting it to go the other way.
>
>deviation of the ball from a straight line? Once the ball has left your
>hand the only forces that will cause it to deviate from a straight line
>are gravitational and aerodynamic forces. I think you're confusing the
>line you are bowling with swing. By your terminology I could bowl out
>swingers by going round the wicket! If you're talking about truly swinging
>the ball this can be done changing the orientation of the ball with no
>change in action.
>
>Phil.
I have never seen this post's originator bowl, but I would think he knows
inswing when he sees it. As far as the comment "How can the position of
your body at delivery have anything to do with the deviation of the ball
from a straight line?" where are you coming from? The position of the
body has much to do with the resulting arc of the arm and hence the motion
imparted to the ball and finally the resulting swing (or not) of the ball.
I would think that most people who swing the ball would lose the swing with
a change in motion, or perhaps get it to swing the other way. Truly great
bowlers, however, with perfect actions (eg Sir Richard H) deliver the ball
so well that all it takes to make it swing the other way is to change the
grip.
Matt
Phil. G. Felton
In article <5pr6l8$4e1$1...@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>,
When the ball leaves the hand it will carry on in a straight line unless
influenced by gravitational or aerodynamic forces, the arc of the arm prior
to release is irrelevant unless it imparts rotation to the ball in which
case the aerodynamic forces may be affected. The factors influencing the
trajectory would be the position of the seam relative to the direction of
travel, asymmetry of the ball (i.e. surface roughness or an out of shape ball)
, rotation of the ball and the initial velocity. If a ball can be made to
swing from left to right by positioning the seam at a certain angle to the
direction of flight then it should swing in the opposite direction if the
angle is reversed. Action does not come into it!
Phil.
James Matthew Rice
In article <felton-0707...@pgfelton97.princeton.edu>,
The rotation of the ball is very much governed by the arc of the arm,
and the action, BY YOUR OWN STATEMENT is relevant, in fact, for most
of us it is very relevant.
I won't get in to this any more, as I am not a very good bowler, but here are
a few things to think about:
I used to bowl with a very front on, wrong footed action. I could make the
ball inswing no matter what grip, just as long as the seam was roughly
upright. I took a moderate number of wickets like this. But, when someone
pointed out that I usually get the wickets due to the batsman laughing
at the action and not through good bowling, I decided to change the action.
Now it is more side on, but just as ugly. I don't get the swing, nor the
wickets.
If you look at the coaching books (I had a book written by Greg Chappell,
I don't know who was the bowling consultant.) to bowl inswing, follow through
with the arm on the "leg side" and outswing with the standard "off side" follow
through. This inswing action gets you more front on. (this is, of course,
along with the change in grip.) To get the ball to rotate with the seam
in the "inswing" position you need to hold the ball with the seam pointing at
legslip AND YOU MUST GET THE BALL TO SPIN WITH THE SEAM AS THE EQUATOR.
This is the vital point. The direction of swing is a function of the angle
between the velocity vector and the angular velocity (spin) vector[*]. Factors
such as the rough side and the seam can dramatically increase the amount
of swing, but the action is of vital importance to get the spin of the ball
in the right direction.
If you take an outswing bowler, and tell him to bowl THE SAME WAY, but with
the inswing grip, he will just "mix" the seam and the ball will likely not
swing.
Here are some other examples (though a different physical effect, in this case
the Magnus force) to work the ball right to left a golfer will CHANGE HIS
SWING (ACTION) to "in to out" and to work the ball left to right he will
swing "out to in" (us hackers call this a slice, and cannot fix our action
to correct this.)
Base ball pitchers also use wrist action to impart different spins on a ball to
get different movement.
[*] Just a point for completeness. It is hard to bowl a ball with no spin
and this would be the thing to do to get the most swing, as spin has a
stabilizing "gyroscopic" effect. The spin imparted by the correct action
is that needed to keep the ball "set up" in flight, i.e. with the seam
pointing in the right direction etc. A bowler will "lock his wrist" when
bowling swing to minimize the spin, but will still need the ball "set up"
in flight, and for most of us, that means getting front on for the inswinger.
Sir Richard etc could do this by subtle changes, not wholesale ones. But
remember, Hadley only needed the ball to swing 2 inches, and did not bowl
"bananas".
A bowler will "rip his wrist when trying to get cut, and will lose much of the
swing.
Shariq Ahmed Tariq
I think the textbook way of inswinging the ball is with a square on
delivery stride. I guess they do this because they want the arm to
go through the same path of motion but the shift in angle of body
combines with angle of delievery arm results in a different kind of spin
that is put on the ball. Imran in his book says that the direction of
swing is determined bu the wrist movement and to bowl an inswinger the
bowler need not go square at the point of delivery. I think he knows
what he is talking about because his inswinger is one of the best
cricket has ever seen and he did not bowl it with a square on action.
Regards,
Dhaniram
Mark Wilson
Phil. G. Felton wrote:
> In
>
> When the ball leaves the hand it will carry on in a straight line
> unless
> influenced by gravitational or aerodynamic forces, the arc of the arm
> prior
> to release is irrelevant unless it imparts rotation to the ball in
> which
> case the aerodynamic forces may be affected. The factors influencing
> the
> trajectory would be the position of the seam relative to the direction
> of
> travel, asymmetry of the ball (i.e. surface roughness or an out of
> shape ball)
> , rotation of the ball and the initial velocity. If a ball can be
> made to
> swing from left to right by positioning the seam at a certain angle to
> the
> direction of flight then it should swing in the opposite direction if
> the
> angle is reversed. Action does not come into it!
Yes, but your action DOES effect the angle of the seam relative to the
balls path! If you keep the angle of the seam relative to your hand
constant, a high, front-on inswingers action will tend to point the seam
towards leg slip. This is not to say that it is impossible to bowl and
outswinger with an inswinger's action or vice versa, but compensation
must be made in the form of the way in which the ball is held, which
often adversely effects accuracy and/or pace. It is undeniably true that
only forces acting upon a ball post-delivery CAUSE swing, but there is a
strong correlation between bowlers actions and factors to which the
amount and direction of swing are sensitive (angle of release, ability
to keep seam straight etc).
Cheers
Mark Wilson
> Phil.
Donald Rose
Ay Caramba! I did not realise when I first published my little article on
swinging the ball that we would be still discussing it one month later.
Just to clarify what causes swing. We put the rough side and point the
seam [slightly] in the direction that we want the ball to swing. What then
happens is that the rough side aided by the stitching, creates a vortex
which results in a vacuum on the rough side while the air slips past the
shiny side easily. This vortex/vacuum sucks the ball in its direction.
Now, it is important to have the seam spinning in a vertical position even
if pointing to 1st slip for an outswinger or to the batsman's bum if an
inswinger. This ensures that the seam does not wobble, creating a second
vortex on the other side which will nullify the swing. The arm action will
govern the angle that the seam is spinning. Remember, without the arm
action, if we simply point the seam to first slip, we will spin the ball
with the seam off centre creating a wobble.
I do not coach bowlers to change their body action. It is hard enough to
get this 'grooved' as it is. Instead, I suggest that they bring their arm
over ever so slightly round arm for the outswing, vertical for the seamer
and move it from slightly behind their right ear for the inswinger. Having
said all that, if adjusting the arm will affect the bowler's consistency, I
tell them to leave it alone and just keep the arm as high as possible,
using the wrist to create the seam angle.
The real trick is to make the ball swing late. Faster bowlers do this
naturally because the ball leaves their hand far too quickly to swing
appreciably and only begins to swing as it slows as it travels to the
pitch. The ball will then continue on in its new altered direction from
the pitch.
Hadlee, who was possibly one of the greatest bowlers of all time teaches
bowlers to impart as much back spin on the ball as possible with a whippy
wrist action dragging down the back of the ball. He maintains that this
imparts late swing. I know from experiments that this causes the ball to
flatten in its trajectory, hold in the air for a moment longer and this is
consistent with the ball slowing to allow for late swing.
My son is an express bowler with a natural slinging, outswing action. He
has found that the ball can swing too much when it is brand new so he has
developed the technique of keeping the seam completely vertical and
pointing to the off stump for the first few overs. What often happens is
that the ball can jag off the seam, or grab the air on either side creating
unexpected swing. He has the rather charming habit of rapping batsmen on
the 'box' fairly frequently and also finding the batsman's tummy (he has
nearly castrated me on several occasions by squaring me up--groan!). When
the ball is new he bounces it too much for LBW decisions. It seems that
every time he consciously tries to swing the ball in to the batsman, it
'banana bends' past his bum. I mention this because it illustrates how
each bowler should adapt an individual style that works for the movement he
is able to get.
--
Rosebud
"The older you get, the greater you were."
Lee Grosscup (whoever he is)
Phil. G. Felton <fel...@princeton.edu> wrote in article
<felton-0707...@pgfelton97.princeton.edu>...
WebLizard
The behaviour of a cricket ball is not determined purely by the laws of
physics as applied to a projectile. A lot of applied anatomy influences
the ball's behavior. This is where a bowlers action comes into the
picture.
Different anatomical actions would impart a diferrent spin on the ball.
Add to this a variation in ball speed, angle, and probably most
importantly the position on the ball at which the force vector is
applied ( determined by ball grip, and bowling action ).The human body
is not simply a 3 dimensional positional device.
These anatomical factors then combine with 3 dimensional physics (
including aerodynamics, the state of the pitch, wind speed/ direction,
humidity, ball mass and surface characteristics ...) to determine the
movement of the ball through the air.
Mastery of all these aspects, with the inclusion of the strategic,
psychological, and technique factors result in good bowling.
Andy Shrimpton
Rubbish. The action makes up a large part of which way a ball swings.
Side on bowlers swing the ball one way, and front on bowlers the
other. This can be demonstrated by bowling a coin upright and seeing
which way it moves. A good way to tell a young bowler what his
natural ball is, too.
>When the ball leaves the hand it will carry on in a straight line unless
>influenced by gravitational or aerodynamic forces, the arc of the arm prior
>to release is irrelevant unless it imparts rotation to the ball in which
>case the aerodynamic forces may be affected. The factors influencing the
>trajectory would be the position of the seam relative to the direction of
>travel, asymmetry of the ball (i.e. surface roughness or an out of shape ball)
>, rotation of the ball and the initial velocity. If a ball can be made to
>swing from left to right by positioning the seam at a certain angle to the
>direction of flight then it should swing in the opposite direction if the
>angle is reversed. Action does not come into it!
>Phil.
Donald Rose
Dearie me, what a load of pseudo scientific gobbledygook ;-). I hope
there was a wink or a smiley somewhere in there.
It's not all that hard. There's a vortex (swirling air) on the rough side
of the ball, that creates a vacuum which sucks the ball in that direction.
Whatever you do with your body or hand or position of the ball simply
supports that vortex.
--
Rosebud
"The older you get, the greater you were."
Lee Grosscup (whoever he is)
WebLizard <lj...@anat.uct.ac.za> wrote in article
<33C539...@anat.uct.ac.za>...
Phil. G. Felton
In article <01bc8d00$813e6e40$96703dcb@drose>, "Donald Rose"
<dr...@removethisnovation.com.au> wrote:
> Ay Caramba! I did not realise when I first published my little article on
> swinging the ball that we would be still discussing it one month later.
>
> Just to clarify what causes swing. We put the rough side and point the
> seam [slightly] in the direction that we want the ball to swing. What then
> happens is that the rough side aided by the stitching, creates a vortex
> which results in a vacuum on the rough side while the air slips past the
> shiny side easily. This vortex/vacuum sucks the ball in its direction.
The effect is right but the fluid mechanics is a little shakey. :-)
What happens is that the seam or roughness causes the flow on that side to
become turbulent which as a result creates less of a vortex on that side of
the ball resulting in a lower pressure on that side of the ball and therefore
a side force in that direction. This effect is behind the dimpling of golf
balls, the rough surface reduces the drag on the ball thus allowing it to
be driven further! In my lab class I ask the students to guess which has the
lower drag, a golf ball or a table tennis ball and then we test it in a wind
tunnel. The non golfers usually think that the smoother ball will have the
least drag and are very surprised at the result.
> Now, it is important to have the seam spinning in a vertical position even
> if pointing to 1st slip for an outswinger or to the batsman's bum if an
> inswinger. This ensures that the seam does not wobble, creating a second
> vortex on the other side which will nullify the swing. The arm action will
> govern the angle that the seam is spinning. Remember, without the arm
> action, if we simply point the seam to first slip, we will spin the ball
> with the seam off centre creating a wobble.
Yes the stabilization of the position of the seam by the use of spin is
important. However, the is a type of pitch in baseball known as a "knuckle
ball" which is delivered slowly with no spin and tends to wobble all over
the place, this can be pretty deceptive. However, the backspin is induced
by the fingers/wrist rather than the position of the body.
>
> I do not coach bowlers to change their body action. It is hard enough to
> get this 'grooved' as it is. Instead, I suggest that they bring their arm
> over ever so slightly round arm for the outswing, vertical for the seamer
> and move it from slightly behind their right ear for the inswinger. Having
> said all that, if adjusting the arm will affect the bowler's consistency, I
> tell them to leave it alone and just keep the arm as high as possible,
> using the wrist to create the seam angle.
>
> The real trick is to make the ball swing late. Faster bowlers do this
> naturally because the ball leaves their hand far too quickly to swing
> appreciably and only begins to swing as it slows as it travels to the
> pitch. The ball will then continue on in its new altered direction from
> the pitch.
Yes, the change in the flow behavior occurs for a certain range of speeds
so that it's possible that a ball could be initially travelling so fast that
both sides of the ball are turbulent and there is no side force. As it
slows down the one side becomes laminar (the opposite of turbulent) and a
side force develops.
>
> Hadlee, who was possibly one of the greatest bowlers of all time teaches
> bowlers to impart as much back spin on the ball as possible with a whippy
> wrist action dragging down the back of the ball. He maintains that this
> imparts late swing. I know from experiments that this causes the ball to
> flatten in its trajectory, hold in the air for a moment longer and this is
> consistent with the ball slowing to allow for late swing.
If the back spin is strong enough then a lift force is developed in a
similar manner, this is an effect used by baseball pitchers, "rising fast
balls" and with top spin "sinker balls".
>
> My son is an express bowler with a natural slinging, outswing action. He
> has found that the ball can swing too much when it is brand new so he has
> developed the technique of keeping the seam completely vertical and
> pointing to the off stump for the first few overs. What often happens is
> that the ball can jag off the seam, or grab the air on either side creating
> unexpected swing. He has the rather charming habit of rapping batsmen on
> the 'box' fairly frequently and also finding the batsman's tummy (he has
> nearly castrated me on several occasions by squaring me up--groan!). When
> the ball is new he bounces it too much for LBW decisions. It seems that
> every time he consciously tries to swing the ball in to the batsman, it
> 'banana bends' past his bum. I mention this because it illustrates how
> each bowler should adapt an individual style that works for the movement he
> is able to get.
In this case with the shiny ball the effect of the seam can be very dramatic
of course there is no roughness effect yet. We do some lab experiments with
a smooth 3" diam. ball at 60 and 100 mph. Just adding a thin wire to the
front of the ball can cause the dramatic effect on drag I mentioned above
so a raised seam can have a huge effect. I remember opening the batting
against the new ball once when the first ball was a huge outswinger, fortunately
the bowler was unable to do it again but that first delivery scared the hell
out of me!
By the way my students are always looking for topics for their independent
work projects and sports related ones are very popular so if anyone's
interested in some experiments on cricket balls please get in touch with me.
Phil.
Phil. G. Felton
In article <33C539...@anat.uct.ac.za>, WebLizard
<lj...@anat.uct.ac.za> wrote:
> The behaviour of a cricket ball is not determined purely by the laws of
> physics as applied to a projectile.
Really, Newton must be spinning in his grave!
> A lot of applied anatomy influences
> the ball's behavior. This is where a bowlers action comes into the
> picture.
>
> Different anatomical actions would impart a diferrent spin on the ball.
> Add to this a variation in ball speed, angle, and probably most
> importantly the position on the ball at which the force vector is
> applied ( determined by ball grip, and bowling action ).The human body
> is not simply a 3 dimensional positional device.
The point is that all these factors do not depend on whether the body is
square on at time of delivery etc, the hand/wrist motion is what imparts
the rotation to the ball and determines its attitude relative to the
direction of travel.
Phil. G. Felton
In article <5q2fj0$ioq$1...@corolla.OntheNet.com.au>,
wolf...@OnTheNet.com.au (Andy Shrimpton) wrote:
> Rubbish. The action makes up a large part of which way a ball swings.
> Side on bowlers swing the ball one way, and front on bowlers the
> other. This can be demonstrated by bowling a coin upright and seeing
> which way it moves. A good way to tell a young bowler what his
> natural ball is, too.
The natural ball will result mainly from the hand/wrist movement which
governs the rotation and attitude of the ball at the moment of delivery
how can the position of the body effect either of these? By the way the
fluid dynamics of a disc and a ball are rather different, I'm not sure what
this experiment will tell you, especially as the grip will necessarily be
different. The Physics is as stated below.
Phil.
Phil. G. Felton
In article <01bc8d30$f83809e0$61703dcb@drose>, "Donald Rose"
<dr...@removethisnovation.com.au> wrote:
> Dearie me, what a load of pseudo scientific gobbledygook ;-). I hope
> there was a wink or a smiley somewhere in there.
>
> It's not all that hard. There's a vortex (swirling air) on the rough side
> of the ball, that creates a vacuum which sucks the ball in that direction.
> Whatever you do with your body or hand or position of the ball simply
> supports that vortex.
> --
I'm afraid there wasn't! If you're interested in a great pair of photos
showing the difference in the flow around a ball caused by surface roughness
take a look at our lab. web site:
http://www.princeton.edu/~asmits/MAE222.html#picture of the week
Phil.
>
> WebLizard <lj...@anat.uct.ac.za> wrote in article
> <33C539...@anat.uct.ac.za>...
> | The behaviour of a cricket ball is not determined purely by the laws of
> | physics as applied to a projectile. A lot of applied anatomy influences
> | the ball's behavior. This is where a bowlers action comes into the
> | picture.
> |
> | Different anatomical actions would impart a diferrent spin on the ball.
> | Add to this a variation in ball speed, angle, and probably most
> | importantly the position on the ball at which the force vector is
> | applied ( determined by ball grip, and bowling action ).The human body
> | is not simply a 3 dimensional positional device.
> |
WebLizard
I was quite serious about my earlier comments :)
It is a common mistake to to simply analyse ball motion with the laws of
projectile physics - a lot of biomechanics comes into it.
If only projectile physics determined ball motion then to be a good
bowler would be simple indeed.
Prior to the release of the ball, human biomechanics determines many
factors which set the ***** initial conditions ****** of the cricket
ball. The human muscle-skeletal-joint system cannot be ignored. The
centre of mass changes position according to the bowlers stance before
delivery.
This centre of mass is the origin of the force vector.
The bowlers grip on the ball prior to release sets the termination of
that force vector.
This action imparts a combination of linear and angular monentum to the
ball. The laws of projectile physics then take over from here.
The cricket ball, not being a point mass, is fairly sensitive ( at least
as far as the batsman is concerned ) to these variables.
I think that the movement of a cricket ball is indeed quite complex -
something which perhaps bowlers and batmen appreciate more than
theoreticians.
But, then again, I may be wrong !
Regards,
An Engineer+Biomedical Engineer ;)
Donald Rose wrote:
>
> Dearie me, what a load of pseudo scientific gobbledygook ;-). I hope
> there was a wink or a smiley somewhere in there.
>
> It's not all that hard. There's a vortex (swirling air) on the rough side
> of the ball, that creates a vacuum which sucks the ball in that direction.
> Whatever you do with your body or hand or position of the ball simply
> supports that vortex.
> --
Donald Rose
You're right. I meant the smooth side facing the direction in which you
want the ball to swing.
Rosebud
"Ability is the art of getting credit for all the
homeruns somebody else hits."
Casey Stengel (baseball illuminary)
Phil. G. Felton <fel...@princeton.edu> wrote in article
<felton-1007...@pgfelton97.princeton.edu>...
| In article <01bc8d30$f83809e0$61703dcb@drose>, "Donald Rose"
| <dr...@removethisnovation.com.au> wrote:
|
| > Dearie me, what a load of pseudo scientific gobbledygook ;-). I hope
| > there was a wink or a smiley somewhere in there.
| >
| > It's not all that hard. There's a vortex (swirling air) on the rough
side
| > of the ball, that creates a vacuum which sucks the ball in that
direction.
| > Whatever you do with your body or hand or position of the ball simply
| > supports that vortex.
| > --
|
Andy Shrimpton
When I was a lot younger and much more into the playing of the game, I
attended a coaching camp, where we used composite balls in the nets,
which had no seam, and were close enough to spherical. It was very
evident that the action of any given bowler had a large effect on
which way the ball swung. Since the ball had no shine to speak of, no
seam, it WAS the action the made the difference.
cheers,
Andy
Phil. G. Felton
In article <01bc8df4$6c36d240$46703dcb@drose>, "Donald Rose"
<dr...@removethisnovation.com.au> wrote:
> You're right. I meant the smooth side facing the direction in which you
> want the ball to swing.
> --
No you misunderstood me, the side which has turbulent flow (rough or seam)
has the faster flowing air near the ball which exerts a lower pressure than
the slower flowing air in the vortex on the other side thus the force is
towards the rough side. Similarly in a wing the faster flow is over the top
which generates lift, when the flow separates and forms a vortex the wing
stalls as it no longer generates enough lift to support its weight.
Phil.
(Rest Deleted)
Phil. G. Felton
In article <5qdb58$4k5$1...@corolla.OntheNet.com.au>,
wolf...@OnTheNet.com.au (Andy Shrimpton) wrote:
> When I was a lot younger and much more into the playing of the game, I
> attended a coaching camp, where we used composite balls in the nets,
> which had no seam, and were close enough to spherical. It was very
> evident that the action of any given bowler had a large effect on
> which way the ball swung. Since the ball had no shine to speak of, no
> seam, it WAS the action the made the difference.
This is going to make teaching my Fluid Mechanics class very difficult this
term as I will have to explain how a smooth sphere can remember what it was
doing before it was launched and deviate laterally despite the absence of any
aerodynamic forces acting on it! I'm sure the military and aircraft
manufacturers will be beating a path to your door to learn how we can
maneuver without any control surfaces for example. ;-)
In order for a truely uniform sphere to swing it must be spinning, maybe the
bowlers you observed were spinning the ball in different ways and you assumed
that what was changing the flight of the ball was their action.
Phil.
James Matthew Rice
In article <felton-1607...@pgfelton97.princeton.edu>,
Phil, good to see you back again!
Here we go again, it is almost impossible to bowl a ball with out
imparting back-spin (medium pace and fast bowlers, not spin bowlers)
therefore the ball in question is spinning.
The ACTION will dictate the axis of this spin relative to the direction of
flight.
Therefore the ACTION will determine the swing of the ball.
WebLizard
On this point, I've seen tennis balls that are consistently swung in a
specific direction by different bowlers.
IMHO The bowlers action determines the initial conditions on the ball.
A cricket ball with a smooth and rough surface merely aids or opposes
the
effect of these initial conditions. This would explain how almost
any ball can be swung.
I've even seen a tennis ball being used to bowl off-cutters on leg
cutters by the use of bottomspin or topspin .
atif rahim
In article <33CFB9...@anat.uct.ac.za>, WebLizard <lj...@anat.uct.ac.za> says:
>
>On this point, I've seen tennis balls that are consistently swung in a
>specific direction by different bowlers.
>
>
Are you talking about taped tennis balls? A lot depends on how the ball
has been taped.
Atif
Andy Shrimpton
>I wrote:
> > When I was a lot younger and much more into the playing of the game, I
> > attended a coaching camp, where we used composite balls in the nets,
> > which had no seam, and were close enough to spherical. It was very
> > evident that the action of any given bowler had a large effect on
> > which way the ball swung. Since the ball had no shine to speak of, no
> > seam, it WAS the action the made the difference.
>
>You replied:
>> In order for a truely uniform sphere to swing it must be spinning, maybe the
>> bowlers you observed were spinning the ball in different ways and you assumed
>> that what was changing the flight of the ball was their action.
>>
>> Phil.
Yep, it was spinning alright. Backwards.
Student
In article <33CFB9...@anat.uct.ac.za>, WebLizard <lj...@anat.uct.ac.za> says:
>
>On this point, I've seen tennis balls that are consistently swung in a
>specific direction by different bowlers.
>
u sure a tennis ball swings in the air or moves off the pitch. Never been
able to swing a tennis ball in backyard cricket before :)))
David W. Noon
One need only have watched a power serve tennis player like John Newcombe or
Roscoe Tanner to see a tennis ball swing. It was done by putting sidespin
on the ball.
However, the aerodynamic "funnies" caused by a cricket ball seam make for a
rather less consistent trajectory, with the ball swinging late. I suspect this
is due to the change in the angle of attack the seam has to the atmosphere
as the ball's trajectory becomes more downward later in the delivery.
In marked distinction, a tennis ball swings quite consistently throughout its
flight. The air pressure difference from one side to the other reduces
fairly smoothly as rotational momentum is lost, with the swing reducing
equally smoothly late in the flight. However, there is usually sufficient spin
left for the ball to take a "hop" when it bounces. This is akin to a seamer
becoming a leg cutter after some early inswing (or reverse for rotation in the
opposite direction).
Basically, there are 2 ways to obtain a change of direction during flight,
which is what swing basically is: by rotation causing a pressure difference;
or by a prominence (e.g. seam, scuff mark) affecting the airflow over/around
the ball. Either will do, but the latter is more difficult for the batsmen.
Regards
Dave
<Team PL/I>
David Weddell
> In article <5qs9co$o...@janus.cqu.edu.au>, cqu.edu.au (Student) wrote:
> >>On this point, I've seen tennis balls that are consistently swung in a
> >>specific direction by different bowlers.
> >>
> >
> >u sure a tennis ball swings in the air or moves off the pitch. Never
been
> >able to swing a tennis ball in backyard cricket before :)))
Theoretically, you should be able to. If the ball is old enough to be a bit
"hairy", then sweat or water on one side should "slick back" the hair, and
produce a difference in aerodynamics. I haven't tried this, but i guess it
should work.
David
WebLizard
I've seen tennis balls swing in the air, and move off the pitch.It was
also interesting that the same bowlers were able to swing a cricket ball
in the same direction.
Never seen a reverse swinging cricket ball though, but I've bowled a few
which swing away, and then cut in, off the pitch.