It’s a hard life for bowlers in Twenty20 cricket. There’s never enough fielders, the ropes are too close, the pitches too flat and the rules are too restrictive.
Now, if you believe Ricky Ponting’s recent assertions during the Big Bash so far this summer, there’s a new threat facing them. According to Punter, it’s one of his biggest fears – the fear that a bowler is going to get hit in the head by a cricket ball hit back at him.
Follow live scores of Day 5 in the Australia-India Test here
Watching some of the Big Bash this summer, you’d have to think that his concern is well placed.
With no fielders directly behind the bowler, going straight down the ground is increasingly becoming a go-to scoring zone for batsmen. As a result, we’re seeing more and more deliveries coming rocketing back in their direction, disappearing over, past and through the bowlers frantic duck for cover.
That knee-jerk reaction is perhaps the most worrying part for bowlers.
Where batsmen have the confidence of being well set, steady and a sightscreen flicked white behind them before they face up to bat, a bowler who has to register a ball is coming back in his direction at a rate of knots is at a disadvantage.
They will be overbalanced, unsteady, halfway through their follow through, a few yards closer, and are trying to pick the ball up out of a background of batsman, flashing bat and an ad for a big dirty bucket of KFC on the sightscreen behind the batsman.
They’re up against it. It’s a realistic danger too – that’s already been proven. Google Keegan Meth of Zimbabwe, if you want to see what a cricket ball being struck into your mouth can do.
Be warned though, it’s not pretty.
Now, I’ll grant you, most balls don’t get hit anywhere near the bowler. Even the ones that do get hit back in the direction of the bowler are usually several metres above their head by the time they go past – or, they’re rocketing along the ground, which is another area where the bowlers are in the firing line.
Quick bowlers routinely are asked to try and get feet/ankles/legs/anything front of drives hammering back in their direction – Pat Cummins collected a painful blow on his foot and ankle in the Sixers versus Thunder game that I saw, and I’m sure he isn’t the only one either so far this summer.
It’s not just cricket that is starting to take note of this – baseball already has this little conundrum. They’ve had four pitchers struck in the past couple years.
Alex Cobb, JA Happ, Aroldis Chapman and Dan Jennings all got collected in the head after line drives were slugged back in their direction – similar to fast bowlers, the pitchers are overbalanced, heads down, arms tilted.
They have very little time to react, or indeed even register that the ball is coming back their way.
Baseball and cricket are reacting to this fairly similarly – with a shrug of the shoulders. Given the sheer amount of balls that are pitched or bowled, it’s inevitable that some are going to find their way back in the direction of the bowler.
Part of me agrees with this as one of the risks you endure playing this game. It’s difficult to think of what you can actually do to prevent a bowler being struck.
Baseball pitchers have by and large rejected the idea of wanting any additional protection – even a helmet or padded cap is too much inconvenience for pitchers.
And they’re stationary when they pitch. Bowlers are sprinting in 20 metres, so they’re not going to be wearing any protection any time soon.
You can’t protect them with a net or a barrier of any sort. So they continue charging in, armed only with a ball that hasn’t changed much since 1877. Meanwhile, batters are securely standing on by flat pitches, full of bravado brought on by plenty of body armour, and armed with the most advanced bats in the world, that bear no resemblance to anything a few decades earlier.
What do Roarers think? Are bowlers really in the firing line and ripe for serious injury?
Or is this needless concern over something that has such a small chance of happening? And if there is concern, is there anything that can be done about it in any event?
Paul D
Roar Guru
If baseball pitchers aren't wearing them because they're uncomfortable (and they stand still to pitch) there's no way in hell a bowler is going to wear protective gear when running in to bowl. Will be far too cumbersome and restrictive.
davros
Guest
I keep going back to a mandatory kind of soft headgear similar to rugby league or old style bike headgear ...just something a bit extra to provide a bit of padding on the crucial vulnerable skull areas...I know it would look weird ...but so did the first batting helmets..penalties for players playing improper shots wont stop someone getting hit
Paul D
Roar Guru
The swimsuit analogy is quite a good one I think. Another instance where technology overly compensated for lack of skill. At the moment timing and placement are two concepts that are less and less critical in T20, since you can just go over the top and even a mistimed shot is a chance of clearing the rope. Dialing down the bats is probably as good a place as any to start.
Maggie
Guest
Good article. In my view there should be a rule about the size, width etc. of the bats. Channel 9 commentators have this week emphasised the thickness of today's bats compared with those that were used by Slater, Chappell etc. - and hence the increased power that batsmen such as Warner can achieve when hitting the ball. Isn't it time to say this has given too much advantage to batsmen and made it too dangerous to bowlers, fielders and umpires. (While the article talks about the danger to bowlers, the umpire at the bowler's end is also at risk.) There is precedent, Dennis Lillee wasn't allowed to use his alluminium bat. In some ways (not the risk factor but the unfair advantage) it could be compared to the full body suits worn by swimmers until the rules were changed to cut back the unfair advantage that technology had delivered so that the skill of the athletes once more became the dominant factor in success.Time to do the same in cricket.
Pope Paul vii
Guest
The modern bat is a cannon as well
Cam Reddin
Roar Rookie
Really thoughtful article, Paul. You raise some great questions, and there certainly is reason for concern. It is difficult to see a way to protect bowlers' heads and faces with any sort of equipment without interfering with their action. No doubt there is risk associated with playing the sport, but as you say it should certainly not be ignored.
Wayne
Roar Guru
Part of playing sport. I play field hockey, and as a defensive player, I stand between goals and strikers while they drag flick (professionals about 100km) and tomahawk (really fast, it's essentially a hit in air). Rules benefit attacking team, if non goalkeeper is hit, and shot is on target, it's a penalty corner
davros
Guest
Well at least Paul you are offering some sort of solution to what is a very difficult problem. Im sure a lot of shots in the area you are talking about are not really that controlled and in many ways accidental though. But I get your drift if there are penalties it would have an effect for sure .
Paul D
Roar Guru
I don't think the onus should be on the bowlers - batsmen should have a duty of care, in terms of how they're playing their shots. I thought maybe some sort of penalty regime, ie. fines or similar for any batsman who strikes a ball in the air within x distance of the bowler's head - there are fines and similar for 'reckless' play in most contact sports, maybe you could have reckless batting. Match referee could review footage of any incident where they felt the bowler was at risk of receiving a serious injury - ball above waist height, within two meters of his head, for example. Once batters start copping a 25% match payment fine for each incident they'd probably look to hit elsewhere, or ensure that they actually control the shot, either along the ground or well in the air. It's difficult to police, and would only apply to top flight cricket, but it would at least indicate that the powers-that-be were aware of the potential for harm and were taking steps to indicate that they don't want batters hitting in that particular area.
davros
Guest
it will take a tragedy before anything is done ...as a relative of a t 20 bowler it is definitely in the back of my mind..especially after Phil hughes...some form of padded headware maybe ..its a tough one ...probably too much to expect for CA to be proactive..but as I have written before there is clearly an identifiable risk ...nd when someone like punter expresses his concern maybe we should be listening
pjm
Roar Rookie
A batsman hitting a bowler above the chest should be an out. Drives down the ground are fine but know that you have to control it and if you don't you pay the consequences.
AndyS
Guest
Seen it happen but there is not much to be done. One of those risks you accept when you play a sport, just as batsmen accept the possibility of a freak ball impact.