The death of the very talented Phillip Hughes in November 2014 shocked the sporting world.
Struck on the back of his helmet in a Sheffield Shield game at the SCG, Hughes died in Sydney’s St Vincent Hospital just before his 26th birthday.
You would think that tragedy would be a wake-up call to all batsmen that while the helmet is a protective asset, it’s not impregnable.
But the message hasn’t got through, as two helmet-crushers in the current Manuka Oval Test, which could so easily have been far more serious, attest.
Sri Lankan opener Dimuth Karunaratne was heavily struck by a Pat Cummins bouncer that felled him, and he was carted off horizontal on a medicab.
Kusar Perera was felled by a Jhye Richardson bouncer that saw him slowly assisted from the field with wobbly legs.
Thankfully both were eventually passed fit enough to continue, but both were close calls.
And both share the same problem with the current crop of cricketers: They close their eyes to duck a bouncer and hope for the best.
That’s a form of Russian roulette and a recipe for disaster which should never have surfaced.
Yet the reasons are simple.
Those born after 1980 have only ever worn helmets since they first started batting and have let that equipment be the safeguard rather than keeping their eyes open to closely watch the path of every ball.
There were no helmets, chest pads or arm guards during my career, just a box, a thigh pad and pads. But I was taught from the start to watch every delivery no matter where it was pitched. In time that was automatic, and it was exactly the same story for future teammates and the opposition.
Had I closed my eyes, ducked and hoped for the best in trying to avoid bouncers from Wes Hall and Gordon Rorke in the 1960s and the fiery Jeff Thomson-Lenny Pascoe combination in the 1970s, there’s little doubt the result would have been terminal.
Have people learnt from the Phil Hughes tragedy? (AP Photo/Rick Rycroft, File)
I must admit there were some close shaves, especially facing Hall, who played for Randwick throughout the 1965-66 season. That was 54 years ago, but the memories are as vivid as if it was yesterday.
Firstly, I had to snap out of watching Wes’s hypnotic golden crucifix swaying around his neck, catching the morning sun as he bounced in from off the Mosman Oval southern fence.
I’d cover-driven a four, and the next ball was a red laser beam that followed me. The further I bent backwards watching it, the further it bent, whistling past my nose so close I could smell it.
By the time I straightened, Wes was right in front of me, bending forward with both arms dangling loosely, sporting a huge grin.
“Just wanted to remind you who is bowling, man,” was his retaliation.
The next ball put a deep dent in my box that took two to three minutes upending my bat to take out with the top of the handle.
The meeting with Wes Hall and the one with Gordon Rorke, who was mainly a Mosman teammate who spent one season with Manly, also resulted in deep black, red, and yellow body bruising that lasted for well over a week.
But the head was always safe.
The many clashes with Jeff Thomson and Lenny Pascoe produced the same multi-coloured body beltings, but again the head was safe.
There was one very different clash at Bankstown Oval.
Thommo bowled a searing bouncer to our very genuine No.11 John McKenzie, who wore horn-rimmed glasses. ‘Macca’ never saw it as it went perilously close to his head.
Barry Knight immediately declared, waiting at the gate to tell Thommo to just wait until he batted, with a few well-chosen expletives thrown in.
When Thommo did bat Sandy Morgan had four wickets for little, but Knight grabbed the ball, went back some 50 metres, stormed in past the umpire, who was calling no ball, and threw the ball close enough to miss Thommo but give him one helluva fright.
Thommo threw his arms, legs and bat to the wind, the ball sailed past me on the up at first slip and bounced only once before it cleared the fence – and Bankstown is a mighty big oval.
Pascoe, who was at the non-strikers end, started wielding his bat chasing Knight, booming a lot of expletives around “you Pommie bastard”. The sight of Knight, who was quick on his feet, being chased by Pascoe, who wasn’t quick and whose pads slowed him down further, was hysterical.
Eventually peace resumed and we all had a beer together after stumps.
Those are stories worth recalling because they were an integral part of what happened in Sydney first-grade cricket in a vastly different era.
But let’s not have another Phillip Hughes tragedy, which can only be avoided by every batsman watching every delivery, not by hoping for the best and ducking with eyes closed.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I must admit I wasn't playing high level cricket against super fast bowlers, but I always preferred batting in a cap myself. They did have helmets when I was a kid, and I did have one for much of my childhood I believe. But found them uncomfortable and they inhibited my vision. I always felt I was more likely to get hit if I was wearing one. However, if I went and played against guys bowling 140+, I'm sure I'd don the helmet!
Andre Leslie
Roar Guru
It's strange, isn't it? I grew up batting with a helmet (at Mosman coincidentally) but was still taught by all coaches to watch the ball and weave out of the way just as if I didn't have one.... and I'm no more than 10 years older than these guys. I'm not sure it's as easy as "have helmet, bat carefree" I think there was some general confusion from players on both sides about avoiding the short pitch balls at Manuka. I think that the pitch was pretty true, but when balls were short only Starc really had the pace for the ball to go well over head height. Otherwise, it sort of just came through right at throat height!
Peter Warrington
Guest
However you could retire hurt from broken fingers especially re Thommo. I don't recall a lot of sconings in my time, even in the Windies, but the head injuries do stand out - off the top of my head, not counting Thommo in grade games: * Jenner * Beatle Watson downed by a beamer in the World XI games * Lever clocking G Chappell 74-5 * ditto Chatfield same summer * McCosker * Hookes in WSC *Toohey in the Windies * Yallop in a non-test game, Windies * Sandeep then can't really remember any until Henry in 88-9. from memory, with the Windies here for tests and super tests in 75-6, 77-8, 78-9. 79-80, 81-2 and then 84-5, the only really bad head blow was Hookes'? I am happy to be corrected, it is all a long time a go!
caspian
Guest
Do you have a better method of judging how many batsmen got hit by short balls? Seems like a good enough method to me. You aren't gonna retire hurt from hit by a leggie. One retired hurt per 5 tests back from 60-80, and now it's up to 9 tests. Big difference. So yes, based on the ABC evidence, which somewhat contradicts all of these old "no one ever got hit back in myyyy daaaaay" type articles, I'm inclined to chalk up all this stuff to survivorship bias. Based on retired hurt stats, I'd say it sounds like a lot more people got hurt back then. It's essentially a similar argument to the whole "we smacked kids back in the day and we all turned out fine".
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Oh dear...missed again. Maybe if you stand on a chair it won't go over your head.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
"I often see this reflex action of turning the head and think that with helmet designs as they are, they are much better facing the ball and getting hit front-on. That’s not pleasant, but at least that’s where the protection is. So the chance of serious damage is dramatically reduced." Curious that you've said the same thing as me (albeit more eloquently), but David hasn't felt the need to bite your head off!
David Lord
Expert
Last call from me, of course batsmen have been struck, but there's obviously far less chance of being hit on the head by keeping your eyes open and watching the path of the ball, than ducking front on, and hoping like hell you won't be hit at all.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
You think... "If a batsman kept his eyes open watching the path of the ball, he can duck, or weave, and never be struck on the head"...is safe?!?! How did that go for Rick McCosker in the Centenary Test? Derek Randall? Ian Botham? Or any of the other batsmen that have been hit in the head over the years. You really are too silly for words David.
David Lord
Expert
Suggesting batsmen should turn front on instead of sideways is not only disgraceful, but ignorant of what serious damage you are inviting. Your suggestion is fingers crossed the helmet saves the batsman from brain damage, even death. That’s another form of Russian roulette. If a batsman kept his eyes open watching the path of the ball, he can duck, or weave, and never be struck on the head. There’s only one safe alternative, and it’s not yours.
Rellum
Roar Guru
T20 batting has meant the players are more likely to plant the front foot and play pulls shots from there, and yes just trust the gear and the hand eye co-ordination. Since Nic Maddinson got hit in the head a couple of years back doing just that I have notice players have been trying to on the back foot to short stuff, if not getting inside the line like they used too. The ABC was saying that more batsmen retired hurt in the 20 year periods from 1960-1980 and 1980-2000 compared to the last 20 years but that is a very random way to judge how many guys have been hit in the head or by short balls.
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
Hell yeah. Bring back the hook. Yet another mystery Pete. It is strange. Why not get inside the line and see what happens? Seems to be a crime to use the crease, so a lot these blokes are pulling off the front foot if they do play a shot. That seems more dangerous to me. You'd have to be seeing like a hot air balloon. They must be being taught to not use their hands if they are evading. Some of these blokes have virtually ducked into chest high balls. That's madness at this speed.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
Over the top?!? All I said was that it would be better if batsmen were taught to duck their head straight on instead of turning their head sideways. Seriously David, you need to play the ball not the man. I had no issue with anything you wrote in this article and made what I thought was a reasonable additional point that in no way contradicted anything you said. And yet you decide to jump all over me calling me "over the top"? Please point out one thing I said that was "over the top". And when you can't do that, I'll wait for your apology...
David Lord
Expert
You did Freo.
David Lord
Expert
Sigh as much as you like, I'm far removed from being paranoid, you just don't con me for a nano-second, and I'll always call you out when you're over the top like today. Normally I just leave you alone in your own little world of stirring.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
Sigh...don't be so paranoid David. El Loco and Paul understood my point correctly. Interesting the so-called expert didn't...
jameswm
Roar Guru
Great story. I remember playing grade and facing some 1st grade quicks in the nets. They couldn't believe I was facing up without a helmet, but in my time you didn't have them - they became the norm when I started playing again in my 30s. You relied on your wits like David said.
Peter Warrington
Guest
Chappelli has been on about this for years. Before helmets batsman hooked and rarely got hit. They might have got out. Now, with improved protection, batsmen rarely hook. And get hit, while not hooking. Hooking practise?
Peter Warrington
Guest
Yes wes pushing off the sight screen at Marrickville that season was apparently a memory some of the batsman never forgot
Paul
Roar Guru
David, no-one can take away your deeds on the cricket field and being able to face guys like this is something few of us will ever have. Your views are based on first hand experiences, so you know you're offering an opinion based on hard fact. Remarks to the contrary should be "treated with ignore".
David Lord
Expert
El Loco, and Paul, don't fall into the usual CtD trap. His dig at me was for giving advice from the safety of my living room, he hasn't given any advice, then condecendingly added - "but still, a bit of training in this area might save some lives".