The Teesra

Author: Andrew Beaven

  • Telling it like it is – communication matters

    An article in the Sydney Morning Herald provoked an interesting discussion on LinkedIn about the importance of communication for the coach.

    The article featured descriptions of individual batsmen’s techniques, including in-depth analysis of (perceived) technical flaws.

    To be fair to Neil D’Costa, the Aussie coach who came in for some criticism on the LinkedIn group, the descriptions look to me to contain pretty accurate diagnostic pen pictures, highlighting diversions from the “orthodox” technical models that we all refer back to.  We could argue about the remedies proposed, but I think the potential technical issues have been clearly identified.

    Whether they have been communicated adequately or appropriately is a different matter, however.

    (more…)

  • Numbers that matter – contributions that don’t show up in the averages

    An interesting question posted by Shamus Robertson to the LinkedIn Cricket Coaches Worldwide group on LinkedIn – can we quantify the intangible contributions that do not normally not show up in the averages?

    …if our top 6 all averaged 50+ would the hundreds matter?

    Averages can only tell part of the story.  Is a score of 350+ (6×50+, plus a few runs from the tail) going to be enough?  Can you score the runs quickly enough to bowl the opposition out, twice?

    More important than absolute numbers must be the context – runs scored to win (or save) a game are (should be) worth more than runs scored in a draw.

    Supporting a team mate through a long innings, and backing up in the field – not recorded in the score-book, and rarely acknowledged in match reports.  But these are the contributions that are missing from a less successful team.

    Off-the-field contributions count for a lot, too, especially away from the professional game.  Turning up on time makes a big difference on match day, and being available every week saves the skipper from wasting his week filling up the team sheet for Saturday.

    We should be recognising the overall contribution of our players, and not just the runs scored and wickets taken (important as these are).  But how to devise a contribution scale that combines the quantitative (averages, aggregates, results) with the qualitative?  Does it even need an objective component? (more…)

  • The campaign for real sledging – or why there is a problem with moronic chatter

    I have a confession.  I quite enjoy a little sledging.  If the fielding team decide to criticise my batting technique (and I give them plenty of scope for that!) I am generally quite happy to play along.

    There is no point getting annoyed, or distracted.  A quick response and, 99 times out of 100, back to the game.

    As a bowler, I see nothing wrong in letting a batsman know when I think he is lucky still to be at the crease.

    And it is a game (at Club level) and I really believe that a little banter doesn’t hurt it.

    For the pros, I guess there is “mental disintegration” as deployed by the Aussies (when they were good enough to win without resorting to this, but played the game any way).

    I do believe there is a place for “verbals”on the cricket pitch.

    But that does not include the inappropriate, unfunny, just plain boorish chatter, that we sometimes have to endure in the name of “sledging”.

    My own pet hates and worst “sledges”

    • “He’s only got one shot” or “he can only play {insert stroke here}” – especially, as I heard it recently, to a batsman who had just cut three consecutive long hops to the boundary, and missed a fourth…what stroke would you like?
    • “more blocks than Lego” – (possibly) funny once, but not any more.
    • “wicket ball!”
    • “your man”
    • and anything with “buddy”…

    (more…)