The Teesra

Category: bowling

  • Looking for more variations

    Peter Philpott, in his “The Art of Wrist-Spin Bowling”, described the concept of a spinner going “around the loop” – keeping the finger movement constant, but rotating the wrist between successive deliveries, to change the direction of spin.

    So, for a right-arm wrist spinner, you might start with a “big leggie”, releasing the ball with the seam pointing at gully, or even cover; then a “little leggie”, with the seam directed to first slip; the top spinner, with the seam straight down the wicket; the googly, with the wrist now turned even further round so that the seam is spun towards leg slip.

    Shane Warne’s “slider” might be the delivery at the opposite end of the loop to the googly – still with the same finger movement as a regular leggie, but now with palm of the hand towards gully and the seam pointing towards leg slip but with the fingers spinning the ball back towards the bowler.

    And if that sounds like a convoluted description, just imagine how it must be to bowl the delivery!

    For the finger spinner, perhaps the loop from doosra, through top-spinner and on to the regular off-break could be continued on to include the “flipper”…and back to Saqlain’s teesra…perhaps.

  • What is the teesra?

    When I started this blog, I struggled to come up with a name that evoked the fascination I feel for the game of cricket. I didn’t want to write as the wrong’un, much as the googly would fit the bill – possibly the original mystery ball. Professor Bruce Charlton already had an excellent blog called the doosra.

    So I went one further. After the doosra (the second, or “other” on), comes the third one, or “The Teesra”. Saqlain Mushtaq was reputed to be developing a new mystery delivery, back in 2004. At the time, it wasn’t really clear if this ball ever was ever bowled in anger, or even exactly what the delivery might be.

    But a post on cricistan.com shows Saqlain bowling his “third one” (after the off break, and the doosra) in the 2008 ICL. [post no longer available; video clip removed from youtube for copyright violation]

    It looks like a flipper – palm of the hand facing away from the bowler at the point of release, the ball flipped out beneath the fore-finger. And the video clip shows the result as a seemingly short delivery pitches much further up than expected, and skids on to trap him leg before.

    So is this the new mystery ball? Or could it be Graeme Swann’s “gyro” arm ball?

    It doesn’t really matter – so long as spin bowlers can keep coming up with new ways to take wickets, the game will stay as fascinating as ever.

  • Ball tampering – is it really a crime?

    The recent third test between South Africa and England ended in a thrilling draw (for England fans). Another last wicket stand saw England “win the draw”, again.

    But during the game, accusations of ball tampering were raised (through the media, not to the match authorities). As the Laws of the Game stand, ball tampering is just about the most serious crime a cricketer can commit on the field of the play.

    It has to be stopped, but first it has to be proven.

    Duncan Fletcher, in an article in the Guardian, has suggested employing the third umpire to look out for misdemeanours.

    That makes a lot of sense.

    But only if we continue to see ball doctoring as a crime. Is it really such a bad thing, if ball preparation allows great (and not so great) bowlers to redress the imbalance between bat and ball? To allow the bowlers to remain competitive for the duration of the match, not only when they have a shiny new ball in their hands?

    In the same way that Murali was first condemned (still is, unfairly, in some quarters) for achieving something that no-one else could (i.e. for being too good), then ultimately accepted as the master bowler he is, should we encourage innovation in swing and seam bowling?

    And if that needs some preparation of the ball, why not?

    Why not allow the bowlers a better grip on the ball?

    I have written previously about the possibilities of spin-swerve, at pace, as demonstrated by baseball pitchers. I wonder how batsmen would react to a Shane Warne-like ball-of-the-century delivered at brisk medium pace, and faster?

    It’s possible, as shown by baseball pitchers. But of course, they are allowed to use their resin bag, to improve their grip on the ball.

    So why not allow bowlers to do the same?

    OK – one reason why not – a really skillful spinner, with a resin-enhanced grip, might make batting a much harder proposition (not such a bad thing, from this bowler’s perspective), and seriously cut short the time needed to complete a match.

    But how often is the final day of a Test match as enthralling as in the current SA v England series? And if you could fit a full Test match into just 4 days, then why not? In most countries, Test match grounds are rarely full on the final (5th) day. So there would perhaps be no real loss of (gate) revenue involved, especially if the first four days of a game can guarantee more action, and bring in larger crowds.

    Would the television channels still pay as much for a series of 4 day Tests? If the viewing figures were good (and the improved “product” should help to achieve that), then why not?

    So – why not give bowlers the chance to work on the ball?