Technique is Overrated

[TNA]

Simon Katich, Shiv Chanderpaul, Fawad Alam are jeeta jaagta examples of effective run makers without the luxury of having a proper batting technique.

Many PPers rate players on techniques the players shuffles "lbw candidate not going to last" the players plant his foot awkwardly while strokeplay "wannabe sehwag"

a batsman rotating the strike, finding gaps, solid temperament by far trumps over a million dollar looking batsman at the crease.

How many of you agree?

[JibranAnsari]

yah , to some extent. But in tricky conditions , usually technique helps you to survive.

[Zeeraq]

Technique doesn't matter for me only score runssss that too on healthy strike rate's.

[bilawal666]

Yeah I agree to some extent considering there are players like Raina who's a really ugly looking batsman but he does the job which is basically to score a bulk of runs...

[Down2Earth]

poor technique will only get you runs on flat tracks.

[AZ]

the first 2 you have mentioned may look scraggly in their stance but are perfectly in position when its time to hit the ball.

and technique is most certainly not overrated, how many unorthodox batsmen have you seen to have long successful careers?

[kkmix]

Eoin Morgan is another example ... so is Gayle, so is Dilshan, Sehwag ... so many examples of people doing good at international arena with rubbish techniques ... so yes technique is definitely overrated.

[Zeeraq]

Originally Posted by kkmix Eoin Morgan is another example ... so is Gayle, so is Dilshan, Sehwag ... so many examples of people doing good at international arena with rubbish techniques ... so yes technique is definitely overrated.

Yeah Technique is Important but not the most important thing.
The most Important thing as a batsmen is to score Runs.

[bilawal666]

Originally Posted by Down2Earth poor technique will only get you runs on flat tracks.

also right!

[Chocolaty Laila]

Originally Posted by kkmix Eoin Morgan is another example ... so is Gayle, so is Dilshan, Sehwag ... so many examples of people doing good at international arena with rubbish techniques ... so yes technique is definitely overrated.

technique does not only mean footwork! look at their balance when they are about to face up, you can see they are ready to meet the ball properly!

unlike some fazool batsmen!

[kkmix]

Originally Posted by Chocolaty Laila technique does not only mean footwork! look at their balance when they are about to face up, you can see they are ready to meet the ball properly! unlike some fazool batsmen!

footwork is an essential part of the technique. If you don't have good foortwork, more likely you do not have good technique. I would also add Umar Akmal to player with bad techniques who are making name in the world these days.

[Chocolaty Laila]

Originally Posted by kkmix footwork is an essential part of the technique. If you don't have good foortwork, more likely you do not have good technique. I would also add Umar Akmal to player with bad techniques who are making name in the world these days.

it is important but like many examples in the world, not the be all and end all of it! more important than that is balance! one cannot time his shots if he does not have that.

as for - his technique is perfectly fine, just lack of application and experience.

[Hasnain_786]

umar akmal has an ugly technique but has good looking shots

[Chocolaty Laila]

you clearly do not know the difference between technique and shot selection.

[JibranAnsari]

umar akmal has ugly technique? thats a news to me.

[kkmix]

shuffles too much at the crease ... not a sign of great technique.

[ads101]

Good technique pretty much separates the village cricketers from the international guys. Technique is important.

Katich and Chanderpaul (Fawad too, but he hasn't had much of a career yet) don't necessarily have bad technique. Their technique allows them to cover most areas and defend their wickets. Their strange movement and technique actually makes them pretty hard to bowl at.

Examples of poor technique might be Raina and the weakness to the short ball in test cricket. And he gets out to it plenty because of that technique.

Perhaps what you mean is "good looking" technique is overrated. Which it clearly is. You don't need to play as elegantly as guys like Mohammed Yousuf or Brian Lara to succeed in test cricket.

[Quick Single]

I think people are getting mixed up with player's who don't move their feet, Dilshan, Sehwag etc, and those who have horrible techniques, Shazaib, Fawad etc.

[zains_rulez]

Originally Posted by tna fawad alam are jeeta jaagta examples of effective run makers

[TNA]

Originally Posted by ads101 Good technique pretty much separates the village cricketers from the international guys. Technique is important. Katich and Chanderpaul (Fawad too, but he hasn't had much of a career yet) don't necessarily have bad technique. Their technique allows them to cover most areas and defend their wickets. Their strange movement and technique actually makes them pretty hard to bowl at. Examples of poor technique might be Raina and the weakness to the short ball in test cricket. And he gets out to it plenty because of that technique. Perhaps what you mean is "good looking" technique is overrated. Which it clearly is. You don't need to play as elegantly as guys like Mohammed Yousuf or Brian Lara to succeed in test cricket.

Definitely agree but too much emphasis on having a good compact technique is being made these days and the judgement is already out on how the players will turn out to be in the near future.

Katcich, Chanders and Fawad are just few examples there are many others. They will still carry the tag of having poor techniques no matter how composed they look while defending their wicket. People will still cricticize flukey "50s" "100s" (which boggles my mind) what really matters is these flukey runs is what is going to win you matches. Fawad as you said hasn’t got much composure to intl cricket but katich and chanders has already made a mark by having sub-par technique and survived on swinging and bouncy pitches.

is a slogger; technique is irrelevant in his case


Spot on on the bolded part.

[TNA]

Originally Posted by Quick Single I think people are getting mixed up with player's who don't move their feet, Dilshan, Sehwag etc, and those who have horrible techniques, Shazaib, Fawad etc.

How?

[TNA]

Originally Posted by AZ the first 2 you have mentioned may look scraggly in their stance but are perfectly in position when its time to hit the ball. and technique is most certainly not overrated, how many unorthodox batsmen have you seen to have long successful careers?

AZ technique is overrated in the sense how much wieght its carrys when rating a players and so many other component of overall players ability are put aside just because he look ugly. Not fair

[sunnykhan]

Untechnical batsman with runs or Technical batsman without runs? PPers will mostly take the technical batsman without runs

[kingusama92]

I think the examples given by the OP are wrong.

Katich and Chanderpaul are always perfectly in balance by the time the ball reaches them. Yes, they have those awkward looking trigger movements, but they are always ready when it comes to hitting the ball.

A good example of succeeding with minimal technique would be Sehwag.

His exceptional and world class hand eye coordination allows for him to not move his feet. Any other player who attempts to play like him will have an average of 10 or less by the end of his very short career.

Only Sehwag can say technique is overrated. However, remember when Sehwag had that horrible one and half year patch of low scores? He took so long to recover because his hand eye coordination waned and he had no technique to fall back on.

Technique helps the batsmen grit things out.

[violet_may]

Has to be Sehwag with the bad technique. I don't think he is aware of the fact that God has indeed given him a pair of feet, which work.

And yet, he does quite well in most places.

[Eagle_Eye]

Hand speed can get you out of trouble providing you are sensible shot selection.

[Bullet Drive]

Definitely is overrated.

Sehwag & Chanderpaul are great examples.

[Zeeraq]

Batsmen should play with their natural style & score runs instead of focusing much on technique.

[sunnykhan]

Originally Posted by Zeeraq Batsmen should play with their natural style & score runs instead of focusing much on technique.

Ekjactly!!!!

[Bonafide Hustler]

You couldnt be serious? Is this a joke?


Technique is incredibly crucial to batting, it is not overrated. Players like Chris Gayle and Sehwag lack footwork which is just one method to reach technical supremacy.

The two most important aspects of batting technique are balance and weight transfer. All the best strikers in the world have tremendous balance and usually a very level head. These are far more important than simply getting your foot to the pitch of the ball.

Balance assists with weight transfer, if you are shifting your weight properly into shots, then you do not really require much feet movement.

In fact the lack of footwork exhibited by Sehwag, Gayle and to a certain extent even Lara at times has advantages. For one thing it allows them more time to play the ball, allows a free swing of the bat without the feet getting in the way, and allows them to shift balance more easily. If you are already planted on the front foot, it is difficult to shift your weight back etc

[humzy]

katich and chanderpaul have great technique.. shuffling doesnt mean ur technique is bad..

[Liverpool_Faizan]

Chanderpaul's technique is outstanding. Dont know what youre banging on about there.

Technique for me is what seperates good players from the world class players.

Ponting, Kallis, Dravid, Tendulkar, Alistair Cook, Hayden, Sangakarra are the players which I classfy as world class. All had/have outstanding technique. Whether that technique be used for defensive or attacking purposes.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by Down2Earth poor technique will only get you runs on flat tracks.

Sure - see Sehwag's king pair against England. Moving ball, no footwork.... curtains.

[velu]

Originally Posted by Robert Sure - see Sehwag's king pair against England. Moving ball, no footwork.... curtains.

but he got runs in NZ where it swings like England.

[saeedhk]

Agree to certain extent.Look at Sehwag, he just stands and hammers the ball.

[>>FaHaD<<]

Technique is important for composure and a lasting career. Technique has lead to Tandulkar as a batsman for years. Shahid Afridi would not have lasted more than 2 years if he were a speacialist batsman with no bowling skills!

Indeed its Runs what we want to see but then when the player is not scoring (normally the case against a bowling attack with a mind) then it is us who whine about finding better batsmen.

[AlizeeFan]

Originally Posted by velu but he got runs in NZ where it swings like England.

Century in NZ (in 2 ODIs which had even more difficult conditions than Enlgnad, both teams were struggling to cross 150), SA on debut, England, Australia and even in difficult conditions at Chennai where many England players with good technique will struggle to cross double figures.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by velu but he got runs in NZ where it swings like England.

Hmm, are the Kiwi opening bowlers as good as England's, though?

Think how much better Sehwag would be if he had good technique. He'd be another Bradman.

[AlizeeFan]

Originally Posted by Robert Hmm, are the Kiwi opening bowlers as good as England's, though?

They were good enough to restrict India to these scores

108
219 (108 by Sehwag)
108
122
168 (45 by Sehwag)
200(112 by Sehwag)
122

He was only player to score century on that tour.

[velu]

Originally Posted by Robert Hmm, are the Kiwi opening bowlers as good as England's, though? Think how much better Sehwag would be if he had good technique. He'd be another Bradman.

sehwag scored a king pair because of his temperament .
Both the times Anderson invited him to cover drive and he obliged, other than sehwag and afridi, most batsmen very well might have left the ball to the keeper.

Interestingly sehwag never bothered ( or not learned ), he had a swing at his first delivery by anderson in the 2nd innings of the 4th test , and he inside edged it for four.

NZ bowlers were not as good as current Eng bowlers, but our team performed worse in NZ that time than what we did in England this summer

[AlizeeFan]

Originally Posted by velu sehwag scored a king pair because of his temperament . Both the times Anderson invited him to cover drive and he obliged, other than sehwag and afridi, most batsmen very well might have left the ball to the keeper. Interestingly sehwag never bothered ( or not learned ), he had a swing at his first delivery by anderson in the 2nd innings of the 4th test , and he inside edged it for four. NZ bowlers were not as good as current Eng bowlers, but our team performed worse in NZ that time than what we did in England this summer

Sehwag was not always like this. I believe his batting has changed in recent years.

He didn't use to throw hand at each delivery blindly. He used to play carefully earlier.

His style of playing used to - if ball is there to be hit, he will hit it. Now he tries to hit even those deliveries which should be just defended. This is one reason why his SR has increased in last few years and his test form has suffered.

[velu]

@AlizeeFan

The reason why his average came down to 52 from 55 is because he was not playing any tests against pakistan

Last 4 years ( including this ) he averages 56 , 70, 62 and 11 ( only 2 tests )..
Sehwag is sehwag always ( except his first 5 years where his SR gradually increased from 65 to 78 )

[AlizeeFan]

^ Whatever be the case, he is one of the best player of spin bowling in the world.

[saj786]

Originally Posted by Bonafide Hustler You couldnt be serious? Is this a joke? Technique is incredibly crucial to batting, it is not overrated. Players like Chris Gayle and Sehwag lack footwork which is just one method to reach technical supremacy. The two most important aspects of batting technique are balance and weight transfer. All the best strikers in the world have tremendous balance and usually a very level head. These are far more important than simply getting your foot to the pitch of the ball. Balance assists with weight transfer, if you are shifting your weight properly into shots, then you do not really require much feet movement. In fact the lack of footwork exhibited by Sehwag, Gayle and to a certain extent even Lara at times has advantages. For one thing it allows them more time to play the ball, allows a free swing of the bat without the feet getting in the way, and allows them to shift balance more easily. If you are already planted on the front foot, it is difficult to shift your weight back etc

as a former palyer in a pretty high standard i've got to dissagree, all of yourpoints that you've made are nothing to do with technique, balance, weight transfer are all to do with WATCH THE BALL HIT BALL, by this i mean if you concentrate on watching the ball out of the bowlers hand then you automatically getin to position and play the ball, back to the main point tecnique is important to diferent levels of players, the average ones normally work on their tecnique, but the good and great rely more on their natural talent and like i said above their quick hand eye co ordination

[Robert]

Originally Posted by velu sehwag scored a king pair because of his temperament . Both the times Anderson invited him to cover drive and he obliged, other than sehwag and afridi, most batsmen very well might have left the ball to the keeper.

If Sehwag had got his front foot to the ball he would have driven both those Anderson deliveries for four.

NZ bowlers were not as good as current Eng bowlers, but our team performed worse in NZ that time than what we did in England this summer

Good teams tend to perform worse when playing bad teams. England are always dull in Kiwiland.

[OZGOD]

Originally Posted by TNA Simon Katich, Shiv Chanderpaul, Fawad Alam are jeeta jaagta examples of effective run makers without the luxury of having a proper batting technique. Many PPers rate players on techniques the players shuffles "lbw candidate not going to last" the players plant his foot awkwardly while strokeplay "wannabe sehwag" a batsman rotating the strike, finding gaps, solid temperament by far trumps over a million dollar looking batsman at the crease. How many of you agree?

I stopped reading after the part that said Simon Krapich was an effective run maker

[Cricfan4eva]

I think the OP has got stance and technique mixed up. Chanderpaul has one of the finest techniques while playing shots, his stance is unorthodox though, same can be said for Katich, he has a decent technique while playing shots.

Technique is definitely not over-rated, as there aren't many like Sehwag who succeed even without it.