Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Top Contributors
M

mas cambios

Active Member
Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Neil Pinner, an off-spinner who plays for Worcestershire's second XI, may have found the answer.

The 19-year-old from Stourbridge is developing a delivery which bounces twice before reaching the batsman.

"It just makes it so much harder for the batter to hit it out of the ground, which is what they are trying to do in Twenty20 cricket," he told BBC 5 live.
Click to expand...

From BBC (BBC Sport - Cricket - Teenage spinner Neil Pinner devises double-bounce ball)

Any takers or better still anyone want to perfect it in a match?
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

we had a discussion about this at a cricket match yesterday. personally i think its retarded.

"If we can perfect that and bowl six balls that bounce twice and they can't hit them out of the ground, then I'm doing my job as a spinner,"

no, if you have to bowl balls that bounce twice then youre not doing your job at all, youre clearly not good enough to be playing professional cricket. there are so many talented spinners in club cricket that dont make it pro, so it just angers me when people like this make it.

in T20 cricket spinners should be used as an attacking option, not a defensive one. you watch what happens when pace bowlers attack, and they end up getting dispatched to every corner of the ground because the added pace is so easy to hit. they take pace off the ball and they restrict scoring rates.

spinners try to bowl defensively and restrict runs and batsmen figure them out and go after them. spinners that constantly attack might go for runs initially, but they take wickets. Steve Smith is a good current example, he attacked at the T20 world cup and took wickets, but was fairly expensive. Saeed Ajmal defended and cost Pakistan a place in the final. someone like Graeme Swann can attack so consistently that he also restricts scoring, hence he took a lot of wickets and still didnt go for many runs. thats why hes the number 1 spin bowler on the planet at the moment though. wickets also reduce scoring rates, so attack is definitely the best form of defence in T20 for a spinner. whereas defence is the best form of attack for pace bowlers. medium pacers and very fast off spinners can find a happier medium.

if the double bouncer does come about, the rules in T20 will be changed. i cant remember ever seeing an international player bowl a double bouncer. and T20 is about pulling in crowds, and its batting power which does that. so anything which compromises the main ingredient of the biggest money maker in cricket will quickly be quashed.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

I have to agree... it is all a bit strange.

Delivering a ball that bounces twice is easy; all little novices do it with unfortunate regularity. We allow a ball that bounces twice but it always appears as a concession; until the bowler can get better and progress to a 'proper' bowler, who can deliver cleverly... only bouncing once :confused:.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

There was someone trying to perfect a double bouncer in the KFC bigbash last season as well. It was one of the part time bowlers, I cant remember for sure, it could have been Brad Hodge? I wasn't sure they weren't joking when i heard it.

NSW and Australian legspinner Arthur Mailey took wickets with double bouncers in first class games back in the 1920's. Les Keating from Victoria was one of his double bounced victims. Mailey had a unique personality and a reputation for his humour that let him get away with it without too much criticism.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

It's silly indeed, but 20 years ago we would have said the same thing about the switch hit and the 'dilscoop'.

However, I'm sure that the moment somebody attempts to do it on purpose in first class cricket it will be banned, because innovation is only allowed if you are a batsman.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Ashraful once got AB DeV with a double bouncer. It was an outrageously poor ball. Personally I think it's a joke. If you're not consistent enough to pitch it up SOMEWHERE near the batsman then you shouldn't be bowling spin, or playing cricket for that matter.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

A couple of years ago I was no balled after I accidentally bowled a double bouncer, and since then I had thought it actually was illegal. Now that I read this I have learned that it actually is not - I was cheated all those years ago! :D

Saying that, though, I thought it was illegal for a reason.

Besides it wouldn't be easy to bowl. If you perfect bowling it, the batsmen will perfect hitting it.

As said in the article:
"It will be a challenge to bowl, you've got to take the pace off so that it does not bounce twice too quickly," he said.
"But if it's slower and you get it wrong batsmen can set themselves and smash it out of the park."
Click to expand...

I have enough trouble trying to land my off breaks where I want them with one bounce, let alone trying to land the first bounce where I want it and work out where it will bounce second.

Get it wrong and it really is a no-ball, or you have just bowled a half tracker that is easy to clobber out of the park.

Get it right, though, and it would be fairly hard to hit. It would skid, possibly spin with bounce the first, skid on the second bounce.

As a cricket watcher and player I would hate to watch/face/bowl alongside a double bouncing bowler. Not only would it be no so good to watch, but detract from playing the game as well.

In the end, though, it's just not cricket, if not anything else.

As A for Effort said, it is innovation, like the switch hit, but the switch hit brought exciting batting. Double bouncing would bring about boring bowling and boring batting. Not much innovation IMO.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

It would force a lot of switch hits etc
Hell the only wicket last night i took was when I tried to pitch a short one, pitched it far too short and it double bounced on the crease...
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

the ECB have banned it, but the MCC have deemed it fine, so its still feasible for international cricket, as well as T20 competitions in other countries.

i actually bowled a double bouncer last night. by accident whilst trying a flipper. the ball got stuck in my hand and i dragged it down a bit, but because the backspin it still carried through, just with 2 extremely low bounces, and would have bounced a third time had the batsman not managed to get bat on it. he only hit a single though. i dont think it would really work as a regular ball, as batsmen would easily adapt to it. but as a variation it probably has some use for restricting a run. say you wanted to keep someone off strike at the end of an over for example.

i didnt realise that an accidental triple bouncer wasnt an automatic no ball either. its at the umpires discretion, unless its bowled on purpose (im not sure how you would differentiate). i thought it would just be a rule set in stone, such that if the umpire didnt give it then it would be a mistake, rather than a choice.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Even though more than 2 bounces is not illegal if not done on purpose, would it still be able to get a wicket?

If it was bowled by accident and bowled somebody would that still be deemed out?
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

macca;400274 said:
There was someone trying to perfect a double bouncer in the KFC bigbash last season as well. It was one of the part time bowlers, I cant remember for sure, it could have been Brad Hodge? I wasn't sure they weren't joking when i heard it.
Click to expand...

From memory he bowled a ball off the side of the pitch that came back down and almost yorked Henriques. I thought it was an accident at first but he had a sly grin on his face like it was a dare from a team-mate or something. He conceded a single I think lol.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Boris;401578 said:
Even though more than 2 bounces is not illegal if not done on purpose, would it still be able to get a wicket?

If it was bowled by accident and bowled somebody would that still be deemed out?
Click to expand...

I, and I guess most, would refer to Law 24 (6)...

The umpire at the bowler's end shall call and signal No ball if a ball which he considers to have been delivered, without having previously touched the bat or person of the striker, either
(i) bounces more than twice
or
(ii) rolls along the ground before it reaches the popping crease.

To my mind, more than two bounces is not accepted and considered a bit of a pea roller. However, I might have given some very little people the benefit of the doubt in the past :).
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

That's how I would call it, Liz, and that's what seems a logical rule. I just don't get the part about whether it was deemed on purpose or not.

Aren't the rules of cricket just great? :D
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

I remember a game at the end of season 2 years ago I bowled a beautiful double bouncer that was a very bad effort at a wrong un, but it still spun back and bowled the batsman :D
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Boris;401615 said:
...I just don't get the part about whether it was deemed on purpose or not.
Click to expand...

Well... absolutely... where in the rules does it mention discretion? The rule clearly says, "...shall call and signal No Ball...", not "...may call and signal No Ball...", or, as in the report, "...can...".

However, I can see why the MCC are a little miffed. After all, a double bounce is within the rules and as they are the 'keeper' of the rules, I am not sure of the purpose of the ECB outlawing this delivery. Having said that, I really think the double bounce a little self defeating. As Jim says, the batsman would get the measure of it very quickly and the extra time would be a batsman's dream.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

Liz Ward;401632 said:
Well... absolutely... where in the rules does it mention discretion? The rule clearly says, "...shall call and signal No Ball...", not "...may call and signal No Ball...", or, as in the report, "...can...".

However, I can see why the MCC are a little miffed. After all, a double bounce is within the rules and as they are the 'keeper' of the rules, I am not sure of the purpose of the ECB outlawing this delivery. Having said that, I really think the double bounce a little self defeating. As Jim says, the batsman would get the measure of it very quickly and the extra time would be a batsman's dream.
Click to expand...

If I weren't so lazy as to find it all, there are a number of articles as well as it being discussed on here where it is put as the umpire's call as to whether or not it was on purpose. I was just wondering why I had read it so much when the rule states this.

And I think it would be quite effective, to take the opposing opinion, but would be nigh on impossible to bowl. Anything more or less would either end up as a half tracker or give the batsman plenty of time to smack it wherever and however they want.
 
Re: Double Bouncing balls the next big thing?

I think you have just explained the reason why the ECB outlawed this delivery. At least there is no ambiguity; not that I believe there is any ambiguity in the word "shall", but obviously some people read this as "discretion".

For instance, in Law 24 2(a) the words, " If, in the opinion of either umpire..." then listing three options of procedure. That to me suggests discretion... strongly suggests discretion. These words do not appear in Law 24 6.

Responsibility of the umpires, with respect to fair and unfair play is clearly stated, "If either umpire considers an action, not covered by the Laws, to be unfair..." but the double bounce is covered. However, (referring to another thread), this includes the treatment of the ball and if the umpire is not happy with the way a player is 'shining' the ball, he has several options, including awarding 5 penalty points to the batting side.

Going back to ambiguity, the laws clearly state, with respect to height of full delivery under 'Dangerous and Unfair Bowling', that it is "...deemed dangerous and unfair, whether or not it is likely to inflict physical injury on the striker..." if the delivery is above waist height for a fast ball but above shoulder height for a slow ball. How often is this misinterpreted? Yet the wording is clear. To me, the wording is as clear as the MCC can make it. I think the problem is there are too many unqualified umpires, who probably do not know the laws, setting too many precedents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top