Field Settings for Leg-Spinners

[someblokecalleddave]

Another good source for ideas on field placings is Amol Rajan's book 'The Twirlymen'. There's no images, but the descriptions of the fields with all the positions are backed up with the theory behind the placement of the fields. Most of the them (The ones that I've come across so far) relate to bowling an off-stump line and there's some interesting fields that I'll produce as images in the next couple of days. But if you're a bit slow at this stuff as I am, it's interesting to read about the theory behind the settings, but once read it seems so obvious. The main aspect seems to be that you leave gaps trying to encourage the batsman to play specific shots and then bowl deliveries in accordance with increasing the chances of producing an outcome.

 

[Jim2109]

The main aspect seems to be that you leave gaps trying to encourage the batsman to play specific shots and then bowl deliveries in accordance with increasing the chances of producing an outcome.

This is definitely the key. Not just in field settings, well targeted banter can do the same. You set the batsman up to play a specific shot, and then you pitch up a delivery to induce a specific dismissal. For most people its hard to pull off, which is what made Warne so brilliant and successful, because he would do it to pretty much every batsmen. There weren't many "lucky" wickets in his career. I don't get it to work that often, but I do try it every game by leaving at least 1 gap in my field to induce a specific shot.

Yesterday I executed a short term plan to perfection. The pitch was turning big, and they had a really good batsman in at number 4 who wasn't smashing me, but looked comfortable. I plugged away on off and middle stump, and after a while he pulled out the reverse sweep, and executed it very nicely. He stood there admiring it and being cocky thinking it was a 4 without looking, but the ball didn't go, and he had to scramble 2 runs whilst all our fielders laughed. I knew I could easily wind him up and induce a stupid shot, so I shouted "he should have spent less time admiring his own shot and more time running", knowing full well that next ball he would prance down the wicket at me to drive a 6. And to be fair, he was good enough to do it if I pitched the ball on a good length.

So next ball I trundled in, and bowled the fastest full toss I could muster with loads of overspin. He did exactly as expected and came 2 big strides down the wicket (completely pre-meditated, because the delivery warranted staying back and pulling square), the ball went past at waist height with a ton of dip and hit the base of middle stump clean bowled. He walked off about as angry as a batsman can be with getting absolutely mugged by a bowler. He couldn't have looked more stupid if he had tried.

Not field setting related, but tactical all the same. You're aiming for the same sort of result with the field setting. Sometimes you'll have to sacrifice a few 6's and 4's to get the end result, but ultimately if you get it right and you've thought it through well enough you'll get your wicket.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

This is definitely the key. Not just in field settings, well targeted banter can do the same. You set the batsman up to play a specific shot, and then you pitch up a delivery to induce a specific dismissal. For most people its hard to pull off, which is what made Warne so brilliant and successful, because he would do it to pretty much every batsmen. There weren't many "lucky" wickets in his career. I don't get it to work that often, but I do try it every game by leaving at least 1 gap in my field to induce a specific shot.

Yesterday I executed a short term plan to perfection. The pitch was turning big, and they had a really good batsman in at number 4 who wasn't smashing me, but looked comfortable. I plugged away on off and middle stump, and after a while he pulled out the reverse sweep, and executed it very nicely. He stood there admiring it and being cocky thinking it was a 4 without looking, but the ball didn't go, and he had to scramble 2 runs whilst all our fielders laughed. I knew I could easily wind him up and induce a stupid shot, so I shouted "he should have spent less time admiring his own shot and more time running", knowing full well that next ball he would prance down the wicket at me to drive a 6. And to be fair, he was good enough to do it if I pitched the ball on a good length.

So next ball I trundled in, and bowled the fastest full toss I could muster with loads of overspin. He did exactly as expected and came 2 big strides down the wicket (completely pre-meditated, because the delivery warranted staying back and pulling square), the ball went past at waist height with a ton of dip and hit the base of middle stump clean bowled. He walked off about as angry as a batsman can be with getting absolutely mugged by a bowler. He couldn't have looked more stupid if he had tried.

Not field setting related, but tactical all the same. You're aiming for the same sort of result with the field setting. Sometimes you'll have to sacrifice a few 6's and 4's to get the end result, but ultimately if you get it right and you've thought it through well enough you'll get your wicket.

That sounds like a very satisfying piece of work Jim!

 

[shrek]

I play in a league where the batsmen are really aggressive and fancy themselves against spinners a lot - that combined to my woes starting a spell means I have decided that I will start off with just 4 in the circle. deep square leg, deep midwicket, long on, long off, sweeper cover, short extra cover, short midwicket, point and a gully. Once I get into a rhythm, I'll get the deep square leg into the circle as square leg and sweeper cover into circle.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

I play in a league where the batsmen are really aggressive and fancy themselves against spinners a lot - that combined to my woes starting a spell means I have decided that I will start off with just 4 in the circle. deep square leg, deep midwicket, long on, long off, sweeper cover, short extra cover, short midwicket, point and a gully. Once I get into a rhythm, I'll get the deep square leg into the circle as square leg and sweeper cover into circle.

I'm just watching some of the ODI India v WIndies and Mishra is bowling and the Windies are all playing him with a straight bat. Why don't that happen at club level ?!!!!

 

[shrek]

I'm just watching some of the ODI India v WIndies and Mishra is bowling and the Windies are all playing him with a straight bat. Why don't that happen at club level ?!!!!

I don't know Dave, but the moment someone starts with the horizontal bat, I love it. As it is, I get many many top edges on short pitched balls (unintentional ofcourse). So, any sweep shot, I'd shelve some of the side spin for more overspin and watch the magic happen. Hit them on the chest, head(if not wearing helmet) a couple of times and they will go back to straight bat shots (if not already dismissed by then)

 

[someblokecalleddave]

I don't know Dave, but the moment someone starts with the horizontal bat, I love it. As it is, I get many many top edges on short pitched balls (unintentional ofcourse). So, any sweep shot, I'd shelve some of the side spin for more overspin and watch the magic happen. Hit them on the chest, head(if not wearing helmet) a couple of times and they will go back to straight bat shots (if not already dismissed by then)

I think I must be bowling crap at the moment or they're bowling me to far up the order as I seem to come up against good batsmen or more likely I'm just crap at coming up with strategies for batsmen that play anything other than straight bat drives.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Have a look at this...........

The theory can be found here - http://mpafirsteleven.blogspot.com/2011/07/1st-2-overs-field.html

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Here's a good link that goes over the fundamentals of setting a field.

http://www.pitchvision.com/setting-the-field-–-theory-and-practice/

 

[shrek]

Have a look at this...........

The theory can be found here - http://mpafirsteleven.blogspot.com/2011/07/1st-2-overs-field.html

A Decent field, but I do wonder if you need protection to save boundaries, if silly point will be effective? Perhaps a better use for that would be short extra cover - the gap in covers should still entice batsmen to drive, and if they don't reach the pitch, the drives tend to go in the air in the extra cover region - so he should be an important catcher. I'm not sure if square leg (9) is needed as you already have a deep square leg to cut off the sweeps/pulls. Not many catches are taken in the circle at square leg, so perhaps you can find a better place for that fielder.
I like leaving the vast empty space on the leg side to entice batsmen to nudge against the spin, but also believe that it will give away too many singles and won't let you settle into a rhythm. Perhaps, you can move 9 over to short midwicket - so that he can stop all the singles off nudges/pushes/drives

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Shrek, you might well be right, normally I'd never think of using the bloke at silly point, but he's there on the basis of experiential learning. My worst figures ever have both been at the same pitch and on both oacassions the batsmen were hitting the ball into the area between deep square leg and Long on and being a Sunday side the fielders weren't up to it and as I recall there was only one bloke out there and one at long off. The bloke at long off worked as he was a 1st team player and was fit and agile. Yeah you could be right about the bloke at Square Leg (9) maybe put him in at Mid wicket or perhaps deep cover point? Is that the kind of thing you mean when you say to save the boundaries?

I think overall I might be basing the idea on limit knowledge which I'm the first to admit to having. This field is based around one set for me - 'Alex McLellan field' where the 2 batsmen were happy to go big on the leg-side and he set the field to discourage the legside attack. They had a go and saw that they if it was sustained they would be caught, a couple were put down. They then started to drive through mid off and cover and in 3 overs 5 opportunities went begging. Two of the chances were almost taken by Point running in to the position at silly point and just not making it, hence the deployment there. The drives that came off the bat well ended up almost being caught just behind me at a more conventional mid off and mid on position, but that was because I bowled well straight off, whereas this field I'm thinking of as being a field set for the first 2 overs. The idea being that once I had settled I'd change it - bringing the mid on and mid off up, trying encourage hitting the ball over their heads.

What would your suggestion be?

 

[shrek]

Shrek, you might well be right, normally I'd never think of using the bloke at silly point, but he's there on the basis of experiential learning. My worst figures ever have both been at the same pitch and on both oacassions the batsmen were hitting the ball into the area between deep square leg and Long on and being a Sunday side the fielders weren't up to it and as I recall there was only one bloke out there and one at long off. The bloke at long off worked as he was a 1st team player and was fit and agile. Yeah you could be right about the bloke at Square Leg (9) maybe put him in at Mid wicket or perhaps deep cover point? Is that the kind of thing you mean when you say to save the boundaries?

I think overall I might be basing the idea on limit knowledge which I'm the first to admit to having. This field is based around one set for me - 'Alex McLellan field' where the 2 batsmen were happy to go big on the leg-side and he set the field to discourage the legside attack. They had a go and saw that they if it was sustained they would be caught, a couple were put down. They then started to drive through mid off and cover and in 3 overs 5 opportunities went begging. Two of the chances were almost taken by Point running in to the position at silly point and just not making it, hence the deployment there. The drives that came off the bat well ended up almost being caught just behind me at a more conventional mid off and mid on position, but that was because I bowled well straight off, whereas this field I'm thinking of as being a field set for the first 2 overs. The idea being that once I had settled I'd change it - bringing the mid on and mid off up, trying encourage hitting the ball over their heads.

What would your suggestion be?

Fielders 5,6,3 looked like those put to save boundaries to me. Silly point is really useless unless you have really good control over length.

That said, it is important to analyse the shots that are being hit in the cow corner ( fielder no:6), If it is a slog sweep, perhaps putting a wider long on and taking 6 out might be helpful. If it is off the short pitched ball that turns a lot so that pulls also go to no:6, then fielder no:3 might not be required.
On the other hand if you are like me and can bowl a half tracker followed by a waist high full toss, keeping all three on the leg side boundary makes sense. At least until you can avoid one of the two types of rubbish balls (i.e allow yourself leeway either on full tosses or on short pitched stuff, but not both)

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Fielders 5,6,3 looked like those put to save boundaries to me. Silly point is really useless unless you have really good control over length.

That said, it is important to analyse the shots that are being hit in the cow corner ( fielder no:6), If it is a slog sweep, perhaps putting a wider long on and taking 6 out might be helpful. If it is off the short pitched ball that turns a lot so that pulls also go to no:6, then fielder no:3 might not be required.
On the other hand if you are like me and can bowl a half tracker followed by a waist high full toss, keeping all three on the leg side boundary makes sense. At least until you can avoid one of the two types of rubbish balls (i.e allow yourself leeway either on full tosses or on short pitched stuff, but not both)

No, I was on form and all the balls were on and around the off stump, the length was okay as I recall, the other leg-spinner who spins hard, but hasn't got as much control as me was bowling down the legside and he was hoiked out to square leg and backward of square leg. The pace bowler who bowled with me at the other end I think they were hitting him across the line trying to get it to the on-side of the pitch depsite the fact that he was bowling a middle and off-stump line. As I recall they were both doing exactly the same thing. I think you probably give this a lot more thought than me and it's something I'm still wrangling with. I'll have to have a look at what you've suggested and draw another diagram based on your points and see how it looks.

 

[parbs1980]

A problem i had with a captain last season was that as soon as a bowler went for a few runs, the fielders were immediately put back offering protection. All this did was give singles everywhere and allowed the batsmen to play themselves in - i watched so many chances go wanting with no fieldsmen in catching positions, and with the size of our ovals at club level of course we ended up going for plenty anyway..

 

[Chaz Adam]

Eww, some of the fields posted here for starting are just dreadful. The last thing you want as a spinner is to be milked for runs and for a batsman to feel comfortable with you immediately. If you have 5 blokes back on the boundary, a batsman will go "this bloke is poor". 2 blokes out sweeping, on side and offside. If they are good enough to hit you back over your head well let them try!

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Eww, some of the fields posted here for starting are just dreadful. The last thing you want as a spinner is to be milked for runs and for a batsman to feel comfortable with you immediately. If you have 5 blokes back on the boundary, a batsman will go "this bloke is poor". 2 blokes out sweeping, on side and offside. If they are good enough to hit you back over your head well let them try!

Post some up then with some explanations, even if you just write them down I'll do the graphics and if I get it wrong tell me and I'll modify them. No-one here's a self proclaimed expert, we're all learners, so we'd love to hear from an expert.

On another note the majority of the fields here, as far as I can recall are fields set by 1st class cricketers, so it'd be interesting to hear which ones you think are dreadful and why, especially as looking back through them I can only see 3 or 4 that have 5 blokes on the boundary and they're all Warnes fields set in T/20 matches in his first 1 or 2 overs. Which now makes me a lot more interested in your claims that they're dreadful, as this would kind of suggest that you're a master of the art of wrist spinning with some years of experience and you're the kind of bloke we need on here to be a mentor to the rest of us and get involved on this thread. For a start what do you bowl - I'm assuming you're a wrist spinner?

 

[Chaz Adam]

I'm not self advocating that I'm a maestro by any means, however I am a RA wrist spinner yes. Remember that these fields are fields that are set by first class bowlers to first class batsman! (in t20's)

I just had another quick look over some of the other fields that were posted, and obviously there is a huge variance in what we all think is an acceptable field for a leggy. Indeed this variance will depend on the standard you play, the type of bowler youare and what are your strengths and weaknesses. (Not even starting on the playing surface)

For example there was one field with 4 men back on the leg side.... Now what you can gauge from that is that they are either bowling very slow, or they are bowling very much a middle outside leg line. (or coming on when batsman are slogging)

And Dave we are all just learning when it comes to leg spin, even Warne!

Now I suppose I was relatively harsh in 'having a go' at the fields set, but maybe I should ask - what are we trying to achieve when we bowl?

I would suggest that most leg spinners get sucked in to bowling leg stump line, that requires us to pack our leg side field if we fail to a) pitch b) turn the ball.

If I was to state that a leg spinners best weapon is a leg break, I wouldn't be stating anything new would I? So lets now take the line to a off-stump outside off stump line (especially when we first come onto bowl, we haven't seen how much we will turn it, bounce it, drift it).

I'm creating discussion rather than posting fields here... So would this line affect any of 'our' or the forums field placements for starting a spell and what effect would it have on our stock ball and other deliveries?

Chaz

 

[macca]

Off stump is a good safe line to start a spell with for sure.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Good stuff Chaz, it's late and I struggle getting my head round fields, so I'll have to come back to this tomorrow when I'm not so knackered!! But good to hear you're the real thing and you've taken the time to comment and are looking to get involved in a discussion, hope you stick around a while.

 

[chippyben]

I'm not self advocating that I'm a maestro by any means, however I am a RA wrist spinner yes. Remember that these fields are fields that are set by first class bowlers to first class batsman! (in t20's)

I just had another quick look over some of the other fields that were posted, and obviously there is a huge variance in what we all think is an acceptable field for a leggy. Indeed this variance will depend on the standard you play, the type of bowler youare and what are your strengths and weaknesses. (Not even starting on the playing surface)

For example there was one field with 4 men back on the leg side.... Now what you can gauge from that is that they are either bowling very slow, or they are bowling very much a middle outside leg line. (or coming on when batsman are slogging)

And Dave we are all just learning when it comes to leg spin, even Warne!

Now I suppose I was relatively harsh in 'having a go' at the fields set, but maybe I should ask - what are we trying to achieve when we bowl?

I would suggest that most leg spinners get sucked in to bowling leg stump line, that requires us to pack our leg side field if we fail to a) pitch b) turn the ball.

If I was to state that a leg spinners best weapon is a leg break, I wouldn't be stating anything new would I? So lets now take the line to a off-stump outside off stump line (especially when we first come onto bowl, we haven't seen how much we will turn it, bounce it, drift it).

I'm creating discussion rather than posting fields here... So would this line affect any of 'our' or the forums field placements for starting a spell and what effect would it have on our stock ball and other deliveries?

Chaz

I guess bowling off stump to outside offstump line is a safe and sensible option to begin a spell. Coming from a fast bowling background bowling full and wide of off stump was a tactic I used for bowling at the death. It limited shots to that side of the pitch and then you could just stack that side with a 7/2 field and protect the bounderies and at worst you were going for 6 an over at the end which isnt too bad.
So similarly you could have a more off side biased field to protect you from going for too many in the first overs whilst you start to get some rhythm going. The other benefit is a more open legside field would encourage the batsman to play across the line and against the spin. The downside to bowling this line with this field as I see it is you cant bowl anything on leg or definately nothing short or your going to be punished. But as Ive heard said on the field many times before "You can't set fields for bad bowling" except you can. Well you can seek to limit the damage from long hops etc, which is what the previous leg dominated fields set out to do. I think they are a pretty negative tactic though.
My theory, ( and it is only a theory as Ive only bowled a handful of legspin overs in a match) is to start off with the orthodox field with perhaps square leg and point on the boundary as protection for long hops early but to have someone under the batsmans nose from the beginning. My theory being, 1. The batsman may think, "gee this bloke must be alright, what am I up against??" 2. The batsman may think "I want him out of there" and play a rash shot. 3. Batsman usually have a look at you first and block a few. I get a lot of bounce and so one may pop up to the waiting man in the ideal case or even if he plays one that doesnt go straight down there will be a few oohs and ahhs from the field and hopefully that gets the batsmen into a negative frame of mind, just thinking about survival and making sure the next block drops the ball straight down. 4. Its a positive tactic, trying to get wickets early.
Of course there are always downsides and they are 1. You are left exposed with one less outfielder if you bowl badly. 2. You may be a bit more nervous bowling because you dont want to get your mate belted in there, but I think the benefits outweigh the negatives and you can always admit defeat and bring him out of there if things go badly.
Im still not 100% sure who to put in there though. My thinking was perhaps mid wicket in. This leaving a gap on leg to encourage playing against the spin. Also Im not sure about which side the close man should be. Perhaps leg if you have your square leg on the boundary, but this requires a more leg stump line. Silly mid off would be better if your bowling an off stump line early.
Anyway these are my musing, what do people think.