Field Settings for Leg-Spinners

Top Contributors
someblokecalleddave said:
Here's the first one. This field was set for me, by the captain Alex McLellan Sept 2010. Initially I didn't get it as he put it into place, but he came over as I started by spell and said that he'd been watching both the bats (RH) and one in particular was strong on sweeping across the line of flight (I was coming over the wicket) hitting the ball to deep square leg round to deep mid wicket and rarely played through the off-side or straight. The other was trying to get the ball to the on-side and had a slightly more confident approach to playing straight.

.
Alex%2BMcLellan%2BSept%2B2010.jpg
Click to expand...

mate where s the gully?i think you should have a fielder at silly point
 
someblokecalleddave said:
Here's potentially what I'd set for myself if I had the confidence, I think though after last season even though it was pretty awful, I've got some sense of the kind of field I'd set at the start of the game till I'd settled and had some sense of how my bowling was going and how the bats were dealing with my bowling. This is it here.
Someblokecalleddaves%2BField%2Bsetting.jpg


The diagram at the bottom indicates my bowling line - over the wicket at middle and off - looking to turn the ball away from the edge of the bat. The bloke that's in the 'Square 3rd man position' (11) would be brought up to a position at Gully depending on how the batman was playing the ball, if say he was playing straight bat shots trying to hit it through the covers with a chance of inviting the edge. If I was getting on top of him and he was playing defensively he may then be brought into short extra cover or silly mid-off, with point being pushed back slightly. In the same way Deep Square Leg would be brought up into a more conventional position. (10) at fine leg would stay in that position for Wrong Uns. Whether that makes any sense or not to other bowlers I don't know. A lot of what you do is dictated by the batsmen and how they're playing and what their strengths are. Reading the batsmen and responding to what they do is a whole new facet of the game that takes a great deal of nous. At the moment it's been interesting to see Ricky Ponting in the Ashes moving blokes around in response to where the balls being hit in the same over and he's getting slated by the commentators, so it's not easy.

I've found that neither the batsmen or the wicket keepers can pick my wrong uns and the end up down the legside, so I like to have a bloke in at a position at 10 and he can also potentially pick up balls that hit the inside of the bat.

From http://www.pitchvision.com/field-se...l-any-wicket-long-format-right-handed-batsman

  • Accurate leg spinners can move silly midwicket to the offside to make a 6/3 split field.
    • Googly bowlers will need a fielder behind square on the leg side. This can come from silly midwicket, gulley or the covers.
      • Faster leg spinners with less spin may benefit from a deep midwicket instead of silly midwicket.
        • Gulley can go a little deeper or move to short third man but always keep someone behind square on the leg side as the ball goes there a great deal.
Click to expand...
this one is intersting
 
shashivardhan said:
mate where s the gully?i think you should have a fielder at silly point
Click to expand...

The bloke who was captain on the day was a Leggie himself and the 2 bats were strong on the legside hitting the balls for fours and sixes. It almost worked, I think I had 2 balls put down at Mid on, another put down at deep forward mid wicket and one drop short off a wrong un top-edged at silly mid off. Yeah it is an unconventional but I think he calculated they didn't have any off-side shots. I nearly worked for me on the day, just the fitness and agility of the players prevented the catches being successful.
 
I think probably the simplest field is to start with a 3 man ring saving the single on either side of the wicket, then depending on the state of the game and where the ball seems to be going, use the other three men either as boundary riders, close catchers, or some kind of combination of the two.
 
I couldn't download the file on someblokecalleddave's blog, so I've made my own...
Leg spin - Defensive RHB.png
This field would be a defensive field against RHB's, I'm not a captain and I generally have very little say in matches when it comes to field settings, but my thinking behind this is that I would bowl a leg stump/outside leg stump line on a good length from over the wicket.
Then, I'd have a short fine leg in case I stray too wide, A man on the 45' for top-edged sweeps, a man on the deep square leg boundary (just in front of square) again for the sweep shot, a mid-wicket to save the easy single a man at cow corner if they are slogging, mid-on and mid-off for leading edges as they attempt to work it to leg or for drives, cover/extra cover in case I stray towards the off-side and a man on the deep point boundary to stop the cut shot.
Again, I'm very inexperienced in this area so please feel free to correct me on anything I've got wrong.
 
loopylegspinner said:
I couldn't download the file on someblokecalleddave's blog, so I've made my own...
View attachment 235
This field would be a defensive field against RHB's, I'm not a captain and I generally have very little say in matches when it comes to field settings, but my thinking behind this is that I would bowl a leg stump/outside leg stump line on a good length from over the wicket.
Then, I'd have a short fine leg in case I stray too wide, A man on the 45' for top-edged sweeps, a man on the deep square leg boundary (just in front of square) again for the sweep shot, a mid-wicket to save the easy single a man at cow corner if they are slogging, mid-on and mid-off for leading edges as they attempt to work it to leg or for drives, cover/extra cover in case I stray towards the off-side and a man on the deep point boundary to stop the cut shot.
Again, I'm very inexperienced in this area so please feel free to correct me on anything I've got wrong.
Click to expand...

Mate, I think for most of us, this is a long haul. It takes most of us several years to land the ball in the right place to justify having a field set in one way or another. If you're not that special at batting that hinders your progress as well, as you don't have the advantage of the insights of a batsman. As much as you can listen out for things Warney says about fields, he talks a lot of sense and makes you aware of what you might do. With experience, you can apparently identify the weaknesses in a batsman's technique through things like stance, grip on the bat, shoulder positions etc. Then when they start hitting the ball, they give away more clues. Good bowlers, captains etc identify these weaknesses and the set the field in accordance. Me for instance, I can't cover drive to save my life, but I can block quite well, so no matter what you throw at me (Seamers) if it's on the stumps I can deal with it. But anything a little outside I would just leave, dependent on the state of the game and the requirement to make runs. With a need to make runs, outside of off-stump with an umbrella field and I'd be gone within a few balls.

One of the things I've done this season is start with Mid on and Mid off up level with me. The theory being there....
1. It implies that you're not expecting them to hit the ball over their heads, because your bowling is going to negate that as an option.
2. Or it says, 'Go on, look there's a big space there, a nice straight drive over the top and you'll be filling your boots with 4' and 6's.

If they then start playing like that with a straight bat, I might find an edge or if they're skipping down the wicket a stumping might be on? (That's my theory). But the whole idea of leaving big gaps to encourage them to play certain shots, especially when that shot has been identified as being flawed is at the root of those that Warne discusses.
 
The only thing I can add is that you shouldn't be setting fields for bad bowling, you should be setting fields for how the batter will play you and from there you can decide how defensive or attacking you want to be. Often hear people say "I have to have a player there in case I bowl a long hop/full toss etc", not only is that horribly negative but you are basically telling the batter that they can expect some filth from you at some stage so they won't have to bother attacking the good deliveries.

If you're bowling well and being whacked you can set a defensive field, if you're bowling poorly and being whacked there's normally little you can do as you'll find the batter will find new places to hit the ball when you adjust the field.
 
Field settings are always a fascinating discussion.

loopylegspinner said:
I couldn't download the file on someblokecalleddave's blog, so I've made my own...
View attachment 235
This field would be a defensive field against RHB's, I'm not a captain and I generally have very little say in matches when it comes to field settings, but my thinking behind this is that I would bowl a leg stump/outside leg stump line on a good length from over the wicket.
Then, I'd have a short fine leg in case I stray too wide, A man on the 45' for top-edged sweeps, a man on the deep square leg boundary (just in front of square) again for the sweep shot, a mid-wicket to save the easy single a man at cow corner if they are slogging, mid-on and mid-off for leading edges as they attempt to work it to leg or for drives, cover/extra cover in case I stray towards the off-side and a man on the deep point boundary to stop the cut shot.
Again, I'm very inexperienced in this area so please feel free to correct me on anything I've got wrong.
Click to expand...

I tried to imagine batting against you with that field and you've got 6 on the leg and only 3 on the off, including no-one saving the single square on the off side. I would probably just drop a single down on the offside every ball.
You would then be forced to pitch the ball outside leg stump to stop me: this is a line that is very difficult to take wickets because I can just block the line of the stumps with my pads and pick off boundaries through the legside.

leftie600 said:
The only thing I can add is that you shouldn't be setting fields for bad bowling, you should be setting fields for how the batter will play you and from there you can decide how defensive or attacking you want to be. Often hear people say "I have to have a player there in case I bowl a long hop/full toss etc", not only is that horribly negative but you are basically telling the batter that they can expect some filth from you at some stage so they won't have to bother attacking the good deliveries.

If you're bowling well and being whacked you can set a defensive field, if you're bowling poorly and being whacked there's normally little you can do as you'll find the batter will find new places to hit the ball when you adjust the field.
Click to expand...

This is a phrase I hear a lot, but I always think you're better setting an appropriate field for your standard of bowling than kidding yourself and going for 12 an over because you refuse to put a man on the legside boundary. Set whatever field is most likely to encourage you to bowl well.

As Warne said: attacking bowlers need defensive fields, defensive bowlers need attacking fields.
 
leftie600 said:
I think you've interpreted me to the extreme there SLA.
Click to expand...

Apologies if it came across as a criticism or argumentative, I'm just thinking out loud, trying to get to the bottom of this expression.

I think there is a difference between "you can't set a field for bad bowling" ie, it is impossible because given a competent enough batsman and poor enough bowling, the fact is that wherever you put your fielders, the batsman will just hit it for a boundary elsewhere, and "you shouldn't set a field for bad bowling", ie even if you know the bowler is probably going to bowl a long hop, you should just hope for the best and set a ring field anyway because otherwise you are being negative/defeatist.

I agree with the first idea, in fact in game's I've captained I've had to explain this to a bowler before. "No you can't have another man on the legside boundary, you've already got 3, what you need to do is stop bowling legstump full tosses."

However I don't agree with the second idea, and I have definitely heard people interpret the phrase both ways. I always bowl with a man on the legside boundary, because if he isn't there I become so nervous about bowling a long hop that gets carted for four I stop spinning the ball properly and just start lobbing it up outside off stump. With a man back there I know that if I try something and it comes out wrong, at least its just a single.
 
leftie600 said:
The only thing I can add is that you shouldn't be setting fields for bad bowling, you should be setting fields for how the batter will play you and from there you can decide how defensive or attacking you want to be. Often hear people say "I have to have a player there in case I bowl a long hop/full toss etc", not only is that horribly negative but you are basically telling the batter that they can expect some filth from you at some stage so they won't have to bother attacking the good deliveries.

If you're bowling well and being whacked you can set a defensive field, if you're bowling poorly and being whacked there's normally little you can do as you'll find the batter will find new places to hit the ball when you adjust the field.
Click to expand...

What do you start with Leftie for the first over, or are you one of those blokes that can see how the bats are playing from elsewhere in the field? Similarly, when a new bat comes in - do you then re-set the field to some kind of default field till you get some sense of what his strengths and weaknesses are? Same with you SLA - what do you do?
 
SLA - Thanks for that, I am a little worried about how I come across as I am not the best written communicator. I have no issues for the first over or so setting a fielder out because you are nervous, my experience is that if you believe you will or always will do something then you will do it and this includes bad deliveries. Being positive about your ability (without ignoring reality!) is what I try and encourage.

Dave - Like SLA I have a 3 person pivot on which I base my fields, slip, cover and mid wicket, the others come in or out depending on the batsman. The 'swap' position for me is extra cover/forward point to deep midwicket.

My starting field for a RHB is generally slip, backward point, extra cover, cover, mid off, mid on, midwicket, deep square leg and a 45 which is closer to a backward square.
 
leftie600 said:
SLA - Thanks for that, I am a little worried about how I come across as I am not the best written communicator. I have no issues for the first over or so setting a fielder out because you are nervous, my experience is that if you believe you will or always will do something then you will do it and this includes bad deliveries. Being positive about your ability (without ignoring reality!) is what I try and encourage.

Dave - Like SLA I have a 3 person pivot on which I base my fields, slip, cover and mid wicket, the others come in or out depending on the batsman. The 'swap' position for me is extra cover/forward point to deep midwicket.

My starting field for a RHB is generally slip, backward point, extra cover, cover, mid off, mid on, midwicket, deep square leg and a 45 which is closer to a backward square.
Click to expand...

I like the idea that you start off with the intention of doing well right from the outset and send a signal to the bat you're looking to attack right from the start, this is something I've started to do now. In your set up that you've described there, do you have your mid-on and mid-off up or further out?
 
Is there any merit in using the 'leaving a gap' approach and bowling a tight off-stump line and having no-one in the area between point and the bowler, so you leave a whole quarter of the field free of fielders. To me being a useless batsman that leaves the only option to try and cover drive through that space if runs are required, which would be a guaranteed wicket within a few balls! I'll upload a suggested field for it in a while. Basic one, no photoshop, do it after my dinner...
IMG_4996.JPG
 
What do you reckon to the idea above? A total no-no, or does it have merits, say for instance in a case where you've identified the batsman can't drive the ball or maybe can only drive the ball, but isn't that good - I'm thinking tail enders, or do you think it's better than that?
 
someblokecalleddave said:
What do you reckon to the idea above? A total no-no, or does it have merits, say for instance in a case where you've identified the batsman can't drive the ball or maybe can only drive the ball, but isn't that good - I'm thinking tail enders, or do you think it's better than that?
Click to expand...



It really depends on the format. If you're lucky enough to play in a format where wickets are more important than economy rate, then the kind of tactics above make sense.

Unfortunately, 99.9% of the time I'm either playing straight 20 or 40 over games where a few expensive overs can cost you the game and so there is less room for experimentations like that.

As such, my field placings are pretty simple: other than the occasional luxury of a slip, I place my fielders where I think they will save the most runs, assuming I'm bowling my usual middle stump line.

In a normal 40 over game or a 20 over game where we're on top, this is 2 men on the boundary (1 straight, 1 legside), a slip and the rest on the single (3 on each side).

In a normal 20 over game, or a 40 over game where the batsmen are on top, this is 4 on the boundary (deep cover, long on, long off, deep midwicket) and 5 on the single.

In a 40 over game where we're on top, I would probably have 2 men in close, 6 on the single and only one man halfway back on the legside to catch a top-edged slog.

My only other tactic is to bowl outside off stump to a 6-3 field in 20 over games sometimes if we don't really want wickets.
 
To me 11 is wasted and should be in the cover region, with that field the batsman can sit on the back foot and smother anything full if necessary. Singles would be too easy.

Move 11 to cover and you'll find people will still look that way for runs.

In answer to your 1st question; I usually have mid off on the circle for 2 day games (realising there is no circle for 2 day games) and back for 50 over & T20, mid on will be slightly closer than mid off for 2 day games, back for T20 and one or the other for 50 overs.

I want batsman to look at the arcs from mid on to midwicket & cover to point as their scoring areas. I don't want them sweeping me to death or taking singles at will (unless it's T20 in which case a single is no great loss)
 
You could have 11 in as a short cover, this would force the batsman to try and drive the ball past him forcefully rather than simply pushing for a jogged single, which would significantly increase the chances of catchable nicks to your slip cordon.
 
Agreed SLA, far more logical than having the player on the 3rd man boundary. Most fields for a spin bowler generally have a player in all areas, it's the psychological effect on the batsman of having players in or out that's the key.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top