Can you use this banned delivery to get more wickets?
It's the ball that either takes a great deal of skill or a total lack of it.
And it's been banned in English county cricket, but crucially not by the Laws making it a legal ball in club and school cricket.
Origins of the double-bouncer
Anyone who has played a questionable standard knows the double bouncing ball well. It's the hallmark of the occasional or beginner player. Also see: black trainers.
Some people think it is a no ball. However, Under Law 24.6 of the game the ball is permitted to bounce twice and only becomes a no ball on the third bounce.
Nevertheless, tradition dictates that the batsman smashes the filth to the boundary.
Tradition also dictates that such a ball is also a wicket-taker as the astounded batsman doesn't know how to deal with it. He swings to early and missed it altogether or hits it up in the air.
I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet that was the genesis of the idea developed by the Warwickshire bowling coach Graham Welch: To bowl one deliberately in T20 cricket.
The killjoys at the English Cricket Board quickly banned it in the county game; despite the MCC (the official lawmakers) saying it's a perfectly acceptable bowling variation.
What that means is the double-bouncing ball is still legal in most games.
So should you try and bowl it as a variation at the death or in Twenty20?
It would certainly be fun to try, but it wouldn't be easy to do on purpose as there is not much margin for error.
The first bounce must be dead on. If it's too short you end up with three bounces (and a no ball). If it's too full it's a long hop that a fielder has to retrieve from the pavilion roof.
The ideal would be a ball that reaches the batsman at yorker length on the 2nd bounce and hitting the stumps. It would be coming very slowly compared to your normal delivery but because of the length would be hard to hit.
As a shock ball at the end of an innings it's hard to fault. At the right, pace, length and line it is very hard to hit and very easy to get out to.
It would take quite some work to perfect as getting it wrong is a disaster.
My question to you would then be, if you are working on a shock variation, wouldn't a more traditional inswinging yorker or slower ball be just as effective against the standard of batsman you are up against?
I would guess in most cases, the answer is 'yes'.
In my mind perfecting a yorker would be easier and just as effective, and something I would encourage anyone I coach to work on first.
But if you are going to work on the double bouncer (and I applaud you if you do, cricket needs such ridiculousness) then don't just try it in a match. Take a box of balls to the nets, mark your target area with flat discs and get to work.
But let's not just get my opinion. After all, I'm a 'keeper who has never bowled a ball in a competitive match at any level.
What are your thoughts on the double-bouncing ball?
Have you tried it? How did it go? Are you prepared to practice it?
If you enjoyed this article, don't forget to get the free email newsletter every Friday packed with more coaching tips and advice.
- Login to post comments
Comments
I would say that the "slow bouncer" is the new shock delivery to be mastered. Brett Lee bowled it very well and it is very deceptive. I actually can't believe how well it worked, every time he bowled it in the IPL it was a dot ball.
well, i remember batting in the net and this spinner came on, and he did a double bouncer and i thought, THIS IS GOING TO THE BOUNDARY. basically i missed and i got bowled, this is y i bat 12 for my club
I'm not sure how effective a slow bouncer would be at club level whn most bowlers are not quick enough in the first place. There again, I've never seen anyone try it at my level, so maybe it works.
The club trundler that tries to bowl a slow bouncer may end up bowling a double bouncer. That could be a new variation, the slow bouncer double bouncer
Here is a wicket that falls to a double bouncer in a Test Match.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJp8jpDIycILol, a double bouncer... And I've even bowled a dozen bouncer....
Sadly that is a no ball.
I dont think it is applicable at senior level. At junior and especially the very young cricketing ages, it becomes a real, although unintentional, weapon! My son is a talented batsman at U8 level. Last season he was out more often to the double bounce - bowled- than any other way. I dont think coaches have ever tried to teach the method, but it is very often the only way a youngster can get a ball to pitch at a good length, the batsman sees dollar signs and next thing he is out!
Yes a deadly ball in U8 cricket for sure. Why is it not applicable at senior level?
Probably because no one has thought about it before. If it works, use it. The variation in the pace though is so great that senior players 'should' pick it easily. As for it being banned in some instances it is once again the traditionalists balking against anything which may change the game.(20/20 not long ago??)
Yes, I agree, they should, but I saw a waist high full toss get a wicket this weekend, so should and could are often different animals!
The difference is that a full toss will be faster than a normal ball or a double bouncer so you are rushed. My own opinion is that a full toss has never been the "easy" ball to hit that everyone makes it out to be. Look at how many over-full(read full toss) balls were bowled in the IPL and the world 20/20, especially at the death, on purpose. Which makes me think we are in fact talking about the same thing here. If a full toss is legal, a double bounce should be as well.
A little off topic but when the Aussies(Chappels) famously won a game against NZ with an underhand delivery, why was that a legal delivery on the bounce principle?
At the time it was legal to bowl underarm. (Or more specifically, it wasn't illegal).
Is the underarm delivery no longer legal? I have often contemplated asking my U8s to complete their overs this way when they are really battling in a match but have never yet gone that far!!
Yes, it's explicit in Law 24.1 (b) "Underarm bowling shall not be permitted except by special agreement before the match."
An interesting fact about the underarm incident is that in the rules for that particular tournament, underarm bowling was not allowed, even though it was still not outlawed by the MCC. The umpires for that game obviously did not read the tournament rules.