John Arlott in conversation with Mike Brearley

I watched the BBC's newly edited version of "John Arlott in Conversation with Mike Brearley", with some trepidation.  Here was the owner of the voice of cricket from my youth, about to be quizzed by one of England's most successful captains, the man with the reputation of having perhaps the most probing mind amongst all England cricketers.


In the days when I had time to watch or listen to broadcast cricket matches, I longed to hear more of Richie Benaud's expert dissection of the play - Benaud could tell you exactly what had just happened, and why - but Arlott remains the only commentator, ancient or modern, who could describe a cricket match with his poet's eye and entrance sports fans and non-fans alike.


The original programmes were not scripted-for-TV interviews.  The pauses, for thought and for another glass of wine, might not be allowed in a modern broadcast (maybe even not in 1984, when the original interviews took place, but for the remit of the then recently launched Channel 4 to provide an alternative to then existing channels).


But "John Arlott in Conversation..." is a most moving portrait of a truly human human being, who also happened to be the greatest commentator on cricket, ever.


"What do they know of cricket who only cricket know?" - CLR James


John Arlott knew so much more than cricket.  But let's not talk about that any more.

Good cricket again - can match rules help?

There is a lively debate going on in my Club this autumn, as our League seeks opinions on the best form of cricket to encourage younger players to stay in the game after they leave the Colts set-up.  Do we go with limited overs, because every one watches IPL and T20 and wants to play that way?  Or can we come up with a formula to make "time" cricket more attractive?

I admit to being biased.  I grew up playing time games (or "proper" cricket - there's the bias!), and to me the dual challenge of scoring runs and taking wickets almost always makes for a more interesting game than the "simple" run chase of a over-limited match.

I enjoy T20.  But I still think that the more consistently successful players are using skills from the longer game.  And as a coach, I think young players will learn more varied skills by playing a variety of forms of the game.

But can "time" be made as attractive as T20 to the younger players?  I think it can.

"Action stations" - whatever happened to standing still and waiting for the ball?

As a young batsman, the absolute importance of standing still until the bowler released the ball was drummed into me. And more recently, as I have worked through various levels of the coach education process, the same mantra is still repeated - pick up the bat, yes, think about leading with the dipped front shoulder, but don't move the feet too early.

It's not easy. And when young players see the professionals twitching, shuffling their feet, and generally not standing still, it can be even harder to convince them to stick to the text-book and wait until the ball is released. So I was fascinated to read an article in the Summer issue of the ECB Coaches Association "Coaches Matter", with Graham Thorpe, now England's Lead Batting Coach.

The article describes how England's top batsmen are now being coached to adopt the "action position" as they wait for the ball, replacing what can be uncoordinated trigger movements with a coordinated pre-delivery sequence to initiate rhythm and activate muscles.

The position is described as being like that used by a boxer - balanced, ready to move forward or back, and decidedly not static.

A lot of top batsmen (most?) have never stood perfectly still when they wait for the bowler. Alistair Cook, for example, now seems to open up his front foot just a little before the ball is released. And it works for him.

Paraphrasing slightly from the article...

The width of the [action] position can be established approximately by dropping the back knee down...where the knee meets the heel of the left foot (for a right-hander) that is a good indicator of the "action" position.

Take a look at Eoin Morgan (bear with the ad from ESPNStar - it is only short) as he talks about his unique stance. With that back foot pivot and bend of the back knee, this looks very like the movement described in the ECB article - except Morgan performs it as the bowler is running in!

And it most certainly works for him!

OK. This is advice for players facing the very best bowlers in the world. And it is clear that the movements must be coordinated, and repeatable.

But next time one of our young players starts a pre-delivery trigger movement, perhaps we will try coaching him into the action position, rather than telling him to stand still!

To Fenway Park, home of the Red Sox – does anyone sing?

Hardly anyone sings the Star Spangled banner, to the dismay of my companion, CC, a baseball traditionalist (who does sing)…I am a visitor, so I am forgiven.

The line “the land of the free” does get the crowd cheering, but why wait so long to participate?

“They are all too uptight”, is CC’s diagnosis – “there’s no physical contact in the crowd, and no one sings until they have had a few drinks.” And, indeed, come the seventh innings stretch, many more voices join in with “Take me down to the ball game”. And by comparison with the anthem, the rendition of Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline…oh, oh, oh”, a favourite for the Red Sox fans, before the ninth is almost ecstatic.

But I had expected something else in the home of the brave, and so did CC.

"Mental disintegration" - is sledging ever justified?

I have spent more time umpiring than coaching this season. Not a conscious decision, but it seems to have worked out that way. And it has to be said that you do get a different view of the game when you are wearing the white coat.

I stood recently in a U16 Colts' game. There was some niggle between one of the opposition bowlers and one of our batters. When the bowler's turn to bat came, he received a fair few comments, from the batters team-mates - nothing abusive, certainly no swearing, no disparaging remarks, beyond the odd "can't get it off the square", and out-loud questions about when he was going to start hitting the ball. And, inevitably, the bowler-turned-batter tried to hit a ball that he would have been better off blocking, and soon was on his way back to the pavilion - to silence for the fielding team.

Classic "mental disintegration", as I believe the Aussies used to call it (when they were winning).

I raised the question with the other coaches and senior members of the Club - as umpire, I saw nothing wrong (nor did my colleague in the white coat, standing "for" the opposition), but was sledging something we should be coaching and encouraging, or actively discouraging?

As our Club Chairman reminded me, the ECB’s Code of Conduct, which incorporates the Spirit of Cricket, specifically states that:

Players and team officials shall not intimidate . . . . an umpire, another player or a spectator. . . . shall not use crude and/or abusive language (known as “sledging”) nor make offensive gestures or hand signals nor deliberately distract an opponent.

I tend to the view that some form of sledging is inevitable in the game - there will always be (and always was) a certain level of chatter, and, so long as it stays broadly respectful of the opposition I think there is a place for it, even in the amateur club game. And if it is done with a sense of humour, it can be even more devastating, I find.

However - the coaching point from the U16 match might be to get the lads to ponder how they would deal with the situation if they were on the receiving end of concerted sledging. Control and concentration at the top of the list.

You are the umpire...Google to the rescue

A fast full toss flashes over the top of the stumps, pitches just in front of the wicket-keeper and bursts through his gloves, hits the keeper's helmet (correctly placed on the ground behind the keeper, in line with the stumps), then careers on to crash into the sightscreen.

No ball (full toss, above waist height).
Five penalty runs (ball strikes protective helmet belonging to the fielding side, on the ground)

...then what? Four (more) no balls?

I stood in a Colts' game a couple of weeks ago, when this happened. I am not a qualified umpire; nor was my colleague. We conferred, scratched our heads, thought about running off to find a copy of the Laws...then my colleague pulled out his smartphone, googled "helmet penalty runs", and got the answer back in seconds.


I know the professionals (and all qualified umpires) would never need to resort to Google, but it worked for us!


oh, the answer - the ball was dead as soon as it struck the helmet on the ground (Law 41, paragraph 3), so 1 no ball plus 5 penalty runs (plus a warning to the bowler).

Twenty20 - "good cricket"? Oh, yes!

There is an interesting discussion on the PitchVision Academy on the merits of twenty20 as a coaching model for young cricketers. Sometimes the performances of the top players can look almost superhuman, and it can be difficult to find ideal models for younger players to follow.

Trying to hit the ball as far as Chris Gayle, or playing the Dil-scoop, or bowling 150kph yorkers like Lasith Malinga - surely, that's only for the professionals?

Is there something in twenty20 for younger players (and amateurs at all levels) to aspire to?

If you saw the IPL2011 game between Deccan Chargers and Delhi Daredevils, then the answer has to be yes.

Top order wickets with aggressive, high class quick bowling. Proper spin bowling (by which I mean slow bowling with the emphasis on spin and variation). And above all, quite magnificent striking.

The game will quite understandably be remembered for the innings of Virender Sehwag. But the Daredevils' innings started with Dale Steyn and Ishant Sharma reducing Delhi to 3-25 of 5.5 overs with direct, back of a length, flat-out fast bowling. And if the Chargers had held their catches, Amit Mishra's legspin and googlies would have got the reward they deserved.

So - if you are going to bowl fast, then really bowl fast. Spin the ball hard. Oh, and hit the ball a long, long way.

OK, the last one takes some doing, and some of Viru's hits weren't out of the (old) MCC Coaching Handbook. But that knock was as much about the mental strength needed as the stroke play, and even the ECB Coaches Association now recognises the "slog sweep" (it features in the excellent "Howzat!" DVD) - you just need to learn how to play the shot.

And if that all doesn't provide inspiration for young cricketers, then I don't know what would!