The folly of shielding the tail

[Ranjha]

Shielding is not necessary and sometimes costs useful runs that could be scored.

[The Outsider]

Don't want to rehash the same arguments by bumping the thread, but it was nice to see the commentary team finally acknowledge the sustained success of Laxman's methods of batting with the tail.

[Bumper]

Jacques Kallis's batting yesterday was lesson in batting with the tail. When Steyn & Morkel was around Kallis was his usual self. Because he knew that both of them can bat. However after Morkel's departure Kallis took off. At 289/8, Kallis had just crossed 100. SA would go on to add another 70 runs, Kallis's contribution to this partnership is approx 60. He started hitting boundaries regularly. Laxman is good at batting with more accomplished tailenders. However if he has bunnies batting alongside him, he could show more urgency. That is the point a lot of us are making.

[akshayxyz]

Jacques Kallis's batting yesterday was lesson in batting with the tail. When Steyn & Morkel was around Kallis was his usual self. Because he knew that both of them can bat. However after Morkel's departure Kallis took off. At 289/8, Kallis had just crossed 100. SA would go on to add another 70 runs, Kallis's contribution to this partnership is approx 60. He started hitting boundaries regularly. Laxman is good at batting with more accomplished tailenders. However if he has bunnies batting alongside him, he could show more urgency. That is the point a lot of us are making.

Completely different situation ( if you are comparing with Sachin's innings in the first test match). Kallis's situation was about scoring as many runs as possible for first innings - Sachin's match was already a lost cause, best Sachin could have done was add another 30-40 runs to avoid innings defeat. Besides, I am sure the whole team had full night to discuss the strategy to be executed next day. And in most likelihood it was team's decision to let Sree try and face the bowling, and Sachin just executed that.

[Ram]

Once again, how many here think Lonwabo Tsotsobe would have added 50+ runs with Jacques Kallis, had the latter simply done what the opposition captain wanted him to do and handed Tsotsobe the strike every 1st or 2nd ball of the over? But to be fair to VVS, there’s a very good reason why he doesn’t try to hog the strike and attempt to go over the top towards the latter half of the over when the captain brings the field up to keep him away from the strike – He cannot, even if wants to. He simply doesn’t have a semblance of a power-game. If he tries to hit out unnaturally, like he did in the 2nd innings of the Durban test, he will more often than not, fail miserably. He recognizes that and doesn’t try to go over the top. This acknowledgements of his self-limitation is somehow bizarrely misconstrued a tried and tested strategy that can be applied across all conditions/situations.

[fineleg]

Once again, how many here think Lonwabo Tsotsobe would have added 50+ runs with Jacques Kallis, had the latter simply done what the opposition captain wanted him to do and handed Tsotsobe the strike every 1st or 2nd ball of the over? But to be fair to VVS, there’s a very good reason why he doesn’t try to hog the strike and attempt to go over the top towards the latter half of the over when the captain brings the field up to keep him away from the strike – He cannot, even if wants to. He simply doesn’t have a semblance of a power-game. If he tries to hit out unnaturally, like he did in the 2nd innings of the Durban test, he will more often than not, fail miserably. He recognizes that and doesn’t try to go over the top. This acknowledgements of his self-limitation is somehow bizarrely misconstrued a tried and tested strategy that can be applied across all conditions/situations.

MM changed the username :omg: Agree with the post. This is one of the reasons Laxman is not in ODI squad and Kallis is a super ODI player as well. Kallis can shift gears and play the power game and score boundaries aggressively.

[yoda]

Funny to see alternate camps bump this thread as the results sway their way. :two_thumbs_up:

[coffee_rules]

In 14 overs that they played, Kallis had to farm 6 times, the rest, TsoTsobe survived, but luck or bad bowling. Conventional wisdom says farming is better with tailenders like Tso who can't put bat to ball. Can't compare, will work some times, will not work. I think the data suggests, farming works most of the time. I agree with Kallis's methods and not Steve Waughs who has batted with better tailender batsmen.

[pensionplan]

MM changed the username :omg: Agree with the post. This is one of the reasons Laxman is not in ODI squad and Kallis is a super ODI player as well. Kallis can shift gears and play the power game and score boundaries aggressively.

Hmm. ok. VVS cannot shift gears and hence is not in the ODI squad while Kallis is a super changer of gears and has the power game for the ODI game and can score boundaries aggressively. Let us see. VVS ODI - S/R - 71.2 Kallis ODI - S/R - 72.7 Hardly anything to suggest that Kallis has a super power game that VVS does not. Some of these are just myths where some players are branded based on misconceptions than facts would support. VVS has a decent range of lofted shots which he can use if needed and he has shown that in the 6 ODI centuries he scored. Not in the class of a Richards or a Gilchirst but decent enough to hold his own if the need be to play a few to clear the infield and put the ball into the gaps and get boundaries. Even in the Durban Test VVS did play couple of inside out boundary shots over the infield off Harris where needed. And I have seen him employ the slog sweep effectively in Test matches before. Plus VVS has such a range of extraordinary ground shots using those magic wrists of his to create some geometrically impossible angles like none can and hence he rarely has to look for the ariel route which the others may need as a scoring option more often. So these are all myths been floated around with no cricketing acumen behind such claims whatsoever that VVS somehow does not have enough fire power to up the tempo where needed in Tests when playing with the tail and whatnot. All I have to say is pick up the tapes of all those blinders VVS played many a time in Tests and pay close attention to all the shots and one will realize his genius. P.S:-This is not an attempt to show that VVS is as good a ODI player as Kallis because it is not.

[ludhianvi]

In my opinion, there are a couple of factors that need to taken into consideration when batting with the "tail". 1. A lot of the bowlers have been really working on their batting and are quite eager to put in the hours. Case in point, a number ten like Ishant Sharma, has spent quite a lot of hours with Gary Kirsten in the nets and this coming straight from Gary Kirsten's mouth. I'm sure it is probably the case with others as well. So bowlers are getting better because they're willing to spend time in the nets. 2. Match Situation / Bowler / Tailender's skill : When are batsmen the most vulnerable to getting out? It is quite obvious - when they are new to crease. And it's the same for the "tailenders". If I were the batsmen, then I would try to take most of the strike early on especially if there is a pacer like Steyn bowling. If the "tailender" is not comfortable against a specific bowler, then I'd try to take most of the strike. Even someone like Laxman employed this strategy with Ishant at Mohali. That innings was not straight out shielding or letting the "tailender" keep most of the strike. It was something in between depending on the situation. IIRC, Ishant had some trouble facing one pacer, and Laxman farmed the strike towards the end. So you'd take the call depending on the match situation, the tailender's batting skills and comfort level, the pitch, bowler and instead of just opting for an outright shielding or exposing.

[kabira]

^right on the money. When Steyn was in full flow and Bhajji still new the crease..Sachin refused some singles...

[Guest Hiten.]

Ludhi, the points you make are very valid and have been posted here time and again. Moreover, VVS himself claimed that the "specialist" batsman usually carry the discretion about letting the tailenders face certain bowlers (a conclusion based on time-to-time discussion on the pitch between the specialist and tailender). But the whole concept of playing the first 4-5 deliveries and then taking a single on the 5th or last ball is totally bull crap as the score is not going anywhere.

[The Outsider]

Obviously, there are situations when it makes sense to shield the tail. They are however, rare. And if done too often, in situations where it doesn't really warrant it, the tail end batsman's batting is never going to improve. He might improve on his basic technique in the nets, but till he has played comfortably in match situations, he will never be able to handle the pressure in a real test match scenario. Tell me honestly how many of you think Ishant would have been able to play the way he did at Mohali if he was never being exposed. Yes, there are occasions when batsmen have successfully shielded the tail to add crucial runs. However, there are more times when the main batsman gets out taking needless risks, like Tendulkar yesterday trying an open faced steer, a shot he would not have contemplated if he was playing normally. Recently, Haddin and Dhoni, also fell adopting this strategy. Then there are times when the tail ender gets out despite being shielded in the 1-2 balls he faces. In most situations it makes sense to just play normal cricket as long as the tail ender is not a bunny like Martin. I am surprised that after seeing the likes of Gillespie, McGrath, Ishant, Zaheer develop into competent batsmen and pulling their sides out of tough situations the general approach is still questioned.