- WHAT ARE THE BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCES IN TECHNIQUE OF THE FRONT-FOOT DRIVE BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL AND AMATUER CRICKETERS?

Now that the essential biomechanical principles have been explained, the next step is to determine the biomechanical differences of the front-foot drive between skilled and non-skilled players, before finally analysing what the differences mean in a game situation.

There is a reason why professional cricket batters have the opportunity to represent their state or country: Simply put, they are the best at what they do. They exhibit the best set of skills capable of allowing them to compete against the world’s best bowlers. To determine exactly what these skills are, we can compare a beginner, amateur and professional cricketer to determine the biomechanical differences in their technique when playing a front foot drive.

Observe this rookie cricketer attempting to play a shot to the incoming cricket ball. Based on the previous biomechanical analysis, it is immediately obvious that this player lacks even the basic biomechanical technique required to perform any cricket shot, least of all the front foot drive. Their stance does not indicate that the player’s centre of mass is slightly forward of the midpoint of the feet; the backlift of their bat is stagnant and not one continuous movement; the forward stride is neither long enough or early enough, nor does the players head or centre of mass move forward during the attempted shot; and as there was no bat-ball contact, the follow through exhibited does not have any significance to the shot. It is clear then that this player has either never or very sparingly played cricket in the past, and much improvement is needed for them to compete in any sort of competition. The most interesting comparative points arise when analysing the front-foot drive of a club (amateur) cricket player with that of a professional, world-class cricketer.

These two videos show a front-foot drive played by Andy Matthews (a club cricketer in the Hampshire Cricket League) and Ian Bell (an English test cricketer). Upon closer review, it is possible to determine why Bell’s front-foot drive is adheres closer to the biomechanical principles of performing an effective front-foot drive.

STANCE/BACKLIFT

Matthews’ stance appears to be very straight, with the shoulders aligned with the feet, with the head in the centre of the midpoint and not forward as suggested in studies by Stretch et al. (1998). Whilst not completely visible (as the video is from a front-on angle), it is safe to assume that Bell’s stance positions his centre of mass slightly forward of the midpoint of the feet.

The backlift of both batsmen also differs. Matthews lifts the bat more in an up/down movement before initiating his shot, whilst Bell adopts a more biomechanically prudent ‘levering’ technique, suggesting that Matthews does not rotate his bottom wrist enough during the backlift (Steulcken, Portus & Mason 2005).

FORWARD STRIDE/IMPACT

The length of the forward stride in cricket varies depending on shot selection (approximately 0.68 metres for the front-foot drive (Stretch et al 2000, p.940). Matthews’ forward stride is noticeably shorter than Bell’s and therefore he does not get his head over the line of the ball, and does not get his centre of mass as close to the ball. This lack of forward movement results in Matthews having less control over the direction and timing of his shot, as evidenced by the fielders cries of “Catch!” indicating the ball has been hit in the air (this may also be due to Matthews’ bottom hand gripping the bat too hard, which results in the bat and ball being push upward). In contrast to Matthews’ shot, Bell has a significant forward stride, and moves his head (and therefore centre of mass) much closer to the ball. As a result, the ball is hit straight into the ground, stopping the possibility of Bell being caught out. Bat speed upon impact appears to be very similar between Matthews and Bell, as supported by the trials of Taliep, Galal & Vaughan, who measured bat speed upon impact of skilled and less-skilled cricketers and found similar results (2007, p.354). Bell’s front knee also bends lower than Matthews, allowing his head to get much closer to the ball itself.

FOLLOW-THROUGH

Both players exhibit a similar follow-through, observing sound biomechanical principles of not decelerating the bat or limbs too quickly to avoid interference with the ball. However as Bell moved further forward during the forward stride stage of his front-foot drive, his head position and centre of mass are significantly further forward than Matthews in the follow-through.