If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Technique training is only useful for players under the age of 26. I think the usefulness should be extended up to the age of 30. Many players like Jimmy Anderson, Morne Morkel, Faf du Plessis, Jonathan Trott, Nick Compton etc made great technical advances and improved control in their late 20s.
Perhaps it can be random for each player. Some players will improve technically as late as 29, 30, 31, whilst others won't improve really beyond the age of 25?
If it were random, each game would result in slightly different potential abilities for a young player.
Technique training is only useful for players under the age of 26. I think the usefulness should be extended up to the age of 30. Many players like Jimmy Anderson, Morne Morkel, Faf du Plessis, Jonathan Trott, Nick Compton etc made great technical advances and improved control in their late 20s.
Perhaps it can be random for each player. Some players will improve technically as late as 29, 30, 31, whilst others won't improve really beyond the age of 25?
If it were random, each game would result in slightly different potential abilities for a young player.
What do you think?
I never use the technique training - what are the benefits as opposed to general training ?
I thought that it was the case that general technique training worked well until about 26, while specific training worked for longer? Am I wrong, and if so, where did I get that from?!
Technique training improves a player's long term ability, whereas a net session provides a short term boost of form.
Thanks Graham
If a players strength is off side bowling then I would guess giving them some legside practice would make sense but once a player perfects a new aspect of their batting is it ever added to their "notes" ?
You come across batsmen where no indication is shown whether they prefer legside or offside bowling
Does this mean that they have perfected both then ?
Originally posted by Dick Van Dykes Disco DogView Post
Thanks Graham
If a players strength is off side bowling then I would guess giving them some legside practice would make sense but once a player perfects a new aspect of their batting is it ever added to their "notes" ?
You come across batsmen where no indication is shown whether they prefer legside or offside bowling
Does this mean that they have perfected both then ?
No preference for leg or off side doesn't mean they have perfected both, it just means they don't have a bias towards scoring in these areas. A bad batsman can have no preference - it just means he is equally bad at both leg and off side shots.
General technique improves all areas of batting slightly. Technique training is explained in detail somewhere on the forum so it might be worth doing a search.
Yep, the notes are decided on the difference between the respective pair of scores.
Also, just something I've thought now, at 2:43am (may not be correct!), but... has anyone ever seen anyone run out going for a third in this game? I can't remember that I have in hundreds of seasons all told, so whilst they would be rare anyway, it seems an unlikely coincidence! If they aren't in the game... one every few seasons would be nice!
Yep, the notes are decided on the difference between the respective pair of scores.
Also, just something I've thought now, at 2:43am (may not be correct!), but... has anyone ever seen anyone run out going for a third in this game? I can't remember that I have in hundreds of seasons all told, so whilst they would be rare anyway, it seems an unlikely coincidence! If they aren't in the game... one every few seasons would be nice!
No I haven't seen that scenario
I wanted to also point out that if the runout occurs going for the second run I don't think the batting team gets the first run.
Comment