| Series | Countries | Live Scores | Fixtures | Results | News |
Features
|
Photos | Video & Audio | Blogs | Statistics | Archive | Games | Mobile | ||||||||||||||||||||
Michael Jeh
Get Lefty
© Getty Images
Enlarge
What is it about Australia's love affair with left-hand opening batsmen? Phillip Hughes is about to join that list in Johannesburg tomorrow. It makes me wonder if there is some sort of natural advantage in being a left-hander against the new ball. The proportion of left-handers who open the batting seems to be much higher than the total numbers of batsmen who make up the rest of the batting order. Is this some sort of Darwinian ‘natural selection’ at work, where left-handed opening batsmen seem to have evolved to have an advantage over right-handers?
Australia have a particularly rich heritage when it comes to left-handers at the top of the order. In recent times, I can think of Hayden, Langer, Jaques, Rogers, Katich, Gilchrist, Shaun Marsh and Warner. Going back a few years, we had Wessels, Wood, Wayne Phillips (the keeper), Mark Taylor and Elliott. I can only think of Slater, Geoff Marsh, Boon and Mark Waugh (in ODIs) who were regular right-hand openers. Just about every first-class team in Australia is top-heavy with lefties. Can it be pure coincidence or is there a theory worth exploring?
It can’t just be attributed to Australian-style pitches because around the world, left-handers still take up a high proportion of opening slots (relative to their total representation in the game). Sri Lanka has Jayasuriya, Tharanga, Vandort and Warnapura. Their latest opener, Paranavitana is also a left-hander but he must be wondering if there are any ‘advantages’ after he was dismissed for a first-ball duck on debut!
England have two of them at the top of the order now, Strauss and Cook. Trescothick enjoyed a long career flying that flag too. West Indies currently have Gayle and Devon Smith with Chanderpaul, Wavell Hinds and Lambert regularly opening in ODI cricket. New Zealand have Ryder and they’ve previously had Fleming, Richardson, Wright, Edgar and Greatbatch to add to that list.
The South Africans have always had left-handers at the top of their order. Going back to their re-admission to international cricket in 1992, Wessels, Gary Kirsten, Graeme Smith and even Klusener opened the batting in the shorter form of the game. Bangladesh have had a relatively short time in the game but I can recall a few left-handers opening the batting for them. In fact, their current openers are both left-handers, Iqbal and Kayes.
Curiously Pakistan and India have not had that many left-handed openers. Wonder why? Butt and Farhat are recent openers and we can go back to the Anwar-Sohail partnership for the next regular pairing. Gambhir leads the Indian list now but I can’t think of too many more recent examples other than Sadagoppan Ramesh earlier in the decade. Both countries’ left-handers also seem to be less wristy than the right-handers, preferring to flay the ball through the offside. Is this because the ball may not swing back into them in the subcontinent and therefore they have to learn to play square of the wicket through the off-side? I’m just guessing here so perhaps those who know local conditions a bit better can suggest why that may appear to be the case. It may just be perception.
Back to the issue though about why left-handers may be more successful at the top of the order: is it because most bowlers are encouraged to bowl right-arm outswing or legcutters (to be more effective against right-hand batsmen) and are therefore more prone to straying on to the pads of lefties? As a medium pace bowler myself (albeit, not a very good one!), I find it difficult to bowl to left-handers because my natural ball curves back into them and gets tucked away quite easily. With my action, as soon as I adjust my line to just outside off stump, the blasted thing stops swinging and it disappears through point or cover! The lbw law makes it harder to trap a left-hander too unless I can pitch in line and get late movement back in (note: this requires skill and therefore automatically discriminates against me).
It will be interesting to see if left-handers get more or less lbw verdicts (proportionately)? Perhaps some clever boffin who can crunch statistics can run a report on this question? On the flip side, left-handers will complain that they usually have to deal with more rough outside off-stump due to the higher proportion of right-armers bowling over the wicket.
I’m no closer to answering the original question about why it is that there seems to be more left-handed openers at the highest level of the game but there’s no doubt that they are over-represented. Australia has by far the highest ratio of any country and it’s too high to put it down to mere coincidence.
Any thoughts or theories as to why this might be the case? Perhaps some coaches can provide an insight – do they deliberately promote left-handers to open the innings to counter outswing bowling? Or is it just a case of natural evolution where only the fittest survive? Whatever the reason, they should be banned for life. I just hate bowling to them!
Michael Jeh is an Oxford Blue who played first-class cricket, and a Playing Member of the MCC. He lives in Brisbane
Feeds: Michael Jeh
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.
| ||||||
| Comments have now been closed for this article |
||||||
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Michael Jeh
Born in Colombo, educated at Oxford and now living in Brisbane, Michael Jeh (Fox) is a cricket lover with a global perspective on the game. An Oxford Blue who played first-class cricket, he is a Playing Member of the MCC and still plays grade cricket. Michael now works closely with elite athletes, and is passionate about youth intervention programmes. He still chases his boyhood dream of running a wildlife safari operation called Barefoot in Africa.
Feeds for all blogs
Keywords
Commentary
Offbeat
India v Pakistan
Hair
Mavericks
Cricket books
Socio-cultural
Selection
Captaincy
Hype
Media
Interviews
Politics
Drugs
Stats
Administration
Touring
Tributes
Controversy
Corruption
Trivia
Coaching
Racism
Olympics
Rankings
XIs
Future of cricket
Burnout
Fans
Legends
Cricket films
Awards
Technique
Drinking
Spirit of cricket
Club cricket
Social media
Broadcasting
Scheduling
Internet
Disability cricket
Cricket writing
Street cricket
Cricket in unusual places
Player management
ESPNcricinfo
ICC
Ashes
Training
Cricket News Hurl
Minnows
World Cup
World Twenty20
Lists
Multistats
FICA
TV rights
Retirements
Nostalgia
Rotation
Laws
Records
Wisden
Catching
Women's cricket
Wicketkeeping
Fielding
Mindgames
Weather
Gear
BCCI
SLC
Allrounders
Legspin
Debuts
IPL Newsfile
Spats
Cricket Australia
History
Recent Posts
- Should we love them more? Or less?
- George Bailey: charm and larrikin in one genuine package
- Can England really be that bad again?
- To whom is it an insult anyway?
- The importance of Tremlett's scare factor
Thanks, Allen.Happ is a good enough idea to conisder. There are surely options. And the options increase and get better if certain guys can get and/or stay healthy.I'm just a phan of the committee concept right now. Last night, in that situation I cited, Eyre would have been a great choice. Other times, based on match ups, maybe Madson or another guy would be the right choice.
Posted by Travis on (March 4, 2009, 19:43 GMT)In this same period Australia has generally had a pretty decent right-handed batsman batting at 3 (which is often where the best batsman in the side bats).
So any opposing attack that takes that first wicket has to then deal with a left-right combination, which breaks up the line of their bowlers, leading to a pretty good stand for the second wicket.
NZ started this trend back in the mid-1980s when Martin Crowe used to bat at 3 behind two left-handed openers.
As to why so many LHB perform well enough at state-level that they get selected for the national team, your guess is as good as mine.
Posted by dethbox on (March 4, 2009, 14:06 GMT)As a leftie myself i would love to explode on the start of play .Generally in lefties their right arm(my backhand) is more powerful so giving a high backlift so clearing the in field also cutting and slashing the ball is easier (much easier) than a rhb due to the same reason.... so they are able to pierce the infeild and create the all vital pressure and give a illusion of immortality a good example is jayasuriya and gambhir ...... have you noticed that lefties have become more plentiful after feilding restrictions ..... selectors have to prefer them over rhb's who are more effective down the order....
Posted by Tboy on (February 27, 2009, 10:03 GMT)In the western world shaking hands is done RH& a powerful person has a RH man. Lots of cultural significance placed on RH with many derived from the Christian bible. These are all historical remnants of the distrust shown to (sinister)LH people. But to return to Michaels question perhaps its a mixture of all of the above elements? Cultural changes, faster neural pathways & the booming industry of professional sports are attracting more LH (those who weren’t forced to “convert.”)While on the subject of LH IMHO the great Don played like a LH: he was strong square of the wicket, drove through the covers & had the best late cut I have ever seen. He also played around his front pad (On drive but with his front foot closed off & pointing to cover!) Obviously this didn’t hinder him in the slightest. A lot of LH even at INTL levels have difficulty opening their front foot on the straight/on drive. Perhaps more stats & figures will help us but does it appears the being LH offers an advantage
Posted by Tboy on (February 27, 2009, 9:57 GMT)(contd) Granted the study was not conclusive and other similar studies have come to different conclusions entirely (Google them & enjoy) but if u ever watch a leftie set up for a pull or cut then u may agree with the ANU. Even a fraction of time gained is vital at elite level sports. When I was at Uni our lecturer went to a training session for the local Pro BBall team. The coach was stunned that his shooter couldn’t hit the jump shot from the right wing. My lecturer noticed & stated that the player was RH but was LH dominant& the coach should run the play from the left wing. It worked. The cultural and religious elements shouldn’t be discarded. I grew up on a farm & my father was LH. I do many things LH: shoot a rifle, bow & arrow, play pool & I can shoot a basketball with either hand from 3 pt range. I play cricket RH. But I was converted from LH to RH for most things during my catholic education at an early age (Im 36.) The extracurricular things my dad taught me were done LH. TBC
Posted by Tboy on (February 27, 2009, 9:55 GMT)Interesting discussion. The latin word for LH was sinestra (sinister). After bowling to 1 of them most people would agree that its an apt description. LH in general is a phenomenon that plagues most elite level sports. Studies vary with the actual definition (eg is a LH person one who writes with the LH & does everything else RH? Or vice versa? )& the percentage varies as well (7-18%)based on the varying definitions, but overall the numbers are amazing. EG 48% of Intl fencers are LH. David Barry has stated in Best of the Best that SL’s top order since Test status has been approx 45-50% LH (don’t have his work on me so please feel free to correct this.) These figures are entirely disproportionate with the % of RH vs LH in the general populace. Barry also argues that perhaps a “pure” LH is one who bats & bowls LH. Open for debate? The ANU did a LH vs RH study and found that LH people had quicker neural pathways (reflex tests) than a RH. (to be continued
Posted by VIJAY BEDEKAR on (February 27, 2009, 5:23 GMT)It seems the percentage of left hand opening batsmen have gone up only recently. Till seventies , I can think of Arthur Morris, Bill Lawry for Australia, Puller,SubbaRow for England For India , there was no left handed opener from Contractor to WVRaman ( Solkar did open in one Test)For Pakistan it was Sadiq in early seventies. Having both the openers left handed was almost unheard of .
Posted by Raunak on (February 27, 2009, 2:58 GMT)yah......i am not sure for left handers opening .........but any person sitting on a couch with a beer with him would love to watch a lefty play........and many experts have agreed that leftys look much more compact and the look much more classy....u can see brian lara,yuvraj singhmike hussey...........these r some guys who r class players...one advantage the left handers have that is they can play the ball on their leg stump very easily......i mean the hook and the pull....its like natural for them........and wen they face the RHB they have to swing the ball from the outside of legstump which is always more difficult than pirchin it straight and swinging......
Posted by L Cerejo on (February 26, 2009, 22:15 GMT)Right handed people are the majority and left handed by far the minority. To take out a left handed person you have to think the opposite to how you would ball to a right handed person like a mirror image. Left handed cricketer's have an advantage simply because this is much harder to achieve for a right handed person and visa versa. And yes I can believe that up until a certain time in some teams there were no lefties because it was discouraged. As a left handed person myself I can write with both hands(but prefer my left hand)play all bat sports right handed, eat correctly. I think to solve the problem you need bowlers to practice being ambidextrous.
Posted by Michael Jeh on (February 26, 2009, 11:14 GMT)Some really erudite and informed opinions here. Thanks everyone. I think most readers agree that: (a) it's an advantage to bat LH (b) LH batsmen are a higher percentage than the average population (Simrat mentioned 7%) (c) the right-arm outswing bowler is easier for a leftie to face and less chance of getting an LBW (d) Left-arm bowlers are in short supply. Navin's comments were really insightful. I didn't realise India had that few left-handed batsmen during that long period in the 80s and 90s. I can't recall too many Pakistani lefties either and Sri Lanka weren't full of them until the Jayasuriya era started in the mid 1990s. Perhaps there's something to the theory that being a leftie on hard bouncy pitches is an advantage. Or that being a RH batsman on slower, turning pitches is perceived to be advantageous. Or maybe, it's all complete coincidence and I've just wasted hours pondering on it. My wife thinks I doth ponder on cricket far too much!