A Memon: Sudden Revival In Spin Bowling (15 Mar 1996)

15 March 1996

Sudden revival in spin bowling

By Ayaz Memon

IN his book, Grimmett on getting Wickets, which was published in the 1930s. Clarrie Grimmett, the great Australian leg spinner, is extremely cut and dried about his preference amongst bowlers.

Bowling may be divided into three classes he wrote, fast medium and slow, the latter two being the most interesting.

It is an opinion that appeared to have been destroyed by the late 70s, when the great Indian spin quartet of Bishen Bedi, Bhagwat Chandrashekhar, Erapalli Prasanna and Srinivasan Venkataraghavan went into decline.

Then, suddenly, Shane Warne has appeared and the international circuit is humming with excitement. Accompanying Warne, whom Richie Benaud rates as the best young leg spinner he has ever seen, into the 21st century are two other leg spinners, Anil Kumble of India and Mushtaq Ahmed of Pakistan, both fine, strike bowlers.

Elsewhere, other slow bowlers are trying to grab attention. England still look to Phil Tufnell to fulfill his match-winning potential, Sri Lanka have found a host of young off-spinners, Australia have in Tim May a splendid foil for Warne, India has Venkatapathy Raju whose worth has not been fully exploited, and New Zealand have the promising left-arm spinner Matthew Hart.

Apparently, after two decades of regret, there is a sudden revival in spin bowling. What must amaze is that this revival has happened in the period that one-day cricket has taken firm root and spinners had presumably been interred forever.

The recent surge in spinners the world over would suggest, therefore, that limited overs cricket has not been a detriment for spin bowling. But that would be escapism. The fact remains that there had been a marked decline in spin bowlers and bowling after the advent of one-day cricket and the current revival is actually restricted to a handful of wicket-taking bowlers led by Warne, who can adopt to either kind of game.

Spin bowling in the last two decades suffered on three counts. Firstly one-day cricket made restrictive medium pace bowling a virtue for almost a decade. In this new scenario, a spin bowler was seen as a luxury because he could apparently be hit so easily.

Secondly, the improvement in equipment technology enhanced this perception. Heavy bats, tech-tuned willows which would make even a mishit travel long distances made spin bowlers seem utterly useless. If the best deliveries could be hit out of the ground simply because the bat enabled this, where was the place for a spinner in a side?

Thirdly, the West Indies formula to success - the use of four or more fast bowlers - came to be recognised as the most effective in any kind of cricket and was sought to be emulated by all other teams, at least in intent if not content.

For more than a decade after the first World Cup, in 1975, the art of slow bowling was on a downward gradient, in Test and limited overs cricket. But there has been a remarkable revision since, and especially in the last five years, as technique and attitudes have changed.

Certain realizations have facilitated this shift in perception. Firstly, emulating the West Indies formula became impossible. Not every country could produce fast bowlers of quality on an assembly line basis as did the West Indies. So, most teams had to go back for alternatives.

This could have been the run-restricting medium pacer. But, and in one day cricket in particular, the specialist appears to have rediscovered his niche. This includes the slow bowlers, who it has been learnt, are not so easy too slog after all if they are skilled, and know a thing or two about aerodynamics.

Yes, willow-technology remains a concern simply because it tilts the balance so much in favour of the batsman vis-a-vis the spin bowler. But with administrators everywhere now determined to save this species, there must be hope that this problem will be licked soon.

It is a moot question whether spinners of the calibre of Bedi Prasanna, Chandra, Gibbs, Mallet, Intikhab Alam and some of the other major performers of the 60s and early 70s could have made a difference had they been younger when one day cricket came its steamrolling way within only a few years, the decline set worldwide till finally spinners became a scarce commodity.

The blame for this decline was assigned to limited overs cricket and entirely unjustifiably. In the first decade of one day international cricket, spinners were thought of only as stock bowlers. Once their role had been redefined to saving runs rather than taking wickets, they seemed to lose their efficacy and usefulness in first-class cricket too.

Spin bowlers in this era became ultra defensive. Brought on usually in the middle overs, when the batsmen were either set, or looking to accelerate, they had little option but to aim for parsimony. There were no close-in fielders to take catches. Bats were becoming heavier and misfits were travelling agonisingly long distances.

Also spinners were not given the end overs when they could have picked up a few wickets to improve their figures and image. It was believed that in the slog overs, the spinners would be punished the greatest.

It must seem extremely ironical that spinners today not only bowl the end overs, but sometimes also open the attack in limited overs cricket. This has been the most amazing development in recent times and especially over the last decade. In some measure, it has to do with the presence of bowlers of the calibre of Abdul Qadir and Shane Warne. But in many ways it also has to do with new and evolving strategies.

Some time in the 80s, it was realised that it was not so easy to hit a slow bowler after all. Especially those with a high degree of skill, who could combine swerve, spin, turn and nuances of flight (like Qadir, Warne, Mushtaq and even Tendulkar), or are unrelentingly accurate (like Kumble and Dipak Patel and John Emburey).

These bowlers have afforded their captains with new matchwinning options. In the 1992 World Cup, New Zealand astonished most opposition by asking off-spinner Patel to open the attack. Opening batsmen, conditioned to using the pace of the fast bowler to play their strokes, were flummoxed when confronted with a bowler whom they had to reach out to, to play shots. By the time Patel was sorted out, New Zealand were through to the semi-finals, and it was only misfortune that prevented them from playing the final at Melbourne.

Qadir, Warne, Mushtaq, Kumble, Carl Hooper and even Tendulkar, on the other hand, are frequently called on to bowl the end overs either because of their sheer variety and acumen, or their nagging adherence to line and length.

Usually, only bowlers who can vary their flight and length adroitly can succeed in these tense overs because the batsmen are looking to hit every ball, using their feet and all their power.

In the slog overs, the percentage of risk-taking is extremely high because more shots are played in the air or across the line. A clever spinner in this situation can be more profitable than a medium pacer or fast bowler who can be predictable and easier to hit unless he is an Akram or a Younis.

Warne, who is a huge spinner of the ball, has kept batsmen on tenterhooks simply because nobody can predict the extent of deviation he will derive off the wicket. Qadir was a master of flight. Kumble, on the other hand, has splendid variation in pace. Why, Sachin Tendulkar won the Hero Cup for India by bowling only one brilliant over of spin in the semi-final climax against South Africa in 1993.

Interestingly, leg spinners have been at the fore of this revival of slow bowling in limited overs cricket. There was a period when the off spinners had been forced to settle into a flattenedflight, defensive mould simply because the line they bowled made attacking strokes easier to play.

You can cart an off spinner over the one side field by playing with the spin. To do the same to a left-arm spinner or a leg spinner is hazardous because it means hitting against the spin. And wrist spinners vis-a-vis left arm spinners become even more daunting propositions because they can impart greater turn, are often more unpredictable, and undoubtedly more tempting for the charge.

Of course, quality makes all the difference, and international cricket must consider itself blessed that it has bowlers of the skill, guile and class of Warne, Kumble and Mushtaq playing at the same time. They have redefined the contemporary Test and one day scenario with their splendid exploits. Two decades after spinners were either given up as dead or completely redundant, they have announced their own resurrection in the most dazzling fashion.

Source :: Dawn Group Of Newspapers (https://www.cricket.org/link_to_database/SUPPORT/DAWN/)