The modern batsman's weakness against the bouncer

A few weeks ago, Phillip Hughes' unfortunate death stirred a fair debate - should the design of the helmet be looked at again and perhaps changed? Are players taking their own safety or the lack of it too lightly? If the cricket fraternity was aware that a particular kind of helmet isn't the safest, why didn't they abandon it long ago? After the tragedy, there was even talk that there should be a rule against bowling bouncers.

There is an overwhelming realisation in the batsman's mind when he gets pinged these days that a cricket ball can kill. So much so that the bowler who bowls the bouncer is the first to enquire about the batsman's well-being. These are difficult times and no matter how much we put the past behind us, I'm convinced that a blow to a batsman's head won't be followed by snarling and abuse - at least not for quite a while. But as much as this incident raises the need for better and safer equipment, it equally highlights the need to get your technique against the short ball watertight.

I have often realised that the best answers to the complex questions cricket poses can be found by going back and looking at how they did it a few decades ago. After all, the Test game has survived about 150 years and the fundamentals haven't changed much. My childhood coach, Tarak Sinha, and former India greats set great store by keeping it simple: play the full ball off the front foot and the short ball off the back foot. In addition to this, they advised me to use the front foot to go closer to the ball when it was pitched full and use the back foot to go deep inside the crease when the bowler banged it in short. The depth of the crease must be looked at as an aid for batsmen to deal with the short-pitched stuff.

For that precise reason, batsmen across the world have, for over a hundred years, chosen to stand on the popping crease and not with both feet deep inside the area. While this fashion of batting has survived the test of the times, it is begging to be reviewed because most modern batsmen are either challenging that wisdom or are simply not considering it worthy enough.

Increasingly batsmen are looking reluctant to use the back leg to go deep inside the crease to counter the bouncer. The new technique is to stay on the front foot even when the bowler digs it in short and then play either an aggressive shot or choose a defensive option from there.

I'm tempted to believe that this shift is courtesy the changes in pitches over the years (they have become flatter), and better bats that don't push the batsman to generate force like before to get the ball to the fence - and hence undermine the importance of getting the body in perfect position to execute a shot. Heavy doses of short-format cricket have done their bit in changing the batsmen's collective mindset, and made them predisposed to attack more often.

A batsman pulling or hooking the bouncer off the front foot is a sight to behold - but it looks ugly when it is not pulled off. Also, we increasingly see batsmen not leaving the bouncer as well as they used to, and more of them are getting hit on the body than before. Now this could be a function of committing to the front foot too early, or a result of poor defensive technique. Ideally you have to load the front leg first to move backwards, but if you've gone too far forward to a quick bowler, you don't get all that much time to move back and across.

The golden rule of batting works best on a simple response. When you are expected to receive a friend flying in from abroad, you get there before he comes out of the airport terminal so that you're there to receive him. Similarly your body must be in the appropriate position before the ball reaches you. That's the only way to have a stable head, which in turn provides balance, and correct judgement of line, length, pace and bounce. If you're stuck at the crease, like many modern-day batsmen often are, it's ambitious to think that you'll be able to deal the short ball successfully - whether defensively or aggressively.

What are the most likely responses to balls that are heading towards your throat, especially when you're already committed on the front foot?

1. If you have picked the line and bounce early, you'll duck or sway away, hoping the the bounce will take it over your head.

2. If the bounce isn't as steep, you might try to ride it, but that's not as easy as it sounds because to gain the maximum height your weight should be on the back foot, not the front. Cheteshwar Pujara found himself in a tangle in this manner against Josh Hazlewood in Brisbane.

3. If you've misread the bounce and pace, you'll throw in the towel and trust your protective gear or your body's resistance to pain to see you through.

While the first option is exercised the most, the other two are equally on display these days, and that's cause for concern. Increasingly we're seeing batsmen either turn their heads away from the ball, at times looking away from it, showing the back of the head to the bowler, a la Shane Watson, or just tucking the chin into the chest and hoping for the best.

Following the death of Hughes it's almost certain that research will be carried out to make the helmet sturdier, probably leading to a new design that will protect the back of the neck. Having said that, it's certain that if players keep getting hit on the head often, it's only a matter of time before the ball again finds a way through and inflicts horrific damage. Improve the helmet by all means, but improve batsmen's technique against bouncers too.