It is easy to get distracted by the wholehearted nature of the cricket Ben Stokes plays. It was during his second eleven over spell of the Test that he set off towards long-off in pursuit of a ball that Jermaine Blackwood had hit off his own bowling. Stokes has done something similar before of course, in Colombo in 2018, and here he chased the ball all the way to the boundary, throwing himself at it in an attempt to haul it back in. That the batsmen ended up running four anyway was besides the point. This was Stokes going above and beyond for England.
The figures themselves tell you plenty about what Stokes did in this game. He scored 254 runs and took three wickets from 27.4 overs, conceding a little more than two runs an over. He bowled marathon spells in each innings, taking key wickets in both. Aside from a caught and bowled, he didn't take any other catches, though. He really must pull his finger out. It was, of course, an all-action display, Stokes in the thick of things as is his preference. But the effort Stokes puts into everything he does on a cricket field shouldn't mask the intricacies of why he was able to influence this match the way he did.
Let's start with his bowling. Some may have watched Stokes pounding the ball into the middle of the pitch in both innings and thought he was merely relying on all the fitness sessions he had posted on Instagram during lockdown to get him through. Of course, it required stamina and strength but bowling short is not simply a matter of banging the ball halfway down and seeing what happens. To bowl short effectively requires accuracy.
The line and length of the deliveries are important. Too short and the ball sails harmlessly over the batsman's head, too full and it bounces waist height from where it easier to defend and attack. If the line is too wide, the batsman can swerve or sway. Added to the complexity is that the right line and length changes depending on a variety of factors, including the surface, the age of the ball and whether the bowler is coming over or round the wicket.
Today, as he did in the first innings, Stokes managed to consistently get the ball to rise up to that dangerous area around the batsmen's shoulders and neck. The line of attack from round the wicket, something he has rarely done outside of the subcontinent, made swaying out of the way difficult. The ball always seemed to be zoning in at the batsman's body. And because Stokes is not genuinely quick, the batsmen are in that halfway house of thinking they can stand up and play it. But if they do that, the fielders at short leg, leg gully and out on the leg-side boundary come into the equation. As the West Indies showed, it is not easy to play.
The other aspect to the tactic is that while it is hostile it also slows the scoring rate, creating pressure. Stokes' 22 overs of round the wicket short stuff cost him just 42 runs in all. "It wasn't a set plan to go and do that but once we turned to it, we felt it looked threatening," Stokes said after England had sealed their victory.
"Not only is it a plan that we feel that can get us a wicket but it also really dries the scoring rate up. We set certain fields to it that you can't really go anywhere as a batter." When batsmen have nowhere to go, trouble looms.
Stokes' dismissal of Jermaine Blackwood was the perfect example of why he was so effective with the short ball. The line of the delivery, starting a foot outside leg-stump but carrying on with the arm so that it arrived at Blackwood just on leg stump, meant it was difficult to sway out of the way. It arrived at armpit height which created uncertainty - Blackwood shaped to pull and then realised it was too quick and too short for him to be in control. In the end, the Jamaican could only fend it off the glove towards where a leg-slip would have been. Jos Buttler scampered round and did the rest.
Another vital breakthrough from Stokes, that of Kraigg Brathwaite in the first innings, was similar, although the ball was fended back to the bowler himself who took the catch. The line, the length, the uncertainty it created, the importance of the wicket, it was all the same otherwise. None of the West Indian batsmen looked like they knew how to deal with Stokes' short ball barrage and that was because of the quality, not simply the effort, of the bowling.
And then to prove he is not simply a one-trick bowler, he came back over the wicket in his second spell, bowled a fuller, good length outside off-stump and tried to find some uneven bounce or seam movement off the pitch. He was rewarded with the wicket of Alzarri Joseph who spliced an attempted drive to cover. That's the thing about Stokes, he has the skill to play many different roles.
He proved that with the contrasting innings with the bat as well, one becalmed and circumspect, the other brutal and cruel. In the first Test, Stokes displayed his new trigger movement, noticeably moving a long way back and across, more than he had last summer and even more than he had in South Africa at the start of the year where his trigger had started to get more pronounced. Stokes spent a lot of time during the winter with Paul Collingwood, England's assistant coach, working on it with the aim of moving across to off-stump in a bid to both play the ball later and closer to his body as well as straighter down the ground.
There was some immediate success in Southampton, with scores of 43 and 46, but Stokes was out twice trying to force balls through the leg-side against Jason Holder. He had gone well passed the first 20 or 30 balls that he says he is trying to concentrate on playing more watchfully but even so, Stokes was dismissed going hard at the ball and not playing straight down the ground. Perhaps the tactic of also moving down the pitch at times to try and combat the movement on offer to the West Indian fast-bowlers had put him in a more aggressive frame of mind at the Ageas Bowl.
In the first innings at Emirates Old Trafford, however, Stokes remained largely on or in his crease. The new trigger movement allowed him to play as late as he could without pushing at the ball, a prerequisite for surviving against some high-class swing and seam bowling in helpful conditions over the first two days. This was particularly crucial in the early stage of his innings and on the second morning when West Indies' bowlers found the movement necessary to pass the bat of Stokes and Dom Sibley with regularity. Importantly, though, Stokes generally didn't push at the ball and tended to only play for the line of off-stump. If the ball moved away, it sailed to the keeper. If it came in, he could defend to mid-on.
The trigger movement remained in the second innings but playing late and conservatively was not on the agenda. In his side's pursuit of rapid second innings runs, Stokes threw his hands at anything and everything. The difference on the final morning, when he scored 62 from 39 deliveries, compared to the fourth evening - 16 from 18 - was that he was in greater control. On Sunday, he had been frenetic. On Monday, he stepped back and across early, then stood still and simply reacted to the ball. An overhand tap to send a very short ball from Shannon Gabriel to the fine third man boundary was the deftest of touches. You can't play that shot if you're not calm and collected.
So while Stokes' performance was full of determination and effort, there was skill and there was nous too. He has become such an effective cricketer because of the varied roles he can play and he can only play those roles because of the large number of capabilities he has, capabilities that he is still trying to expand and develop. Yes, the effort he puts in is an important ingredient in his success. But no amount of chasing the ball off his own bowling should disguise the many other reasons why Ben Stokes is the cricketer he is.
Read more：https://www.topcrickets.com/news/3868.htm
The figures themselves tell you plenty about what Stokes did in this game. He scored 254 runs and took three wickets from 27.4 overs, conceding a little more than two runs an over. He bowled marathon spells in each innings, taking key wickets in both. Aside from a caught and bowled, he didn't take any other catches, though. He really must pull his finger out. It was, of course, an all-action display, Stokes in the thick of things as is his preference. But the effort Stokes puts into everything he does on a cricket field shouldn't mask the intricacies of why he was able to influence this match the way he did.
Let's start with his bowling. Some may have watched Stokes pounding the ball into the middle of the pitch in both innings and thought he was merely relying on all the fitness sessions he had posted on Instagram during lockdown to get him through. Of course, it required stamina and strength but bowling short is not simply a matter of banging the ball halfway down and seeing what happens. To bowl short effectively requires accuracy.
The line and length of the deliveries are important. Too short and the ball sails harmlessly over the batsman's head, too full and it bounces waist height from where it easier to defend and attack. If the line is too wide, the batsman can swerve or sway. Added to the complexity is that the right line and length changes depending on a variety of factors, including the surface, the age of the ball and whether the bowler is coming over or round the wicket.
Today, as he did in the first innings, Stokes managed to consistently get the ball to rise up to that dangerous area around the batsmen's shoulders and neck. The line of attack from round the wicket, something he has rarely done outside of the subcontinent, made swaying out of the way difficult. The ball always seemed to be zoning in at the batsman's body. And because Stokes is not genuinely quick, the batsmen are in that halfway house of thinking they can stand up and play it. But if they do that, the fielders at short leg, leg gully and out on the leg-side boundary come into the equation. As the West Indies showed, it is not easy to play.
The other aspect to the tactic is that while it is hostile it also slows the scoring rate, creating pressure. Stokes' 22 overs of round the wicket short stuff cost him just 42 runs in all. "It wasn't a set plan to go and do that but once we turned to it, we felt it looked threatening," Stokes said after England had sealed their victory.
"Not only is it a plan that we feel that can get us a wicket but it also really dries the scoring rate up. We set certain fields to it that you can't really go anywhere as a batter." When batsmen have nowhere to go, trouble looms.
Stokes' dismissal of Jermaine Blackwood was the perfect example of why he was so effective with the short ball. The line of the delivery, starting a foot outside leg-stump but carrying on with the arm so that it arrived at Blackwood just on leg stump, meant it was difficult to sway out of the way. It arrived at armpit height which created uncertainty - Blackwood shaped to pull and then realised it was too quick and too short for him to be in control. In the end, the Jamaican could only fend it off the glove towards where a leg-slip would have been. Jos Buttler scampered round and did the rest.
Another vital breakthrough from Stokes, that of Kraigg Brathwaite in the first innings, was similar, although the ball was fended back to the bowler himself who took the catch. The line, the length, the uncertainty it created, the importance of the wicket, it was all the same otherwise. None of the West Indian batsmen looked like they knew how to deal with Stokes' short ball barrage and that was because of the quality, not simply the effort, of the bowling.
And then to prove he is not simply a one-trick bowler, he came back over the wicket in his second spell, bowled a fuller, good length outside off-stump and tried to find some uneven bounce or seam movement off the pitch. He was rewarded with the wicket of Alzarri Joseph who spliced an attempted drive to cover. That's the thing about Stokes, he has the skill to play many different roles.
He proved that with the contrasting innings with the bat as well, one becalmed and circumspect, the other brutal and cruel. In the first Test, Stokes displayed his new trigger movement, noticeably moving a long way back and across, more than he had last summer and even more than he had in South Africa at the start of the year where his trigger had started to get more pronounced. Stokes spent a lot of time during the winter with Paul Collingwood, England's assistant coach, working on it with the aim of moving across to off-stump in a bid to both play the ball later and closer to his body as well as straighter down the ground.
There was some immediate success in Southampton, with scores of 43 and 46, but Stokes was out twice trying to force balls through the leg-side against Jason Holder. He had gone well passed the first 20 or 30 balls that he says he is trying to concentrate on playing more watchfully but even so, Stokes was dismissed going hard at the ball and not playing straight down the ground. Perhaps the tactic of also moving down the pitch at times to try and combat the movement on offer to the West Indian fast-bowlers had put him in a more aggressive frame of mind at the Ageas Bowl.
In the first innings at Emirates Old Trafford, however, Stokes remained largely on or in his crease. The new trigger movement allowed him to play as late as he could without pushing at the ball, a prerequisite for surviving against some high-class swing and seam bowling in helpful conditions over the first two days. This was particularly crucial in the early stage of his innings and on the second morning when West Indies' bowlers found the movement necessary to pass the bat of Stokes and Dom Sibley with regularity. Importantly, though, Stokes generally didn't push at the ball and tended to only play for the line of off-stump. If the ball moved away, it sailed to the keeper. If it came in, he could defend to mid-on.
The trigger movement remained in the second innings but playing late and conservatively was not on the agenda. In his side's pursuit of rapid second innings runs, Stokes threw his hands at anything and everything. The difference on the final morning, when he scored 62 from 39 deliveries, compared to the fourth evening - 16 from 18 - was that he was in greater control. On Sunday, he had been frenetic. On Monday, he stepped back and across early, then stood still and simply reacted to the ball. An overhand tap to send a very short ball from Shannon Gabriel to the fine third man boundary was the deftest of touches. You can't play that shot if you're not calm and collected.
So while Stokes' performance was full of determination and effort, there was skill and there was nous too. He has become such an effective cricketer because of the varied roles he can play and he can only play those roles because of the large number of capabilities he has, capabilities that he is still trying to expand and develop. Yes, the effort he puts in is an important ingredient in his success. But no amount of chasing the ball off his own bowling should disguise the many other reasons why Ben Stokes is the cricketer he is.
Read more：https://www.topcrickets.com/news/3868.htm