Phil Hughes Passes Away

Very true.

I think I'd find it hard to focus on that though, if I was a professional fast bowler at this moment in time. Even just as a fan, I think it will be a while before I can watch some tailender getting roughed up without feeling a level of unease. I know that's not a rational reaction though.
Here's the thing though - the short pitched fast delivery is deliberately intended solely to make the batsman fear for his safety. Cricket allows and encourages it. He may play a rash shot or fend it off unsuccessfully and get out but that's only a by-product.

Isn't it a bit disingenuous then, when one of these deliveries actually does some harm, that everyone wrings their hands and says how awful it is? Something like this was always going to happen sooner or later.
 
The main purpose of the short ball is to mess with the batsmans footwork, not to hurt them.
 
Here's the thing though - the short pitched fast delivery is deliberately intended solely to make the batsman fear for his safety. Cricket allows and encourages it. He may play a rash shot or fend it off unsuccessfully and get out but that's only a by-product.

Isn't it a bit disingenuous then, when one of these deliveries actually does some harm, that everyone wrings their hands and says how awful it is? Something like this was always going to happen sooner or later.

Thats a tad bit over the top in that the short ball/bouncer is more to unsettle the batsman. An intentionally bowled beamer on the other hand is solely to make a batsman fear for his safety.

Also, there is an argument to be made that while bouncers are allowed they are not encouraged. There are restrictions placed on the number of bouncers you can bowl in each over with anything above the head of the batsman being called a 'wide ball' in an ODI/20-20 even if thats the first bouncer of the over.
 
Thats a tad bit over the top in that the short ball/bouncer is more to unsettle the batsman. An intentionally bowled beamer on the other hand is solely to make a batsman fear for his safety.

Also, there is an argument to be made that while bouncers are allowed they are not encouraged. There are restrictions placed on the number of bouncers you can bowl in each over with anything above the head of the batsman being called a 'wide ball' in an ODI/20-20 even if thats the first bouncer of the over.
But isn't the batsman unsettled by the thought or possibility of being hit by the ball? What else about the delivery would unsettle him? What's the purpose of a head-high bouncer if not to intimidate the batsman?

Is there a particular restriction in Tests?
 
It's not feasible to ban bouncers. Short deliveries are a major part of the game and the margins between them and a bouncer can be very small.
 
But isn't the batsman unsettled by the thought or possibility of being hit by the ball? What else about the delivery would unsettle him? What's the purpose of a head-high bouncer if not to intimidate the batsman?

Is there a particular restriction in Tests?
Two an over in Test cricket. It's part of the game and the injuries are minimal. No one thinks Formula One should be abolished because of the horrible accidents Jules Bianchi or Marcos Senna have suffered. Or any number of other sports.
 
Two an over in Test cricket. It's part of the game and the injuries are minimal. No one thinks Formula One should be abolished because of the horrible accidents Jules Bianchi or Marcos Senna have suffered. Or any number of other sports.
Nobody said anything about abolishing it.
 
Michael Clarke just read out a statement on behalf of the Aussie team. Absolutely heartbreaking to watch.
 
Perhaps it's possible they may temporarily ban the head high bouncer, or at least ask the players to voluntarily stop using it for now, until a safer helmet is available? If they did nothing and, God forbid, anything happened again the cricket authorities would be facing the mother of all lawsuits.
 


Clarke is an absolute rock. You can see he's holding everyone together right now from Hughes' family, friends and colleagues right through Australian cricket.

It's a scenario that you hope no captain has to go through, an unprecedented situation but the way he has taken on the responsibilities is a display of pure courage and maturity. He's defining the role of captain through this horrible situation and I have the highest respect for him for that.
 
There's a school of thought that the more padding/protection in any sport the more risks taken. Hence we're seeing this growing problem with chronic brain injuries in the NFL. I don't have the stats to hand - so can't be certain but I'm sure I read somewhere that you're more likely to get concussed in the NFL (wearing a helmet) than you are in rugby (not wearing a helmet)
They discuss that concept in this Freakonomics podcast, supporting you point:

http://freakonomics.com/2010/02/05/...our-head-inside-the-helmet-after-a-nasty-hit/
 
Some pathetic tweets on this on the red issue Twitter account, have no idea why they get involved in stuff like this.
 
Shockingly, a cricket umpire in Israel (they actually play a little here) died yesterday after being hit by a ball.
 
Anyone have any idea where to watch the funeral in the UK? I know its being streamed in Australia but want to watch if I can.
 
Got me right where he started choking. We must dig in and get through to tea..

Every one who loves cricket would've felt the emotion there.
 
Clarke has really shown himself to be a true leader in the past few weeks. Giving out statements on Hughes's family behalf, on behalf of Australian Cricket team and now this must be tough for him considering how close he was to Hughes. Incredible man.
 
In case you didn't see it, here's Michael Clarke's eulogy.


Thanks for posting that mate.. What a speech that was from Clarke,would be surprised if there was any cricket fan who wasn't moved by it.. What a captain Australia have in Clarke,I can't think of any other current captain who would have held the fort together like he has done..