To sweep or not, that is the English question
As a batsman, it's never advisable to have a predilection for one stroke.
David Wiseman
15-Dec-2002
As a batsman, it's never advisable to have a predilection for one stroke.
The fielding team will set the trap, the bowler will produce the bait and
the batsman's eyes will light up only to be dismissed.
Pavlov's Dog never had it this bad.
There have been celebrated cases such as current Australian selector, Andrew
Hilditch who was known as the 'Happy Hooker' because of his indulgence for
the notorious stroke which often caused his downfall.
If the fielding side does their homework they can turn the opposition
batsman's strengths into weaknesses. Stephen Fleming displayed that last
year with much success against the Australians when he had a different field
for every batsman.
So what about Nasser Hussain and the sweep? It seems as though this is the
only shot he can play when he is facing the spinners.
In the first VB Series game against Australia at the SCG, Hussain was doing
his best to allow the sweep to get him out; either via lbw, bowled, top
edging one or being caught on the fence.
It is a low percentage shot for just one run. With there being only four men in
the circle, singles are on offer everywhere. He would be better advised to
push through the vacant mid-on, mid-off area for the easiest of singles than
trying to be too clever by half.
Hussain scored 52 from 81 balls. Against Shane Warne he scored 13 runs from 23
balls. From Darren Lehmann, 11 runs from 29 balls. The spinners had him bogged
down, or rather is it that he had himself bogged down?
Against the bowling of Warne and Lehmann, his highest single scoring shot
off either was two runs, which he managed once off each.
Fifteen times he played the sweep for a return of five singles. He played
the dreaded reverse sweep three times to Lehmann. He did not score a run
from the stroke and twice had to survive vociferous appeals for lbw.
The sweep is an interesting stroke. Many a batsman has had a fondness for
it and it has been the downfall of as many.
Jonty Rhodes utilised it to geat effect in 1994 at the SCG when it was the
one and only plan he could muster to escape the clutches of Shane Warne.
Steve Waugh has his 'slog-sweep', but the major difference between the shot
he is employing and the one Hussain is doing, is that Waugh is hitting the
ball in front of square. By not having to turn his wrists with the stroke,
he is able to gain maximum power and uses the shot for scoring boundaries
and sixes.
Hussain is scoring singles with the shot. Is it worth getting out for one
run?
Then there is the reverse sweep........
Australian cricket has never looked kindly on the shot because basically it
should never be played. It is one of the lowest percentage strokes there
is, with the batsman able to get out in far more many ways then he can score
runs from the shot.
It was the shot which caused Mike Gatting's infamous demise in the 1987
World Cup final and a day doesn't go by when he is not reminded of this.
There is no way John Buchanan, Ricky Ponting, Shane Warne and the
Australian cricket brains trust are unaware of Hussain's love of the shot.
Warne and Lehmann will be bowling many balls to be swept and it will be up
to Hussain to play the shot without getting out or devise an alternate way
of run scoring.
If the batsman are going to improvise against spinners, it should be with
their feet and not with the bat. Use of their feet allows them to turn the
ball into the type of delivery they wish to face. This also creates
uncertainty in the mind of the bowler because they are now unsure as to
which length to bowl.
Time will tell if Hussain is one of those who can "resist everything but
temptation".