I started this exact thread on a previous forum. And it attracted rigorous debate. That forum's web hosting expired - so it has now disappeared. 

I was of the opinion, that spinners are not always needed - nor even preferable in SA, Aus, NZ, modern WI and early season England. Watching Adil Rashid play for England in a test, and not bowl a ball, and rightly so, and not bat, and not take a catch, was one of the most lol moments of cricket in  2018. But on NZ pitches with no turn, I have long given up on the idea of a spinner being needed here, unless you have a big ripping leggie. But Sodhi was not chop, and Astle always injured. So why bother with one at all?

To my great delight, within a few months of me posting this thread, it started happening. NZ dumped its spinners for a 5 prong seam attack. No over rate problems. SA did the same against Pak, and Pak admitted its why they lost. In a close game, they were forced to bowl spin and lost to ineffective bowling. They did leave out quality seamers to do this. Faf got an overrate ban but his team won. Now in Maharaj, SA has a very good spinner. But the constant seam attack was better for them. They then brought Maharaj back for the SL series, and they lost with Maharaj putting up the worst numbers of the SA bowlers. I think they may have been worried about over rate bans leading into WC...
 
Then WI did it vs England, and won the series in 2 tests. Holder was banned for the third test. England played spinners. England were smashed in the first test playing Rashid and Ali. Then just Ali in the second. WI crippled them with a prong pace attack. WI was so on top, Holder could have snuck in some Roston Chase overs, but he went for the jugular and seemingly wanted the 3rd test ban.

Australia of course have not done it lately. And India and SL played spinners there last year. Aussie dabbled with it at times arguably, as Greg Mathews was far more a batsman than a spinner, but his career was over with Shane Warne, and rightly so. 

Bans for overrates are gone now. But should the quicks not be able to keep up with overrates? Bumrah, Archer, runs ups are getting shorter. Curran, CdG, the 5th bowling mediums are comming in off shorter runs ups as per. Boult is a regular 140 bowler, who takes a shorter run up than most I notice. Always well short of the field advertising. 

Anyway, I invite you to discuss the pro's and con's. I am a firm believer in horses for courses. When I first did this thread elsewhere, I used the WI evolution post Gibbs as why. But be warned, earlier this year, it finally started happening. And utlimately, I am interested whether Aus cricket fans think the team would be better off with an all seam attack in place of Lyon at home bar SCG. Aus has one issue in that Starc, Haze and Cummins do take a while to get through their overs with their long run ups. But Pattinson has a shorter run up. As do other candidates. Another question is whether they need to be as long as they are in the first place. 

Anyway, welcome your thoughts. 

Overrate bans are gone now, instead if a WTC match, you lose as many points as you are overs behind. But that can still be mighty profitable for points as against not winning where there is no points for losing. 

Great thread title, Paddles.

Fair play to you, mate.

On some pitches they may not be needed, but I contend that all pitches should have adequate encouragement for spin.

They change the rhythm of the game.

I'm surprised anyone would want to see the absence of spinners. When their is spin from each end there is so much cricket to watch for spectators within a short time. There is very little watching pace bowlers trudging back to their mark.

Okay. Interesting point. But I mean from a play to win not entertain perspective.

This is the actual real issue despite the normative "should" even if you believe so. Because in Aus, SA, NZ, Eng, and WI they are clearly not always not needed to be beneficial. What then?

If they are not, I would argue they should be.

When one sees  some Test cricket on the Subcontinent, pace bowlers have less of a role  than spinners. 

I think Test cricket in India is the best I've seen on TV.

They usually have huge crowds, who are very noisy, often with spin operating from both ends. It is often very entertaining. The pitches often highlight the lack of development in Australia of batters playing quality spin on pitches that favour spinners. Moreover,  Shield spinners deemed average in Australia, often with bit part roles in the Shield, look more potent in India than some star Shield pace bowlers.

In addition, pace bowlers often don't have the massive workloads and can bowl flat out when they bowl. Hence, they don't break down with injury.  Spinners shoulder a big workload. 

I'm arguing in the normative, not the empirical.

I think that pitches that favour pace bowling too much, which may be the case in Australia and South A, maybe NZ, are diminishing the spectacle  for spectators.

My least favourite wicket in Aus was the old WACA, which was dreadful for the development of  spin bowlers. Also, having met one of the Tassie Shield spin bowlers, he says the Bellerive pitch is awful to bowl spin on, whilst many of the grade wickers are  encouraging. 

I constantly have this discussion  with other TCA Members. 

I don't mind tbh. I think a global game with spin sometimes being a factor in England, formerly but not often in WI modern, Hamilton and SCG is okay, but I think Ireland, England, NZ, SA, Aus, WI balance out UAE/Pak. Afg, Ban, India and SL.

I don't mind SENA (what cricket lovers call SA, Eng, NZ and Aus) being the home of seam, and  Asia the home of spin, with WI doing whatever takes their fancy. I think its healthy. I love spinners and I love seamers. And some are going to benefit some more than others. And that's part of the global cricket challenge. 

I love watching a good game anywhere, regardless of crowd. I like a tense match, like most of us do. With the result possibly going either way. That's my favourite. Don't care if its swinging around corners, seaming viciously, or turning sideways....

But away from the normative, talking selection, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? On a lil to no spin track? What would you do? Assuming you want to win. England and Pakistan were caught napping big time in SA and WI. I will produce the score cards, Ban were in NZ too, BUT, they didn't have seamers to arguably fill the roles better. But NZ definitely performed better, and won in like 2 or 3 days despite the rain.... (but the real race was rain and not Bangladesh tbf)...

I like lateral movement as a viewer, I really don't care how it caused, swing, seam or spin. I like seeing a batsman challenged constantly.

Back to the normative and not the empirical.

I'd like to see the Subcontinent less conducive to spin, and the other nations you've alluded to, more conducive to spin.

I'm quite concerned some teams, particularly Australia,   just seem to be  good in familiar  home conditions - and - possibly South Africa.

It might have been you, but someone posted Australia has the worst record on the Subcontinent of all Test playing nations. Most of Australia doesn't see it!

I'm not going to debate you on the normative. At all. Im not sure I even have an opinion on that. Do we want all pitches globally the same, or appreciate the different challenges globally. I do not know.,

I am only interested and framing the topic int he empircal. If the pitch won't likely spin, do you play a spinner. That's my question. It's not normative. But feel freee to segue into what pitches there should be, globally homogenous (which really is possible now with turf transport and science) or do we like SENA vs Asia... (which I am kind of used to empiraclly)...

SA is bad in Asia, but NZ and England have won there recently. Aus has not. SA managed a draw in UAE the year before Aus started losing, so pending where you start it from, SA is as bad or better than Aus... 

SA and Aus have a lot to learn about Asia. NZ and Eng are very much ahead of Aus and SA there. NZ is probably the best SENA of late having beaten Banga, PAk and drawing with SL (with their now banned for 1 year spinner destroying us), but India humiliates us there too, like everyone else bar Pakistan which they refuse to host... But I will say when Bangla was there last, it was a green seamer!!!! Not a turner at all....

I'd like to see pitches around the world much the same, where the home team is not so favoured and visitors not disadvantaged.

Earlier on I read where a Shield  spinner is frustrated  bowling on his home pitch! He has often tried to play in a team which has four or five pace bowlers.

 I don't  want to see teams with all pace bowlers.

What does empirical and normative mean?

Empirical is based on historical (trend towards the recent as against the older though, its not always overall pending usage -parameters may be set), and thus used commonly as actual on (recent) past, but could still change in the future (bakward looking and measured), normative is "should" - idealistc.... what the future should hold, forward looking.

So to clarify by analogy, empirically - SENA is more seam and less spin. Asia is more spin. There are exceptions. India hosting Bangladesh today will be fast bouncy and seamy, or Pakistan hosting India in the 1990s will be aimed for reverse swing and not spin.... Any pitch can be doctored... for whatever... science of fields is that far advanced...Personallly I think when Aus or SA is here we should give the em Bunsen burners in NZ.. but Im not a pitch caller... But yes, it happens EVERYWHERE and HAS FOR A LONG TIME - this is why  the current Indian seam attack is such a game changer,,,, (in case you didnt quite get it)...

Not wanting to digress from cricket, but early on at uni in sociology, the Prof stated empirical is the is, and normative is the ought/should. 

You are first  person I've met on sports forums over 14 years  who uses these terms besides me, Paddles.

I love prodigious turn and bounce from spin.

I don't see enough of it watching cricket in countries that favour pace bowling too much.

What has happened to Yasir Shah, the superb  Pakistani leg spinner, who imparts prodigious spin and dip on the ball?

He's still a monster in Asia. He was terribly disappointing on his last tour of Aus, NZ, Eng and SA especially though. His numbers reveal that he needs pitch assistance to be a monster and get that big turn. He barely turned it in NZ or Aus last time. That WI series was the last series before WI relaid all their intl pitches to seam friendly tracks for Holder, Roach and Gabriel. Before then they were low, slow turners like Asia.

in Australia	2016-2017	3	5	148.1	11	672	8	3/207	3/174	84.00	4.53	111.1	0	0
in Bangladesh	2015-2015	2	4	94.3	13	340	10	4/73	7/131	34.00	3.59	56.7	0	0
in England	2016-2016	4	8	238.0	34	774	19	6/72	10/141	40.73	3.25	75.1	2	1
in New Zealand	2016-2016	1	2	13.3	1	61	0	-	-	-	4.51	-	0	0
in South Africa	2018-2019	2	3	32.4	2	123	1	1/20	1/44	123.00	3.76	196.0	0	0
in Sri Lanka	2015-2015	3	6	176.3	28	464	24	7/76	9/155	19.33	2.62	44.1	3	0
in U.A.E.	2014-2018	17	33	990.3	176	2849	116	8/41	14/184	24.56	2.87	51.2	8	2
in West Indies	2017-2017	3	6	188.2	40	549	25	7/94	9/177	21.96	2.91	45.2	3	0

I am not even sure he will play in Aus this year, tbh. Shadhab Khan is becoming their "away from Asia" leg spinner, and he is an all-rounder who is their best fieldsman. But they have a ton of finger spinners too.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan/content/player/922943.html

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/922943.html?class=1;template=results;type=bowling

Thanks for  this info.

One thing one learns, things don't often stay the same in cricket.

I thought I learnt  that Shah at one stage  was the  fastest bowler to reach 100 wickets. I love watching him bowl.

To read that he has struggled so  much in the aforementioned  highlighted counties is astonishing. Warne was successful in all of them, I would  have thought, apart from India. 

You will now probably produce stats to suggest he wasn't!

You are a phenomenon, Paddles!

Thanks DC. Warne did do well in those countries but not WI - but he will never get over being dropped there. Warne was a big ball turner, square at the start of his career, he'd find some turn on anything. But even in 05, he was still spinning it large in England.

But I really want to see people give their opinion on whether spinners are needed. Now - if you have a SK Warne type, of course you will play him. But what about when you just have another over 30 ave spinner who doesn't always get turn? And plenty of seamers under 30?

The question of suitable and fair pitches is too closely intertwined with the need for spinners for me. 

I'm going from the premise that they're not. So it comes down to over rates and the rest of the rules.... tbf...
 I hear your point, you want a  balanced game every time in a  normative sense (and I'm not debating you on this), im just talking the reality...

Good thread Paddles. Have missed it up till today. I am with you on a "horses for courses" policy for someone like Lyon who will never run thru a team but he can be relied on to chip in anytime during an innings with vital wickets. But wud someone else.. such as a batsman that also bowls competent spin be just as useful..doing away with the need for a specialist and allowing room for an additional quick or batsman. I note with interest that a couple of batsmen were on the CA Spin Camp past two years. One of them was Jason Sangha. I have seen him bowl and he is competent with plenty of room for improvement. So he may be one to fit that position to which I alluded.  Mike just fell out of his chair. Another is Param Uppal. I suspect there are at least half dozen more that fit the bill that attended the camp..

I'd say normally you do need a spinner, predominantly to give your other bowlers a rest and when the pitch deteriorates by the 3rd/4th innings. I'd say it is a strong minority of situations where you wouldn't want a spinner in your team to close out a match.

So often teams will bat second and not be batting in the last at all. And if they do - its not always spinning in the third innings. Heck its not always spinning in the 4th innings. One thing you can be damn sure of, is that if you're bowling first, in a 3 big quick plus spinner attack, you will have a spinner on before lunch on day 1. That is xmas time for the batting team. 

 WIll the pitch will deteriorate (cos in NZ it won't - we have half a block at Hamilton that turns, nothing else has in years and years) or the game goes long enough for the pitch to deteriorate (cos in SA it often won't - they will spiced up a seamer shootout - this can happen in England too early in the season, but some England pitches later in the season will turn big and spin plays a massive part, I concede that). 

The bowlers can certainly be rested if in a 5 bowler attack with an allrounder. The WI quartet which basically rejected spinners for 20+ years had no 5th no bowling just used Hooper or Viv Richard's nude spin to give a break to the bowlers. But their over rates were terrible.Once a bowler went down in India, Marshall just bowled and bowled and bowled. Still that would not have been fun for the WI team. Bet they wish they had Harper playing that game.

Anyway this is something that I think could well come into prominence with the WTC rules in SA and WI, possibly NZ too, cos all three teams have displayed a willingness to drop the spinners altogether (or not bowl them despite having them and taking the over rate ban and winning the game instead). Overrates will now effect wtc points, but you don't win points for losing. 

There are times where going without a spinner is fine, but even just to mix things up and give the batters something else to think about it i think is helpful. Ideally you want to disrupt the batters and not let them get comfortable, the spinner and fast bowler combo has always been excellent with that. And even to just have a backup plan in case the pitch and conditions don't turn out how you expect. There are many times when you expect it to be a fast bowler paradise but it turns into a pitch with a lack of movement and consistent bounce.

It's just risky business and if you want a 5 bowler attack then the 5th might aswell be your 4th pace option regardless.

See, for a large part I would agree. But NZ has no such luxury, so we literally went 5 seam. SA went 4 seam, or just didn't bowl the spinner. WI didn't bowl the spinner. So where you have a Roston Chase secnario (top order bat who is a spin allrounder but batting first), its about - do you even bowl him? Or take the fine for over rates...

This is a really nuanced issue. So put your captains hat on, and really tell me your thought process. Available talent matters. No doubt, and for sure.

But Faf and Holder could have avoided fines. They wanted to win. NZ just scrapped the spinner entirely. (So did SA in a couple of tests).

I've just found out what the Arm Ball is from a TCA club coach.

It is an action for an off spinner where the ball drifts like as in a pace bowler's outswinger  away from the bat, instead of the  conventional off spinner turning into the bat.

The action is a bit like an outswing action too.

When Murray Bennett played for Australia, the commentators constantly referred to him using an Arm Ball. I have never heard them saying it about Lyon.

Lyon has one, but rarely uses it. Its an easy ball to bowl, difficult to conceal depending on action. Dan Vettori was a much more famous exponent of it getting genuine swing, but after back surguries young his career, he couldnt spin his stock ball far at all.

Afridi and Shane Thomson have both bowled bouncers in test cricket from a spinners run up. Afridi could generate 130km/h plsu and Thommo was a former fast bowler. Its ineffective for the most part, but THommo once got Tendulkar caught on the boundary who hooked it. 

The doosra, now almost illegal in every form, and the carrom ball are the real chance for an off spinner to vary and decieve. What lyon does, is mix up the over spin with the offf spin, which will change the turn, the pitching and the bounce. THe more over spin you impart, the shorter it pitches but more it turns. A cutting off spinner without over spin can only vary revs or bowl arm balls, so they have less the aresenal. But with accuracy like Jadeja, things can still happen great in your career. A cutter gets a lot more spin than an over spin bowler. 

Murali of course had every single finger spin delivery. Just a genius. He had been playing intl cricket for years before the doosra came out, but he learned it fast. He could also bowl leg spin, like Ashwin can. There are  abunch oif AFG and SL spinners comming through now that are bowling both finger spin and leg spin variations all the time in games. I think this is the future, tbh. 

I know what a doosra is.

What is the carrom ball?

They change the grip, and typically the middle finger flicks the ball in delivery out imparting leg spin on it as it leaves the hand. Its was made famous by Mendis, from SL, who destroyed everyone in his first few series, including India, but he had no regular off spin and quickly became ineffectual as batsman just played the trajectory line. But there is a different tell with the carrom ball. 

Ashwin has a great carrom ball. NZ cricket fans got really excited last year when Mitch Santner bowled a couple in an odi series. It has a big giveaway with the finger popping up though from the hand. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSgBOiG7eLc

Mendis (this is when it becomes famous circa 2008

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT1G10wvzp8

Here Mujeeb was destroying NZ in U19's including carrom balls, his were't turning much that day,  but Elliot talks how to pick the carrom ball, and Mendis last test. Basically spin bowlers who knew how to bowl it told batsmen what to look for. 

As a fan, watching Santner bowl it, from the camera behind, I know instantly if I am paying attention, cos his grip is totally different - looks like a  heavy metal hand gesture almost. Tbh, I am too blind to see the leg spinner variations in real time. So it is easier to read.

The tell for the batsman, is the finger flicking it - because the hand front on goes form a two finger grip to a third, as the middle finger reappears after flicking. But Santner, being tall with big hands, gets more turn than most carrom ball bwolers, long fingers means more turn. 

Its a very good limited overs variation, but not really effective in tests anymore as you have to bowl it so rarely to catch the batsman off guard. 

Yep, I love bowling it. I put my index finger down the seam and bowl with a slightly more round arm action. If you get it right the ball drifts away and doesn't spin. 

There's two ways to get wickets with it - either bowl it a bit quicker and try to smack them on the pad. Or, bowl it a bit more round arm - if they play a defensive shot they'll nick it to the slips. Or even better - if they charge it expecting it to spin, they can get stumped. 

I particularly love bowling it to left handers around the wicket. You bowl a few loopy off breaks and then slip in the arm ball just to see if they're paying attention - quite often they get hit on the pad plumb in front. And to right handers, you'd be amazed at how many times they'll run down and miss it. 

Lyon used to bowl it but not much any more. I think the guys with the best arm balls in recent times are Ravi Ashwin and Daniel Vettori. Especially Vettori - he used to vary the pace of his orthodox delivery a lot, so sometimes you couldn't tell if he was bowling a flatter off break or an arm ball until you got hit on the pads. 

You can see some examples here (especially the third wicket against Tim Ambrose) -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghvHXPv2z68

Thanks for this, Lastbroadcast.

Why do you think Lyon bowls it less than he used to?