Here’s an opinion that is widely held:
“if you’re not preparing your players for hardball cricket, you’re letting them down, frankly. You’re condemning them to never being able to play in a proper game.”
Today, I want to challenge this view. Soft ball cricket isn’t soft.
Soft ball cricket isn’t just for kids. Soft ball cricket isn’t improper cricket. Soft ball cricket doesn’t stop players developing.
Yet, every summer I hear the cry from kids - aged somewhere between 9 and 13 - “can we play hard ball?”. Playing soft ball is a terrible fate to these boys. So, why don’t we just give them their wish and break out the cricket balls?
Form of life
In the Caribbean and Pakistan, tapeball - a form of cricket played without a hard cricket ball - is a recognised and respected format played in streets and on beaches by anyone, and also to a high standard. Street cricketers have famously become internationals. For example Malinga and Pollard.
No one in these places says tape ball isn’t proper cricket. It’s just part of the culture, or what some call form of life.
If culture - rather than enjoyment or development - is the only reason why we don’t play as much tape ball here in the UK, then its a cultural issue more than anything else. You can educate your way to more soft ball cricket.
Assuming this is true, why would we want to change the culture?
The ball is a constraint
Playing with a 5 and a half ounce cricket ball is the most realistic way to play the game. It’s what the pros do. That doesn’t mean it’s the most suitable in all circumstances.
In constraints-led coaching we think of the ball as a constraint. It affords opportunities for action that differ depending on the type of ball.
In skill development, a tape ball (a tennis ball half taped with electrical tape) swings. It affords batsman the chance to play against the hooping ball. It also gives bowlers the chance to work out how to bowl when the ball swings.
Games with “windballs” or “velocity” balls (plastic balls with a moulded seam) can be played quickly and don’t require pitches. They work at any age. You can experiment with tactics and your mental game in far less time. Soft ball helps a lot if you want to replay a scenario a few times in a short period.
From an enjoyment view, a plastic ball is a great option. Ask yourself what people say when they say they don’t like playing cricket. Chances are it’s “boring” or “the ball is too hard”. So why not play a faster moving format with a ball that’s easier to field without worrying about fingers?
We already know it works from the tapeball games around the world.
Yes, this format isn’t for the traditionalists, but what harm does it do to traditional cricket if tapeball it brings more people to the game?
No more “soft” ball
Due to these advantages, I want to lobby to change the image of “soft” ball cricket. In my environment at least.
“Soft ball” is the wrong statement. It suggests they are for the soft people who can’t handle the hard ball like a real man can. You might say it’s just a name, but there is meaning in a name.
I’m going to try to repackage non-cricket balls as training aids and a different format instead. It’s not childish or weak to use a different ball or a different format, it’s just another way to achieve your intention.
Let’s try something like this,
Soft ball formats can be called tapeball cricket, street cricket or velocity cricket.
Soft balls in training can be called simply practice balls or street balls. Or they could be named after the affordances they open up; tactical balls or swing balls.
Who’s with me?