Sajeel Chaudhry

1

Biomechanical and strength predictors of ball release speed for varying bowling actions
in cricket fast bowlers
Fast bowling is biomechanically the most highly studied area in cricket due to the high injury
rates, particularly back injuries (Foster et al., 1989, Elliot, 2000) coupled with the success fast
bowlers have bowling in excess of 85mph (Bartlett, Stockill, Elliot & Burnett, 1996). As fast
bowlers are considered critical components to the success of the teams, biomechanical
research continues to explore the factors that contribute to the increase in the release speed of
the ball. As a result recent studies have been conducted in trying to understand factors such as
technique, anthropometric and strength correlations with the release speed of the ball (Pyne et
al., 2006; Wormgoor, Harden & McKinon, 2010; Worthington, King & Ranson, 2013).
These studies have yet to conclusively be able to determine contributing factors that most
influence the release speed of the ball and much more research is required in understanding
scientific evidence behind the performance aspect of bowling (Bartlett, 2003). Thus the aim
of this study is to characterise the strength and ball release speed correlates between the
various types of bowling actions, as analysts have looked into the joint kinematics and
strength correlates with the release speed of the ball independently, however have failed to
establish the relationship between these two areas.
In the past decade the physical demands of fast bowling have increased steadily due to the
increased match schedules at both domestic and international level which are summarised in
Table 1 and Table 2.



Sajeel Chaudhry

2

Table 1. ACB report on player matches available from 1996 to 2002
Team 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Australia 414 1218 1020 1327 1108 1153 748
New South Wales 416 464 468 510 504 566 664
Queensland 357 396 396 350 399 494 566
South Australia 306 330 459 465 387 413 530
Tasmania 255 270 306 303 308 475 566
Victoria 405 432 416 455 363 523 556
Western Australia 342 396 414 367 449 570 587
Total 2495 3506 3479 3777 3518 4194 4217
Report taken from the ACB (Australian Cricket Board) Injury Report 2001-02

Table 2. Sport Health Report on designated player hours of exposure in matches each season
Competition 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Domestic
One-day 1819 1732 2685 2685 2685 2685 2598 2598
First Class
Domestic 8658 9048 8892 8892 8580 9438 9126 8892
One Day
International 996 1472 953 909 1386 1386 1039 1559
Test Cricket 2067 2067 1287 2379 1248 2691 2262 3042
Total 15539 16319 15818 16867 15902 18204 17030 18097
Report taken from Sports Medicine Australia(SMA)

Despite the increased playing hours the injury rates have remained relatively stable,
summarised in Table 3, with Figure 1 and Figure 2 showing the match load vs. injury rates.
Table 3. ACB and Sports Medicine Australia report on injuries/10000 player hours
Report 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
ACB 18.4 14.4 20.8 26.2 23.6 21.4 24.2
SMA 37.7 34.9 29.7 37.7 31.7 37 27.3 25.1















Sajeel Chaudhry

3

Figure 1. ACB report on Workload vs. Injury Rate

Figure 2. SMA report on Workload vs. Injury Rate

Though the above injury rates comprise of all roles and activities within cricket, fast bowling
is the activity which is most affected by injuries accounting for over 41% of the total injuries
(Gregory, Batt & Wallace, 2004; Stretch, 1993) and hence a moderate to strong correlation
can be assumed between the total injury rate of cricketers and of fast bowlers. The reason for
a relatively stable injury rate amongst fast bowlers, is due to acknowledgement by the
cricketing community that bowlers are required to be in peak physical condition to cope with
the demands placed upon them and as a result more scientific physical training programmes
have been introduced enhancing performance and reducing the risk of injury by making
bowlers stronger and specifically trained for bowling (Woolmer & Noakes, 2008; Noakes &
Durandt, 2000).
0
10
20
30
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
I
n
j
u
r
y
/
1
0
0
0
0

p
l
a
y
e
r

h
o
u
r

P
l
a
y
e
r

D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d

M
a
t
c
h
e
s

Season
Player Workload vs. Injury Rate
Player Matches Injury/10000 player hour
0
10
20
30
40
14000
15000
16000
17000
18000
19000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
I
n
j
u
r
y
/
1
0
0
0
0

p
l
a
y
e
r

h
o
u
r

P
l
a
y
e
r

H
o
u
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

Season
Player Workload vs. Injury Rate
Player Hour Exposure Injury/10000 player hour
Sajeel Chaudhry

4

Performance for a fast bowler is defined as the ability to bowl fast with a relatively low risk
of injury (Bartlett et al., 1996). The risk of injury is dependent upon 3 factors (Dennis,
2007):
Technique
Physical Preparation
Bowling Workload
Out of the above 3 factors, physical preparation is the component which has greatly
contributed to the stable state of injury rate over time, as bowling workload has increased
over time and change in technique has not been covered in depth with only a handful of
studies investigating the efficacy of modifying a fast bowling technique or action (Wallis,
Elliot & Koh, 2002; Elliott and Khangure, 2002; Ranson, King, Burnett, Worthington &
Shine, 2009). These studies have shown that there are certain aspects of bowling action that
can be changed however its effectiveness in elite bowlers is yet to be determined as the
actions are highly developed. Based on this evidence the relatively stable rate of injury is due
to the recognition that bowlers have become physically more conditioned and stronger over
time.
Despite the evidence that bowlers have increased their physical condition over time, there
seems to be no improvement in the release speed of the ball. Various studies have looked at
the strength correlates with the bowling speed of fast bowlers (Wormgoor, Harden &
McKinon, 2010; Portus et al, 2004; Pyne et al., 2006) and have predicted variables where
strength qualities can be improved to generate greater release speed. Figure 3 shows the
stable range of bowling speeds and hence more research is required in understanding this
strength and release speed relationship.

Sajeel Chaudhry

5

Figure 3. Top bowling speeds to date in international cricket (Cric Info:ESPN Cricket)


A greater knee angle at front foot contact (FFC) is a variable which is believed to be
moderate to strongly correlated to the release speed of the ball according to studies shown in
Table 4.
Table 4. Correlation between knee angle and ball release speed at front foot contact
Author r value P value
Wormgoor et al. (2008) r = +0.52 P = 0.005
Burden & Bartlett. (1990) r = +0.41
Loram et al. (2005) r = +0.71 P = 0.011

According to Bartlett et al.(2006) there are three types of knee actions:
1. Straight leg (knee angle >150)
2. Flexed knee (knee angle <150)
3. Initially flexes at FFC and then extends to >150

There are a number of reasons why a greater knee angle at FFC is thought to increase the
release speed of the ball. Elliot, Foster and Gray (1986) state that a greater knee angle
increases the tangential velocity of the ball, as it is released, due to a greater lever arm from
the front foot to the arm as the radial distance is increased. According to Portus et al. (2004) a
more stable platform is provided when the leg is straighter which causes the leg to be stiffer
allowing a more effective transfer of kinetic energy from the momentum of the run up. Thus
100
120
140
160
180
1
9
7
5
1
9
7
6
1
9
7
6
1
9
7
9
1
9
7
9
1
9
9
2
1
9
9
7
1
9
9
8
1
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
B
o
w
l
i
n
g

S
p
e
e
d

(
K
m
/
h
)

Time (Year)
Top Bowling Speed (km/h) Recorded Over Time
Bowling Speed (KPH)
Sajeel Chaudhry

6

it is essential for the knee musculature to resist flexion upon FFC which is dependent upon its
eccentric ability whereas extension of the knee is a function of its concentric capacity
(Wormgoor et al., 2010). A number of studies have investigated this relationship between
knee isokinetic/isoinertial knee strengths and release speeds in Table 5.

Table 5. Lower limb strength measurements and release speed of ball
Study Test Results Findings
Wormgoor et al.
(2010)
Isokinetic strength
test of knee
flexion/extension
No significant
correlation between
isokinetic knee
strength
Negative correlation
between knee flexion
and release speed,
implied knee needs
to resist flexion
Pyne et al. (2006) Isoinertial strength
test (Counter
Movement Jump)
Moderate
significance between
senior and juniors
with large effect size
(1.4)
Release speed was
greater for greater
lower limb strength
tests
Loram et al. (2005) Knee
extension/flexion
peak torques
No significant
relationship
(extension r = -0.11,
flexion r = -0.08)
Positive correlation
between knee angle
and release speed
however no strength
predictors

This relationship is poorly understood. No relationship has been investigated between the
knee strength and the type of knee action. Instead statistical analysis has been performed with
the knee action and release speed of the ball. By investigating this relationship will allow
bowling coaches and S&C coaches to understand the following relationships:
1. Whether knee flexion is a purely a function of technique, as a study by Ranson et al.
(2009) showed that knee action angles have not be known to change despite coaching
interventions over a period of 2 years. Hence is it possible that knee strength training
will have no change in increasing knee extension
2. Understanding the moderate inverse correlation (r2=0.41) between knee extension
angle and trunk strength/stability according to Portus et al. (2000) as bowlers with a
Sajeel Chaudhry

7

more flexed knee have thought to have developed their trunk musculature more so to
transfer force in a closed kinetic chain. In which case bowlers with a straighter knee
may need to increase their trunk strength and force transmission mechanism to
increase the release speed whereas the more flexed knee need to concentrate on their
knee eccentric ability
Similarly no relationship has been investigated between the strength measurements in a
kinetic chain and the relative independent movement of the bowling arm during a bowling
action at FFC. Burden and Bartlett (1990) showed a strong correlation in the linear speed of
the hip and shoulder joints, however a weak correlation between the shoulder and elbow.
Since bowling exhibits triple extension patterns within a closed kinetic chain with a proximal
to distal firing pattern, a relative independent movement of a particular joint may indicate
weakness within the kinetic chain as work by Bai et al., (2008) has shown high correlation
between joint movements and muscle activation during an Olympic lift such as a snatch
which is highly correlated to athletic performance and efficient closed kinetic chain force
production (Funato, Matsuo & Fukunago, 1996). Thus strength correlates such as trunk
strengths, leg strength and upper body strengths during such a movement pattern must be
investigated.
Studies into strength correlates and release speed of the ball have taken a very generalist view
of the strength measurements and have failed to address any dominant biomotor abilities
within an action. For instance within the three types of knee actions in a bowling technique,
where the knee flexes and then extends has greater correlation with the release speed of the
ball (Portus et al., 2004). The time to peak force within a bowling action is 16ms from FFC
(Hurion et al, 2000) which is similar to the fast stretch shortening cycle of <0.25secs (Wilson
& Pryor, 1994) where the knee flexes in order to decelerate the body, storing elastic energy,
and then extending releasing the stored elastic energy which contributes to the power
Sajeel Chaudhry

8

development in the concentric phase (Turner & Jefferys, 2010). Similarly with the three types
of bowling action; side on, front on and mixed, there is more transverse rotation of the upper
body including the pelvis during the side on action which utilises the stretch shortening cycle
for rapid force development (Whitely, 2010). Though no significant difference in release
speed of the bowling actions has been found (Stockill & Barlett, 1992) it may appear that
bowlers utilise different modes of force and power production. For instance in the front on
and mixed action very little utilisation of the stretch shortening cycle prevails and these
bowlers may have greater strength/power in the pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi
compared to side on action. Hence the same strength tests do not apply to all types of bowling
actions. Thus consideration to the strength test designs must be given for the types of bowling
actions as the tests may not be fit for all.
Thus based on the models presented, and the lack of understanding of these technique and
strength relationships, this study shall aim to test the below hypothesis in order to
characterise these strength technique relationships:
H
11
: Knee flexing on FFC technique has weaker eccentric control of the knee musculature, as
the knee is unable to resist knee flexion
H
12
: Knee flexing on FFC technique has strong trunk strengths in order to compensate for a
loss in release speed
H
13
: Knee flexing on FFC technique has weaker ground braking forces as a result of weak
eccentric control of the knee musculature
H
21
: Knee extending on FFC technique has stronger eccentric control of the knee
musculature, as the knee is able to resist knee flexion
Sajeel Chaudhry

9

H
22
: Knee extending on FFC technique has weaker trunk strengths as bowlers utilise the
deceleration due to eccentric loading of the lower extremities to transfer force in the kinetic
chain more so than the trunk
H
23
: Knee extending on FFC technique has stronger ground braking forces as a result of
greater eccentric control of the knee musculature
H
31
: Knee flexing and then extending on FFC technique is has greater utilisation of the
stretch shortening cycle
H
32
: Knee flexing and then extending on FFC technique results has weaker trunk strengths as
bowlers utilise the stretch shortening cycle in the lower extremities to transfer force in the
kinetic chain more so than the trunk
H
33
: Knee flexing and then extending on FFC technique has stronger ground braking forces
as a result of greater force production due to the stretch shortening cycle
H
41
: Weaker trunk strength is accompanied by relatively independent movement of the
shoulder joint due to the loss of force transfer in the kinetic chain
H
51
: Front on action has greater strength in the pectoralis major musculature
H
52
: Front on action has greater strength in the latissimus dorsi musculature
H
61
: Mixed action has greater strength in the pectoralis major musculature
H
62
: Mixed action has greater strength in the latissimus dorsi musculature
H
71
: Side on action has greater ability to utilise the stretch shortening cycle in the upper body
In order to test these hypothesis statistical analysis using Pearson product moment correlation
coefficients, independent t-tests and ANOVA analysis will be used using two-tailed and
Sajeel Chaudhry

10

statistical significance level set to p<0.05. The dependant variable will be the release speed of
the ball and joint kinematics and strength measures will be the independent variables in the
analysis.


Sajeel Chaudhry

11

References
Bai, X., Wang, H., Zhang, X., Ji, W., & Wang, C. (2008). Three-dimension kinematics
simulation and biomechanics analysis of snatch technique. Computer Science in
Sports, Volume 1, 291-296.
Bartlett, M. (2003). The science and medicine of cricket: an overview and update. Journal of
Sports Science,Sep;21(9):733-52.
Bartlett, R.M., Stockill, N.P., Elliot, B.C., & Burnett, AF. (1996). The biomechanics of fast
bowling in mens cricket: a review. Journal of Sports Sciences, 14, 403-424.
Burden, A., and Bartlett, R. (1990). A kinematic investigation of elite fast and fast medium
cricket bowlers. Proceedings of the Vlllth International Symposium of the Society of
Biomechanics in Sports (pp. 41-46).
Dennis, R. (2007). Evidence-based injury prevention for repetitive microtrauma injuries: the
cricket example. School of Human Movement and Sport Sciences, University of
Ballarat.
Dennis, R., Farhart, P., Goumas, C., & Orhard, J. (2002). Fast bowling workload and injury
study: ACB national project 2000. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 36:270-274.
Elliott, B.C. (2000). Back injuries and the fast bowler in cricket. Journal of Sport Science.
18:983991.
Elliott, B. C., & Khangure, M. (2002). Disk degeneration and fast bowling in cricket: An
intervention study. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 34, 17141718.

Elliott, B., Foster, D., & Gray, S. (1986). Biomechanical and physical factors influencing fast
bowling. Australian Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 18, 16-21.

Foster, D., John, D., Elliott, B., Ackland, T., & Fitch, K. (1989). Back injuries to fast bowlers
in cricket: a prospective study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 23, No. 3
Funato, K., Matsuo, A., & Fukunaga, T. (1996). Specific movement power related to athletic
performance in weight lifting. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 12, 44-57.

Gregory, P.L., Batt, M.E., & Wallace, W.A. (2004). Is risk of fast bowling injury in
cricketers greatest in those who bowl most? A cohort of young English fast bowlers.
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 38:125-128

Hurrion, P.D., Dyson, R., & Hale, T. (2000). Simultaneous measurement of back and front
foot ground reaction forces during the same delivery stride of the fast-medium
bowler. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 993-997

Loram, L.C., McKinon, W., Wormgoor, S., Rogers, G.G., Nowak, I. & Harden, L.M. (2005).
Determinants of ball release speed in schoolboy fast-medium bowlers in cricket.
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 45(4), 483-490.

Sajeel Chaudhry

12


Noakes, T.D. & Durandt, J.J. (2000). Physiological requirements of cricket. Journal of
Sports Sciences, Vol.18, pp 919-929.

Orchard, J., James, T., & Portus, M. (2006). Cricket Australia injury report 2006. Sports
Medicine Australia, Vol 24, Issue 4.

Portus, M.R., Bruce, R.M., Bruce, C.E., Pfitzner, M.C., & Done, R.P. (2004). Technique
factors related to ball release speed and trunk injuries in high performance cricket fast
bowlers. Sports Biomechanics, Vol 3, Issue 2.

Portus, M.R., Sinclair, P.J., Burke, S.T., Moore D.J., & Farhart, P.J. (2000). Cricket fast
bowling performance and technique and the influence of selected physical factors
during an
8-over spell. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 999-1011
Pyne, D.B., Duthie, G.M., Saunders, P.U., Petersen, C.A. & Portus, M.R. (2006).
Anthropometric and strength correlates of fast bowling speed in junior and senior
cricketers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 20(3), 620626
Ranson, C., King, M., Burnett, A., Worthington, P., & Shine, K. (2009). The effect of
coaching intervention on elite fast bowling technique over a two year period. Sport
Biomechanics; 8(4): 261-274.

Stretch, R.A. (1993). The incidence and nature of injuries in first league and provincial
cricketers. South African Medical Journal,83:33942.

Stockill,N.P., & Bartlett, R.M. (1992) A three-dimensional cinematographically analysis of
the techniques of International and English county cricket fast bowlers., Proceedings
of the Xth Symposium of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports.Milan:
Edi Ermes.

Turner, A.N., & Jeffreys, I. (2010). The stretch-shortening cycle: Proposed mechanisms and
methods for enhancement. National strength and conditioning association, 32, 87-99.
Wallis, R., Elliott, B., and Koh, M. (2002). The effect of a fast bowling harness in cricket: An
intervention study. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 495506.

Whiteley, R. (2010). Throwing mechanics, load monitoring and injury: perspectives from
physiotherapy and baseball as they relate to cricket. Conference of Science, Medicine
& Coaching in Cricke

Woolmer, B. & Noakes, TD. (2008). Art and Science of Cricket, Struik Publishers, ISBN
978-1-77007-658-7, Cape Town, South Africa.
Wormgoor, S., Harden, L. & McKinon, W (2008). The determinants of ball release speed in
cricket fast bowlers. ISBC Conference, July 14-18.
Sajeel Chaudhry

13

Wormgoor, S., Harden, L. & McKinon, W (2010). Anthropometric, biomechanical, and
isokinetic strength predictors of ball release speed in high-performance cricket fast
bowlers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28(9): 957965
Worthington, P.J., King, M.A., & Ranson, C.A.( 2013). Relationships between fast bowling
technique and ball release speed in cricket. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 29, 78-
84

Wilson, G.J., & Pryor, J.F. (1994). Musculotendinous stiffness: its relationship to eccentric,
isometric, and concentric performance. Journal of applied physiology, 76, 2714-2719.