The aim of the article ‘Is bowling workload a risk factor for injury to Australian junior cricket fast bowlers? ‘ was to investigate the risk factors of the workload of bowling to junior fast bowler and then to suitably evaluate the guidelines of the current bowling workload (Dennis et al. , 2005). To investigate the effects of fast bowling on junior cricket players forty four male fast bowlers aged between 12 and 17years participated in the study and were monitored over the 2002-2003 cricket season (Dennis et al. , 2005).
The junior bowlers who participated in the in this study were also part of a larger group study where junior and senior bowlers both underwent a range of tests (Dennis et al. , 2003,Dennis et al. , 2004). The participants filled in a log book on a daily basis tracking training and reporting any injuries or conditions they had in even if they had not occurred during cricket. An injury is defined as the form of which a person is in affecting their availability to be picked for team selection, limited performance, or needed surgery (Dennis et al. 2003). In the study any participants who had minor injuries which affected participation in only training sessions were not examined in the study. To which they were seen by a physiotherapist who reviewed the injury determining whether or not it met the criteria. The participants were required to undergo an MRI scan at the beginning of the season and again after any back/trunk injuries had occurred so that the physiotherapists could review them to confirm what the injury was.
Although it is not the best to help diagnose lumbar injuries it was used because of the issues of radiation exposure for the participants linked with CT or bone scans (Cross et al. , 2003, Saifuddin and Burnett, 1997). To be able to evaluate the relationship between injury and workload comparisons were made between uninjured and injured bowlers (Dennis et al. , 2003). To do this those who became injured only their workload before the injury happened was used to be looked at (Dennis et al. , 2003) and for the participants who did not become injured their workload for the whole season was used.
The results of the study showed that out of the 44 bowlers 11 of them reported having an overuse injury with 7 of them developing a back injury. The bowlers who developed injuries had been bowling more often than the bowlers who were uninjured (Dennis et al. , 2005). This shows that fast bowlers who have a higher workload are at a higher risk of sustaining an overuse injury. The reason behind doing this study was assessing and documenting injuries to junior fast bowlers. Any participation in sport has a risk of injury in it (Finch et al. 1998, Leary and White, 2000, Gregory et al. , 2002).
Fast bowlers have been identified as being at a greater risk of injury due to factors which include bad technique, inadequate physical preparation and overuse (Stretch, 1993, Elliott et al. , 1992, Burnett et al. , 1991, Foster et al. , 1989). Overuse injury has been identified as being a major factor contributing to injury in young fast bowlers (Stretch, 1993, Stretch, 2003). The 4 main themes which are talked about in the study are junior fast bowlers, overuse injuries, workload and lower back injuries.
In 2003, Dennis et al, looked at the relationship between a fast bowlers workload and injury to try and identify the at what point the risk of the bowler sustaining an injury would be increase. This study found that when the bowlers workload was increased the chance of them sustaining an injury was increased. Then in 2004 Dennis et al, looked into the relationship again and came up with the same results. This suggests that there is a connection linking the workload of fast bowlers to overuse injuries. Studies into the effects of fast bowling in junior players has been going on for many years.
In 1992, Elliott et al, looked into fast bowling and the physical factors on radiological features in young bowlers. During this study they used 20 junior fast bowlers from the Australian development squad, who underwent CT and MRI scans to try and detect the presence of any bony or disk abnormalities. They were split into 3 different groups depending on what the scans showed up. The study showed that depending on how they bowled was they showed different types abnormalities, whether it be disc, bony or in the lumbar spine.
When comparing the three studies they all show that there is a relationship between the workload of a fast bowler and overuse injuries effecting the lower back. There are also other studies which have looked into the workload of young fast bowlers. In a study done in 1989, Foster et al, they tested 82 junior fast bowlers before the season and like in other studies they had to complete log books. The bowlers where put into three different groups depending on the injury and the way they bowled was looked at. The bowlers in group one had similar injury all bowled in a similar way which is the same as what happened in the other two groups.
As you can see studies looking into fast bowling workload as well as overuse and lumbar injuries have been going on for a while, and they are still getting similar results coming from tests and studies which are being conducted years after. The paper ‘Is bowling workload a risk factor for injury to Australian junior cricket fast bowlers? ” has been cited a total of 82. The themes of the papers which have cited the main article are very similar to the themes which were brought up in the main article and the ones they had referenced.
These themes include fast bowlers, workload, lumbar spine injuries and junior bowlers. A lot of the other studies and articles which have cited the main article are also aetiological. Some of the articles have come up with similar results to the main article when looking at lumbar spine injuries through overuse and bowling workload. After doing a 10 year long study, in 2006 an article was published an article which stated that during the length of the study the injury rate in fast bowlers increased, although in the it did fall in the 2004-2005 season.
They found that over the ten years the workloads of the players increased and because they were increasing fast bowlers were missing around 16% of potential time playing (Orchard et al. , 2006). One of the articles which was cited looked into the bowlers workload and found that, if bowlers bowled more than 50 over’s in one match they significantly increased their risk of developing an injury over the bowlers who bowled under 50 over’s during a game (Orchard et al. , 2009).
Both of these articles talk about bowlers who have a higher workload either through playing more games or bowling more in the games they play being more susceptible to developing an injury to the lumbar spine region. This article like the others looked at injury to not only the lumbar spine region but at the trunk of the body and lower limbs. Over the 2003-2004 season, 91 junior and senior cricket fast bowlers were part of a study which looked into bowling workload and injury. Like other studies they found that a higher workload increased the chance of fast bowlers becoming injured.
The main outcome from the study was fast bowlers developed injuries to their lower back but also to their trunk and lower limbs. The conclusion to the study was that there needs to be more biomechanical research into how the risk of injury can be reduced and what interventions would be appropriate to put in place (Dennis et al. , 2008) Other articles which have cited the main article have looked into overuse injuries to the upper limbs due to bowling workload. During the 2007-2008 season, a study was done looking into the what the relationship between upper limb injuries and workload in 28 elite senior Australian cricketers.
This study showed that it is not only the lumbar spine which can become injured through overuse but upper limbs can as well. This study showed there is an increased risk factor for fast bowlers to develop upper limb iniuries due to the workload. To decrease the chance of developing this type of overuse injury more research looking into the guidelines for a bowlers throwing workload (Saw et al. , 2009) Other article which have cited the main article on injury interventions and what to do to reduce the risk of developing an overuse injury in fast bowling cricketers.
There are not many interventions looking into this. This is one of the articles which has cited the main article is on injury intervention. This article is on injury prevention in cricket. They found that over 11 seasons with the last season being the 2008-2009 one that it is not only lumbar spine injuries which have increased but thigh and hamstring strains have increased. It is thought that these types of injuries have increased due to the number of twenty20 cricket games which are now being plays. ne of the interventions which has been suggested is that teams should develop squad rotation more for fast bowlers which may help to reduce the risk of injury. it is also suggested in the article that if the rules are changed to allow a 12th person to play as a full substitute then it will reduce the workload for fast bowlers potentially lowering the risk of them becoming injured (Orchard et al. , 2010) Over the last few year there has been many aetiological studies done and articles written on types of injuries which fast bowlers get.
Most of the injuries which have been sustained are overuse injuries due to the high workload of the bowlers. Cricket bowlers require a high level of control, accuracy and reliability. If bowlers are not at a good standard then it means the performance of the bowler will be poor leading to injuries to lower back, limbs and upper limbs (David et al. , 2009). Incorrect or improper technique over a long period of time is what may lead to developing an acute injury or an overuse injury. The results which have come from the main article show that with a higher workload the risk of getting an overuse injury is increased within junior fast bowler.
This is not the only study or article that suggests this. There are many thoughts about what interventions could be put into place to help reduce injury in junior fast bowlers. Some of these include coaching intervention programs, using a bowling aid to try and help modify and improve a bowlers technique and evaluating the recommended bowling workloads in junior cricketer (Stretch, 2007). Others think that if the bowlers had better abdominal muscles it would help to reduce the risk of sustaining an injury to the lumbar spine region (Hides et al. 2009).
The limitations to some of these ideas is that it by reducing the guidelines for the workloads of junior fast bowlers, it means that they will not be allowed to bowl as much. Which bring up the question of if they cannot bowl as much how are they expected to improve their skills. If like Stretch suggested they bring in an aid to help improve the technique of the junior fast bowlers then they would not have to cut down how much they trained meaning they would still be able to develop how they bowl but reducing the risk of becoming injured.
In my opinion I would recommend that they put a limit on how much junior fast bowls can bowl without a training aid but they should be able to bowl using a training aid to help them develop the correct technique. this would mean that when they are bowling un aided they will be able to feel a difference and try and correct themselves. By doing this they will be able to improve and it means that they will lessen the risk of them becoming injured. Although there is always a risk in all sports that the participant will become injured. So no matter how many intervention are put in place there will always be a chance that someone will becom