Hitters in fast ball-sports do not align their gaze with the ball throughout ball-flight; rather, they use predictive eye movement strategies that contribute towards their level of interceptive skill. Existing studies claim that (i) baseball and cricket batters cannot track the ball because it moves too quickly to be tracked by the eyes, and that consequently (ii) batters do not – and possibly cannot – watch the ball at the moment they hit it. However, to date no studies have examined the gaze of truly elite batters. We examined the eye and head movements of two of the world’s best cricket batters and found both claims do not apply to these batters. Remarkably, the batters coupled the rotation of their head to the movement of the ball, ensuring the ball remained in a consistent direction relative to their head. To this end, the ball could be followed if the batters simply moved their head and kept their eyes still. Instead of doing so, we show the elite batters used distinctive eye movement strategies, usually relying on two predictive saccades to anticipate (i) the location of ball-bounce, and (ii) the location of bat-ball contact, ensuring they could direct their gaze towards the ball as they hit it. These specific head and eye movement strategies play important functional roles in contributing towards interceptive expertise.

BackgroundParalympic sports are required to develop evidence-based systems that allocate athletes into ‘classes’ on the basis of the impact of their impairment on sport performance. However, sports for athletes with vision impairment (VI) classify athletes solely based on the WHO criteria for low vision and blindness. One key barrier to evidence-based classification is the absence of guidance on how to address classification issues unique to VI sport. The aim of this study was to reach expert consensus on how issues specific to VI sport should be addressed in evidence-based classification.MethodA four-round Delphi study was conducted with 25 participants who had expertise as a coach, athlete, classifier and/or administrator in Paralympic sport for VI athletes.ResultsThe experts agreed that the current method of classification does not fulfil the requirements of Paralympic classification, and that the system should be different for each sport to account for the sports’ unique visual demands. Instead of relying only on tests of visual acuity and visual field, the panel agreed that additional tests are required to better account for the impact of impairment on sport performance. There was strong agreement that all athletes should not be required to wear a blindfold as a means of equalising the impairment during competition.ConclusionsThere is strong support within the Paralympic movement to change the way that VI athletes are classified. This consensus statement provides clear guidance on how the most important issues specific to VI should be addressed, removing key barriers to the development of evidence-based classification.

The relationship between perception-action coupling and anticipatory skill in an interceptive task was examined using an in-situ temporal occlusion paradigm. Skilled and novice cricket batsmen were required to predict the direction of balls bowled towards them under four counterbalanced response conditions of increasing perception-action coupling: (i) verbal, (ii) lower-body movement only, (iii) full-body movement (no bat), and (iv) full-body movement with bat (i.e., the usual batting response). Skilled but not novice anticipation was found to improve as a function of coupling when responses were based on either no ball-flight, or early ball-flight information, with a response requiring even the lowest degree of body movement found to enhance anticipation when compared to a verbal prediction. Most importantly, a full-body movement using a bat elicited greater anticipation than an equivalent movement with no bat. This result highlights the important role that the requirement and/or opportunity to make bat-ball interception may play in eliciting skill differences for anticipation. Results verify the importance of using experimental conditions and task demands that closely reflect the natural performance environment in order to reveal the full nature of the expert advantage.