Back injuries to fast bowlers in cricket: a prospective study.

Abstract

Eighty-two high performance young male fast bowlers (mean age 16.8 years) were tested immediately prior to the season for selected kinanthropometric and physiological data. Subjects were also filmed both laterally (200 Hz) and from above (100 Hz) while bowling so that their front foot impacted a force platform during the delivery stride. The players then completed a log book over the ensuing season that detailed their training and playing programmes. All cricket related injuries over this season were assessed by a sports physician who used computerized tomography to assist in the diagnosis of spinal injuries.At the completion of this season the players were grouped according to their injury status (Group 1-bony injury to a vertebra; Group 2-soft tissue injury to the back that caused the player to miss at least one game, and Group 3 -no injuries). A one-way analysis of variance was used to identify if any variables were significantly (P < 0.05) different between the three groups, and a Scheffe post hoc comparison was used to determine which groups were significantly different.Eleven per cent of the players sustained a stress fracture to a vertebra(e) (L4 to Si), while 27 per cent sustained a soft tissue injury to the back. Bowlers with a low longitudinal foot arch were more likely to develop a stress fracture than those with a high arch. Shoulder depression and horizontal flexion strength for the preferred limb and quadriceps power in the non-preferred limb were also significantly related to back injuries. Bowlers who rotated the trunk to re-align the shoulders by more than 400 to a more side-on position between back foot impact and front foot impact in the delivery stride were more likely to sustain back injuries. No significant relationship was determined between peak vertical (5.4 BW) or horizontal (-2.

The influence of cricket fast bowlers’ front leg technique on peak ground reaction forces

“…An apparently arbitrary value of 10º was chosen as the cut-off between categories, which were defined as: flexor, 10º or more knee flexion followed by less than 10º knee extension; flexor-extender, knee flexion and extension of 10º or more; extender, less than 10º knee flexion followed by 10º or more knee extension and constant brace, less than 10º knee flexion / extension. Techniques comprising front knee flexion during the front foot contact phase have been recommended in order to dissipate ground reaction forces and reduce the likelihood of injury (Foster et al, 1989). This has been supported by a study of eight English club fast and medium pace bowlers (Hall, 1999).…”

“…The motion of the front leg during the front foot contact phase has been implicated as a mechanistic factor in the development of lower back injury in fast bowlers (Foster et al, 1989;Mason et al, 1989, as cited by Portus et al, 2004). This led to Portus et al (2004) dividing front leg technique into four categories based on the amount of knee flexion / extension during the front foot contact phase.…”

Different tissue type categories of overuse injuries to cricket fast bowlers have different severity and incidence which varies with age

“…This places all injuries on a par and negates any measure of severity. However, this is not the case with lumbar stress fractures [6][7][8][9] which lead to longer periods out of the game.…”

“…[8,10] Biomechanical research is often conducted on adolescent or young fast bowlers [6,11] or does not clearly identify the demographics of the injured vs. non-injured groups. [10] So it is unclear whether the risk factor of poor technique (excessive shoulder counterrotation) continues into the older age groups.…”

Cricket Biomechanics Analysis of Skilled and Amateur Fast Bowling Techniques

“…4 A more extended front knee during the front foot contact phase has been associated with spondylolysis development. 4,13 Figures 5 and 6 show the bowler's front knee flexion being monitored from front foot contact to ball release. …”