I am often asked if the "English" method of high catching (fingers down) is better than its "Australian" counterpart.

The simple answer is that both methods have their merits so I teach both because individual players have their own preferences.  Also the ball arrives at us at different heights and angles. This in turn dictates which of the two methods is best to use when taking a catch.

With both methods, the vital consideration for a fielder is to use his footwork effectively to get under the flight of the ball as early as possible.  So the first point is always to use footwork to get to the ball.

Australian method

The advantage of the Australian method of catching is that it encourages fielders to make contact with the ball above their eye line. As a result, the fielder can watch the ball for longer as it goes into their hands and if a fumble occurs, he often gets a second bite at the catch.

It is important to create a big and strong catching area with the hands and this is achieved by placing your thumb and forefinger of one hand over the thumb and forefinger of the other hand. It creates a web like strong structure that no cricket ball can break.

The fingers are spread and the catching area is immense.

I often ask very young players to create their catching area with their hands and then place a ball in their open hands to show how "small" they can make the ball look in their huge catching area. This helps to build early confidence in the young players as they embark on a life of taking spectacular high catches.

Times when the Australian Method may not be the best option:

• When the ball's trajectory is dipping beneath the line of your shoulders (Flatter hit from the middle which is falling short of the fielder)
• When a dive is required
• When you’re running at full-tilt

The English method often works better in these instances.

The Australian method is tends to be used by fielders right on the boundary edge. Kevin Pietersen prefers this catching style and has taken a number of catches with the Australian style in his specialist mid on and deep mid on fielding position in ODI and T20 Cricket.

Interlink the two little fingers and butt together the heel of your hands to create the strong catching structure. Players often forget to spread the thumbs out and this is achieved by moving your elbows closer together.

Note the effect that the elbows have on the size and shape of the catching area.

As with the Australian catching method, players should be encouraged to raise their hands slightly above their eye line and for the head and hands to be in close proximity.

As we have discussed previously, the closer we keep our head and our hands, the more control we have over a catching opportunity. 

Many players will start of making contact with the ball around their waistband and this is fraught with danger. Obviously, if we fumble the ball there is little chance of us getting a second go and also, it is very difficult to track the ball with our eyes once the ball has passed our eye line on its descent.

So take the ball at Eye Level whenever possible.

So going back to the original question; which one is better?

They are both highly valid methods and players should be coached to develop their skill in both techniques so that individual player can choose which one to use for any type of high or boundary catch.

It's a bit like a set of golf clubs, a golfer chooses the club that fits the shot distance that he/she is faced with. You can now choose the appropriate catch method to meet the catching challenge presented by the flight of the ball off the bat.

So encourage your players to master both Styles, have fun with your catching practices and watch the success of your fielding unit flow.  

A bad butcher with a sharp knife is still a bad butcher.

And for cricket coaches, technology is the same: A shiny tool can make you feel like you are going to make a difference to players. But in reality the best thing technology can do is add to good coaching, not make bad coaches better.

And at worst, technology can become a distraction from the coaching process. You can spend so much time tinkering that you get less done than you would have if you had just set up some cones and balls.

But that’s where the art of using technology comes in.

As affordable technology like PitchVision becomes more prevalent, coaches at every level will need to have a new set of skills. The challenge is to get the most from modern tools without distracting from improving players ability.

It’s a delicate balancing act, but here is how you can do it.

Coaching plan

As you already know, the best way to get results is to have a goal and a plan how to get to that goal.

So when you are deciding on how to use technology, always start with your goal.

Many coaches don’t do this, for example, seeing that a video camera is affordable and buying it for “video analysis” before they know exactly how it will help meet the goal.

It makes more sense to look at it the other way. Let’s take the example of wanting to help your bowler’s improve their accuracy. A good traditional method of doing this is target practice; lay down cones and bowl at them until you can hit the target with accuracy.

But it’s hard to keep track of every ball a bowler delivers so you can use a technology like PitchVision to track this for you over sessions and seasons. The technology is seamlessly becoming part of your plan instead of you having to adapt to the technology.

Decide what you want the technology to do rather than let it control what you do. Use it as one of the tools in your toolbox rather than trying to replace the whole box with something shiny.

That way you get to use the cool stuff and still be a better coach.