Accuracy and functional variability in elite and developing fast bowlers

Objectives The relationship between performance variability and accuracy in cricket fast bowlers of different skill levels under three different task conditions was investigated. Bowlers of different skill levels were examined to observe if they could adapt movement patterns to maintain performance accuracy on a bowling skills test. Design 8 national, 12 emerging and 12 junior pace bowlers completed an adapted version of the Cricket Australia bowling skills test, in which they performed 30 trials involving short (n = 10), good (n = 10), and full (n = 10) length deliveries. Methods Bowling accuracy was recorded by digitising ball position relative to the centre of a target. Performance measures were mean radial error (accuracy), variable error (consistency), centroid error (bias), bowling score and ball speed. Radial error changes across the duration of the skills test were used to record accuracy adjustment in subsequent deliveries. Results Elite fast bowlers performed better in speed, accuracy, and test scores than developing athletes. Bowlers who were less variable were also more accurate across all delivery lengths. National and emerging bowlers were able to adapt subsequent performance trials within the same bowling session for short length deliveries. Conclusions Accuracy and adaptive variability were key components of elite performance in fast bowling which improved with skill level. In this study, only national elite bowlers showed requisite levels of adaptive variability to bowl a range of lengths to different pitch locations.

Returning to the practices of our ancestors? Reconsidering Indigenous justice and the emergence of restorative practices

Restorative practices have often been considered both as emerging from the customs of Indigenous peoples, and ways of responding to crime that might be most suitable for Indigenous individuals and communities. This paper, which consists of two parts, will reconsider these claims from a critical perspective. The first part of the paper draws on my Ph.D. research on the emergence of restorative justice in Western criminal justice systems. It will argue that although many advocates of restorative justice uncritically and unproblematically accept that restorative practices emerged from the customs of Indigenous peoples, the relationship between Indigenous justice customs and the emergence of restorative justice is much more nuanced than proponents imply. The paper will examine, therefore, the legitimating rationalities associated with the diverse historical ‘truths’ obscured in advocates’ accounts of the role of Indigenous customs and the emergence of restorative justice. The second section draws on the findings of recent research undertaken at the Australian Institute of Criminology, and will present data on the numbers of Indigenous juveniles who participate in restorative conferences in each jurisdiction. These data will be used to elucidate the disparity between the rhetoric or ‘promise’ of restorative justice, and its apparent impact in relation to Indigenous juveniles. This paper will conclude with a consideration of the continued relevance of restorative justice for Indigenous young people in Australia.

Speaking truth to power : sexism, outrage and the public consciousness

Alan Jones's now infamous comment that women are destroying the joint' sparked a flurry of observations and interpretations in the national and international media and in the blogosphere about the motivations and meanings of such a statement. The overriding tone of this commentary was outrage - how dare an influential figure like Jones state with such blatant and provocative hostility that women are at best unsuitable for leadership and at worst, damaging our public and private institutions? The answers, as we have seen, are likely to be complex, but an alternative question could also be posed. Why the outrage? Public male figures have, throughout history, made derogatory, demeaning and sexist remarks about women, and the material effects of gender inequality continue to be felt- consider the gender pay gap and glass ceiling phenomenon for starters. So why did this particular comment ignite such widespread indignation and anger?