A Good Length?

There is now a debate raging about whether the physical distancing guidance of 2m should be reduced to 1m.  The main reason behind the debate seems to be the hope that reducing the safe distance would help pubs reopen.   In fairness, those advocating this change point out that the WHO guidance is for 1m and the adoption of 2m by many countries, including the UK, is based on flimsy evidence.  Some countries have not even defined the desired distances in terms of metres but have used more intelligible concepts - Yukon in Canada has been urging its citizens to stay one caribou apart.  Presumably, if they revise their guidance caribous can expect to be cut in half as people determine the appropriate distance.

FB doesn't know what to think.  He is struck by the similarity to the endless debate over what constitutes a good length in cricket.  Experts, though not peer reviewed by the WHO, suggest that a good length ball should pitch anywhere between 4 and 7metres from the wicket.  (For those reading in Canada this is between 2-3 caribous). This is well over 15% of the available territory between bowler and batter which strikes FB as being a pretty loose definition, even in these days when official guidance seems specifically to be designed to be unintelligible.

A good length is meant to be the length which causes the batsmen uncertainty as to whether to come forward or go back to play the ball.  This means that any ball is a good length ball to a batsman like FB.  Putting that obvious point aside, a good length may vary depending on a number of factors, not least on the amount of bounce in the pitch - on a softer wicket, such as those typically found in Scotland, a good length will be a longer length than on a softer wicket.  

It may therefore be that the good length for physical distancing purposes will be greater in some circumstances than in others.  Some environments are obviously harder wickets -  pubs, clubs and buses for example and it might be sensible to try pitching it a little further from the batsman.  More caribous required.  2m might therefore be sensible.  By comparison, softer wickets of an outdoor walk might justify an adjustment and fewer caribous.  FB, whose line and length is generally immaculate - although usually suited for the wicket he played on the previous week, is confused.  Not even the caribous have clarified things.

It becomes even more confusing when the concept of bowling 'back of a good length' is introduced.  Is this not in itself a good length?  Many is the skipper who has suggested to FB that, having completed his athletic run up the hill against the wind, he should be pitching it back of a length.  On hearing such an instruction FB simply nods.  He knows better to ask his skipper exactly where he thinks the magical back of a length might be.  This would invite meltdown and would probably be unhelpful to the team's cause.  It is certain that no matter where FB pitches it his skipper will applaud the delivery with the equally meaningless epithet, 'Good areas, FB.'

And so the coronavirus guidance is in similar territory.  Faced with the choice between 1m and 2m, FB will be adopting the back of a good length concept, knowing that in doing so he is likely to be in good areas.