Conventional thinking is a double edged sword.

A lot of orthodox ideas have found their way into cricket because they are effective. If you tell a batsman to dig in and play straight you are onto a winner because generally this advice works. It's worked for literally hundreds of years, especially with players of a certain type.

But I'd we slavishly adhere to a convention we also miss opportunities to improve. Without the mavericks we would not have had the googly, the switch hit or even the leg glance (which was seen as an unfair shot when first invented in Victorian England).

So how do we decide if convention or innovation is the way to go?

Ask why.

If your coach tells you to stop messing about with the reverse sweep and play some on drives, ask why (respectfully).

If he tells you that it's better to play straight because you get more runs, ask why.

If he says it's because that's the way he has seen work for everyone for years, ask why.

If he is not thoroughly annoyed by now - and he shouldn't be if he sees you are being inquisitive rather than confrontational - he might be stumped. If so, perhaps those reverse sweeps are an effective method for you.

The point is that often conventional wisdom falls down under questioning. If it does, it means the door is open for you to come up with new thinking instead. It might mean that you stick with playing straight after all, but by questioning the conventions and trying the unorthodox you might stumble on the next switch hit or slower ball bouncer.