Which ball would be harder to face?
About the same/ unsure
Which ball would be harder to face?
"We didn't underestimate them. They were just a lot better than we thought."
Well, it all depends, doesn't it?
I havent seen much of the doosra, so I would say that in the past, the flipper has been more lethal (when in the right spot).
Warne seems reluctant to bowl his flipper now, but between 1993-95 it was deadly. The doosra has been more effective because when Murali was allowed to bowl it against England last year he had a far more devastating series than Warne has ever had against anyone. In Murali's previous series against England he had been neutralised to a degree but this new invention proved irresistable and made all the difference.
Whats the difference? It all depends on how well the delivery is bowled. To say a flipper is more dangerous than a doosra is like saying leg spin is more dangerous than off spin.Originally Posted by odyssey
No it is not, they both have far more in their armoury than just a flipper or a doosra.Originally Posted by Langeveldt
Last edited by a massive zebra; 11-11-2004 at 04:44 PM.
THE ULTIMATE CRICKET WEB ARCADE EGGS CHAMPION
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1990-2006
RIP Craig Walsh (AKA "Craig"), 1985-2012
flipper - only because at its best, it was nigh impossible to pick, and there was no way to stop it, while the doosra (haven't seen it all that often, i must admit) is good, it doesnt have the psychological effect on the batsman that the flipper had
Kind of a silly question.
I mean, a flipper short and outside off stump wouldn't be too deadly would it? Neither would a doosra off the pitch.
Last edited by Jono; 11-11-2004 at 06:36 PM.
"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."
Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.
i'd have to say the flipper is a much more dangerous delivery from a batsman's point of view. a doosra gives you that extra millisecond of thought, because it doesn't skid as much as the flipper. also, if you are watching the ball well, the doosra can be easier to play, but the flipper will cut up the best defence.
Flipper cos it's bowled by one SK WARNE
WCC - Manager of Warwickshire
The one you cant spot is the dangerous one. It could be one or the other or both or neitherOriginally Posted by odyssey
I doubt i'd have any chance of getting even remotely close to either of them.
Then both are equaly dangerousOriginally Posted by Buddhmaster
Originally Posted by Buddhmaster
Yep. But the flipper looks more scarey to me. If I saw that, I'd prolly scream and try a swat at it with the bat!
what would concern me most about the flipper is that if delivered well, there is no way of stopping it, its nigh-impossible to pick, but the doosra can be read off the pitch if you have to, and because of its nature (me being a RH batsman) would be less likely to get me out, as i'd end up playing well inside of it expecting it to turn inwards
I would say the flipper. Its fiendishly difficult to bowl..Benaud once said it took him four years before he had the confidence to use it in a match.
A flipper is basically like a chopped backhand in tennis, while the batsmen lays back to cut, thinking the ball is a long hop. But then it bounces, scuttles, pinning him on the ankle or sneaking under the bat and rattling into the base of the stumps.
Its akin to being your 'yorker' from a spin bowler. so I'd say a flipper is harder to face.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)