*Congratulations* Anil Kumble, highest Indian Test wicket-taker!

[Pratters]

I think most bowlers have more than one delivery, so it's just a case of picking the delivery according to who they're bowling to.

Read the thing again. Two ways..

one way - he has normal technique so I can deliver a bouncer to him to soften him up if it is what is required

the second way - o gosh he cant bat for toffies. I shuoldnt give him any bouncers. Let me hurl half vollies so that the record 10th wicket partnership is created.

 

[marc71178]

There's much more to it than that - no bowler of Test level would not have the tools to bowl properly to the weaker batsmen.

 

[Pratters]

There's much more to it than that - no bowler of Test level would not have the tools to bowl properly to the weaker batsmen.

Obviously there is. But if he wants to bowl a few bouncers to soften the tail ender, there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[Richard]

There is protective gear now. If a bowler is bent on injuring some one he is obviously unsportsman like and should be penalised. But to bowl a few bouncers to soften up an oppositon batsmen, no matter what is skill is is not inhuman.

I am glad you did not see the Windies in the 70s and 80s. Batsmen got seriously hurt during their dominance.

Yes, plenty of them crossed the line too many times and were penalised too few times. I take Dickie Bird's word on that one.
There is simply no need to soften-up tail-enders - a good Yorker will do the trick 7 or 8 times out of 10 whether following Bouncers or not.

 

[Richard]

the second way - o gosh he cant bat for toffies. I shuoldnt give him any bouncers. Let me hurl half vollies so that the record 10th wicket partnership is created.

The chances are most tail-enders will miss Half-Volleys more often than not. Especially if they move at all.
Record tenth-wicket partnerships are almost never created by tail-enders having too much to hit and not being Bounced. Mostly it's due to a batsman having a field-day and a tail-ender playing a small part.

 

[Pratters]

The chances are most tail-enders will miss Half-Volleys more often than not. Especially if they move at all.
Record tenth-wicket partnerships are almost never created by tail-enders having too much to hit and not being Bounced. Mostly it's due to a batsman having a field-day and a tail-ender playing a small part.

But they can be softened up with a few bouncers. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Richard]

There is - it's by-and-large totally pointless and can only really cause injury.

 

[Pratters]

There is - it's by-and-large totally pointless and can only really cause injury.

So it should be made illegal to ball bouncers to tail enders cos it can cos injuries?

 

[Richard]

If someone bowls a Bouncer at a hopeless tail-ender an Umpire should have a quiet word and say "not neccessary, mate". Indeed, Historically, all the best Umpires have.
Obviously there can be no provision in exact laws.
However, the Spirit of the game pretty clearly involves not causing deliberate injuries and that's all bowling Bouncers at non-batsmen is really likely to achieve.

 

[Pratters]

If someone bowls a Bouncer at a hopeless tail-ender an Umpire should have a quiet word and say "not neccessary, mate". Indeed, Historically, all the best Umpires have.
Obviously there can be no provision in exact laws.
However, the Spirit of the game pretty clearly involves not causing deliberate injuries and that's all bowling Bouncers at non-batsmen is really likely to achieve.

If a tail ender is sticking on to the wicket, why not ball him a few bouncers to test him. Just see, as they say, what he is made of from inside. There have been bouncers bowled at tail enders and if one gets scared cos of a few bouncers, he shouldnt play international cricket.

Bowling bouncer after bouncer does no good to the team cause of dismissing the batsmen or to the spirit of the game. So we do find umpires intervening or captains advicing the bowler against that.

But one or two bouncers and then a yorker next can help take the wicket. And you dont have to bowl the bouncer at the face.

Cricketers should play with tennis balls if they want to avoid getting hurt with the cricket balls.

Also, the cricketers should stop hitting straight because the umpire can get hurt if we go by your logic.

 

[Richard]

Now you're just being silly.
Even the hardest of straight hits will always give the Umpire time to get out of the way.
If a tail-ender is sticking to the wicket (which doesn't happen very often) why not try and get him out rather than wasting deliveries with short stuff?

 

[Pratters]

Now you're just being silly.
Even the hardest of straight hits will always give the Umpire time to get out of the way.
If a tail-ender is sticking to the wicket (which doesn't happen very often) why not try and get him out rather than wasting deliveries with short stuff?

Using one or two bouncers isnt wasting deliveries.

And an umpire has a chance of getting injured like a tail ender. All the straigh shots dont go directly to the umpire. Similarly all the nouncers dont hit the player. I am not being silly. Just showing the unlikelihood of one or two bouncers injuring the tail ender.

 

[Deja moo]

I think the likelihood of straight hits going towards the umpire, and tailenders getting hit can be easily compared......umpires have never felt the need to wear helmets....all tail enders do. Simple as that.

 

[Tom Halsey]

If someone bowls a Bouncer at a hopeless tail-ender an Umpire should have a quiet word and say "not neccessary, mate". Indeed, Historically, all the best Umpires have.

If helmets weren't around, I'd agree, but they are.

The fact is, it's part of the game and the batsmen (no matter how bad) should learn to accept it.

 

[marc71178]

Obviously there is. But if he wants to bowl a few bouncers to soften the tail ender, there is nothing wrong with it.

Unless the player is so hopeless with the bat that it is actually a serious danger to him.

 

[tooextracool]

Like Walsh was when he passed Kapil, Kumble is in his prime. Big applause to him.

i know most people would disagree, but IMO kumbles prime came in 92/93 around the time when he took 18 wickets in 3 tests in SA and when his 'rocket' ball was at its best. since 94 however, hes always struggled on non turners.

 

[tooextracool]

But still, a better bet than Tendulkar.
And from everything I've seen, more tactically astute than Ganguly, too.

not like thats something to be proud about.

 

[tooextracool]

There is - it's by-and-large totally pointless and can only really cause injury.

no its not, as long as its not over used, the bouncer is a very effective way of getting the tailender on the back foot before setting him up for the one thats pitched up. tailenders like hoggard and gillespie are extremely good at getting their front foot forward every delivery and getting their bat behind the ball, so really on an unhelpful pitch you can bowl 200 full balls, you wont get them out.

 

[JASON]

Congrats to Anil Kumble !!

What a work horse he has been for India over the years !! Great person as well, with considerable humility despite his achievements as a bowler !!

IMO, he may have still have a long career ahead of him with even 700 wickets a possibility . (considering a lot of top spinners have played into their early to mid forties in the past !! It all comes down to whether Harbajan can take over as India's frontline spinner in years to come (which he sometimes does now !!) and how well he is supported by Murali Karthik !!)

 

[Pratters]

Unless the player is so hopeless with the bat that it is actually a serious danger to him.

Then its better that he hits the wicket and gets out by himself rather than sticking on the wicket.