Best Last Over Bowlers

[Mr Casson]

hes an aeroplane... wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.............

I'd say he's more like the Hindenburg.

 

[Dydl]

I'd say he bowls too many no-balls!!

 

[Richard]

So, you judge all deliveries in a vacuum, do you? You place no faith whatsoever in a bowler's ability to think out a batsman or bowl to him with a plan? How many times has Warne got wickets by forcing a batsman into trying to hit over the top and letting him get himself out? Do you think he doesn't deserve those wickets? Good bowling gets wickets, the ball which takes it doesn't necessarily have to be good. Do you see the difference, and why the wicket can be deserved even if the ball is average? In the scenario I offered above, the bowler clearly earned the wicket through an over of fantastic deliveries. When the last one was poor, the batsman played a rash shot in trying to salvage something out of the over and got out. He did this because of good bowling, and that's all there is to it. Just because you sit and watch the highlights and decide on the basis of watching one delivery that the bowler didn't deserve the wicket does not make it so.

I rarely watch highlights without having had some ball-by-ball coverage - either radio or text.
Of course there are some instances where you can "set-up" a batsman (usually the inswinger-outswinger tactic) but you cannot force a batsman to play a poor shot - indeed, it happens far, far less often than people seem to think. The trouble, of course, is you always remember when it happens and forget the countless times when a good over is spoilt by a bad delivery which is hit for three or four.
No bad delivery can ever deserve a wicket. Some strokes can look average if you just look at them in isolation - if you had no background to this:

36.3 Bicknell to Rudolph, OUT: outside off, leaves the one that comes
back, stands there and is aghast as the off stump is knocked back

you could be forgiven for thinking it was just a poor stroke. But there are certain things that simply cannot be predicted, such as when an inswinger is coming after 4 outswingers; nor can it be adjusted to.
But a simple change in length, or simply following 3 pearlers with a Long-Hop, doesn't actually result in a wicket very often - as I say, the instances where it does just tend to be remembered.
Often, a batsman can look a bit uncomfortable, he can get "stuck on the crease" if 20 back-of-length deliveries are followed by a slightly fuller one. But rarely does it actually cause him to miss the ball.
Equally, as I've already mentioned - most of the time a bad delivery will get the treatment, regardless of what's gone before.
With regards the Warne issue (and turners, loopers and drifters of the ball in general) - it's not at all unusual for a delivery that the unwary could dismiss as poor to get a wicket - a stroke that would at first glance seem terrible. But very often the stroke can be entirely appropriate when taking a first glance at the ball. Then it can loop or drift, then turn, and then you're in trouble.

 

[Richard]

Further evidence that you have no idea what you're talking about.

No, you have no idea if you think I didn't.

 

[Richard]

hes a good depth bowler with inswinging yorkers

He's done it well once or twice, yes.
That's it, though.

 

[Jono]

He's done it well once or twice, yes.
That's it, though.

He did it plenty more times than that actually.

 

[Richard]

Really?
Care to name them?

 

[Jono]

Do I care to name them? Sure. Can I name them? Well I'd have to have some form of archive of the games in which Rana bowled during the VB Series. Now as much as I'd love to have access to those tapes with the click of a finger, I just don't have that ability. A damn shame.

But what I do have is my personal anecdotal evidence. I guess that's not enough for you. My question is, considering you didn't watch the two finals, can't you possibly think that maybe he did bowl well, and got some inswinging yorkers in quite often? Because in those 2 games he most certainly did.

 

[Richard]

Yet he still went for plenty.
Which says almost certainly that he didn't get it right enough.

 

[Beleg]

Richard, in ODI's going for 2 fours can seriously tilt your stats. I do not remember the exact games, but I am pretty sure that a lot of leg-bye's and bye's were conceded by Rana's inswingers when the batsman and the keeper were simply unable to put bat/glove on the ball. And we are not talking about balls pitched a mile out of leg-stump, but deliveries that were pitched at off and swung in to pass between the batsman's legs and the wickets.

 

[Richard]

I certainly remember Lee edging a couple when Kamran missed it then being bowled (think it was the WACA match).
He still hadn't really bowled particularly well that game IIRR.

 

[Mr Casson]

Do I care to name them? Sure. Can I name them? Well I'd have to have some form of archive of the games in which Rana bowled during the VB Series. Now as much as I'd love to have access to those tapes with the click of a finger, I just don't have that ability. A damn shame.

But what I do have is my personal anecdotal evidence. I guess that's not enough for you. My question is, considering you didn't watch the two finals, can't you possibly think that maybe he did bowl well, and got some inswinging yorkers in quite often? Because in those 2 games he most certainly did.

I'll back up your anecdotal evidence!