Pakistan's chances in England this summer

[Richard]

he bowled quite brilliantly in the first test too on what was a very flat pitch, for anyone who was actually watching at least. cause all sorts of problems for Pietersen.

Brett Lee caused plenty of problems for Pietersen several times last summer - in the last 4 Tests where by-and-large he bowled a heap of crap.
What's your point?

 

[Richard]

Srinath was certainly not a 90 mph bowler in that period, and i couldnt really care what one clocked ball on the speedometer shows to disprove it. having watched him at the time, he was generally around the 85-86 mark at best. the only time he could possibly have been close to the 90 mph mark was when he made his debut.

It wasn't just one ball - he was consistently bowling in the mid-high 80s in WC99.
You don't really know what pace he was bowling in 1995-1996 - there were no speedsters and the human eye cannot accurately clock the speed of a car, never mind a cricket ball.

they are both different bowlers IMO. Sreesanth is a classical outswing bowler while Munaf is an inswing bowler. Both of them can get it to reverse even if munaf is better at it. More importantly for me however is that Sreesanth is by far the smarter bowler and hes always trying to do something different, therefore being a lot more difficult to play in all conditions.

Of course it's so difficult to teach Patel a few tricks?
Of course they're vastly different bowlers - Patel is much taller and has a completely different action, and their stock-ball moves the same way.
As I say - Patel has simply looked more dangerous to me in the 2 Tests he's played.

 

[Jono]

I'm just glad India has found both of them, and hopefully they continue to improve. One positive to take from the England series.

 

[adharcric]

I'm just glad India has found both of them, and hopefully they continue to improve. One positive to take from the England series.

Along with Harbhajan regaining form in the final test and making me happy ... and then throwing away his wicket and making me .. well, I had already collapsed by then.

 

[Richard]

I'm just glad India has found both of them, and hopefully they continue to improve. One positive to take from the England series.

The form of Dravid and Kumble is not a positive?
(Or did you just mean previously-unrealised positives?)
I'd say Harbhajan is probably on-the-road to recovery from his Pakistan nightmare, too.

 

[steds]

Give Rana a medal for bowling well in a single Test - in his other 7 he averages 76.

Let's give Shaun Udal one too, then.

 

[Jono]

The form of Dravid and Kumble is not a positive?
(Or did you just mean previously-unrealised positives?)
I'd say Harbhajan is probably on-the-road to recovery from his Pakistan nightmare, too.

Yeah previously-unrealised

 

[tooextracool]

That's one huge "if".
I certainly don't think Rana bowled better than Shabbir in the Second and First Tests respectively.

any bowler that can swing both the new ball and the old one is supremely talented. a bowler that can also switch the ball around just before the point of delivery in his action is even more talented. and anyone who cant see that said bowler is talented is seriously deluding himself.

Was it? I must've missed the big, hooping inswing, then. It moved a bit, yes, but only a bit and a Vaughan pre-2005 I'd have backed to keep it out.

because of course in those docile conditions, the ball was bending around corners was it not? the ball swung in enough to cause problems to any world class batsman, and if you honestly think the joke of a batsman that Vaughan has been since 2003 would have been able to do anything about that then you really are kidding yourself.

The Collingwood and Trescothick wicket balls were both good-'uns in my estimation.

the trescothick ball was decent but hardly wicket taking. the collingwood ball was as innocuous as any other delivery he bowled in the game. and if you want to talk about good deliveries, naved ul hasan bowled far more than 2. both his wickets off vaughan were fine inswinging deliveries. further the ball that swung both ways to trescothick(swung into him and then away) was also a remarkable delivery.

 

[tooextracool]

Brett Lee caused plenty of problems for Pietersen several times last summer - in the last 4 Tests where by-and-large he bowled a heap of crap.
What's your point?

did you watch him bowl? or are you just sprouting some random rubbish? point is that he caused pietersen problems by beating the bat and by a brilliant spell of fast bowling not by bowling short pitched deliveries.

 

[tooextracool]

It wasn't just one ball - he was consistently bowling in the mid-high 80s in WC99.

yes mid 80s is about right. high 80s maybe once in a while. 90s and you're out of your mind.

You don't really know what pace he was bowling in 1995-1996 - there were no speedsters and the human eye cannot accurately clock the speed of a car, never mind a cricket ball..

and if i dont know that then neither do you. but i have a far better idea than you do given that i actually watched him bowl during that period.

Of course it's so difficult to teach Patel a few tricks?
Of course they're vastly different bowlers - Patel is much taller and has a completely different action, and their stock-ball moves the same way.
As I say - Patel has simply looked more dangerous to me in the 2 Tests he's played.

and for me SS is the smarter bowler. teaching someone to become a smarter bowler is certainly not as easy as you are making it out to be, because it requires some genius on your own part. and i dont know how they both have the same stock ball given that SS bowls outswingers while munaf bowls inswingers.

 

[Richard]

Let's give Shaun Udal one too, then.

Except that Rana is a seamer, Udal is a fingerspinner...

 

[Richard]

any bowler that can swing both the new ball and the old one is supremely talented. a bowler that can also switch the ball around just before the point of delivery in his action is even more talented. and anyone who cant see that said bowler is talented is seriously deluding himself.

And how often has he done said things?
If it were that often I'd imagine his strike-rate might be just a teeny bit better than it is.

because of course in those docile conditions, the ball was bending around corners was it not? the ball swung in enough to cause problems to any world class batsman, and if you honestly think the joke of a batsman that Vaughan has been since 2003 would have been able to do anything about that then you really are kidding yourself.

I'm perfectly confident the Vaughan of any time pre-2005 - however bad he might have been in 2003 and 2004 - would have had a decent stab at keeping it out. Vaughan has only had problems missing straight balls since The Ashes.
We see even good inswinging Yorkers dug-out plenty of the time. I can't think of another that he bowled in the spell. It was a good delivery, yes, but I don't think it was as good as you are painting it.

the trescothick ball was decent but hardly wicket taking. the collingwood ball was as innocuous as any other delivery he bowled in the game.

Really? I find they were both extremely good, wicket-taking deliveries. Both moved of the pitch, Collingwood's to take the outside-edge, Trescothick's the inside.

and if you want to talk about good deliveries, naved ul hasan bowled far more than 2. both his wickets off vaughan were fine inswinging deliveries. further the ball that swung both ways to trescothick(swung into him and then away) was also a remarkable delivery.

Which one? I didn't watch every delivery of the series, probably missed it.
Naved-Ul-Hasan might've bowled far more than 2 good deliveries, but he still bowled his share of rubbish in between.

 

[Richard]

did you watch him bowl? or are you just sprouting some random rubbish? point is that he caused pietersen problems by beating the bat and by a brilliant spell of fast bowling not by bowling short pitched deliveries.

Lee caused Pietersen problems by beating (and sometimes hitting) the edge of the bat.
The point is, Pieterseon, for some annoying reason, seems to have a propensity to get himself into a tangle and outside-edge balls that most batsmen would keep out without great effort.
It's the only flaw in his repetoire of shots.
I did indeed watch Sreesanth causing Pietersen problems - but as I say - it looked familiar.

 

[tooextracool]

Lee caused Pietersen problems by beating (and sometimes hitting) the edge of the bat.
The point is, Pieterseon, for some annoying reason, seems to have a propensity to get himself into a tangle and outside-edge balls that most batsmen would keep out without great effort.
It's the only flaw in his repetoire of shots.
I did indeed watch Sreesanth causing Pietersen problems - but as I say - it looked familiar.

Lee bowled quite bell before Lunch at the Oval, and whatever happened after lunch was the plan that was set my the coach, captain and management. Either way you cant blame lee for that. sreesanth not only bowled brilliantly but should have had Pietersen a few balls before he actually got him out anyways, and that wasnt the only thing that Sreesanth got right on that day either.

 

[marc71178]

Let's give Shaun Udal one too, then.

MBE I reckon - if the Ashes side can get one!

 

[Richard]

yes mid 80s is about right. high 80s maybe once in a while. 90s and you're out of your mind.

I find it perfectly conceivable that someone who, at 30, could bowl high 80s once-in-a-while (and, I might remind you, he bowled one delivery in WC99 timed at 93mph - which suggests he was bowling in the high 80s reasonably often), was at 26-27 capable of bowling deliveries over 90 often enough. Not with Donald-Waqar regularity, but about as often as someone like Gillespie or Wasim Akram.

and if i dont know that then neither do you. but i have a far better idea than you do given that i actually watched him bowl during that period.

No-one really has any idea at all.
As I say - the earliest time we can know how fast Srinath was was WC99 - and in that tourrnament he was speedy without being up there at the top. And given that he was probably just past peak physical fitness at the time, it's likely that he was once a bit quicker.

and for me SS is the smarter bowler. teaching someone to become a smarter bowler is certainly not as easy as you are making it out to be, because it requires some genius on your own part.

I don't really see that it requires "genius". It requires a moderately receptive mind. I've not heard Patel speak so I've no clue as to how smart he is, but a good coach can teach a bowler with most of the raw materials such as Patel to become a very good act indeed.

and i dont know how they both have the same stock ball given that SS bowls outswingers while munaf bowls inswingers.

"The same" was a typo, I meant "opposite".

 

[marc71178]

Except that Rana is a seamer, Udal is a fingerspinner...

Giles is a fingerspinner and he got one.

 

[Richard]

Lee bowled quite bell before Lunch at the Oval, and whatever happened after lunch was the plan that was set my the coach, captain and management. Either way you cant blame lee for that. sreesanth not only bowled brilliantly but should have had Pietersen a few balls before he actually got him out anyways, and that wasnt the only thing that Sreesanth got right on that day either.

Err - it was more than just The Oval (when he had him dropped by Warne) - he'd got him out in exactly the same way once before in the series, had caused play-and-misses with similar balls on several occasions, and had dismissed him again that way in the ODIs.
The fact that a bowler as rubbish as Lee caused Pietersen problems attests to the fact that Sreesanth causing him similar problems is no massive achievement.

 

[Richard]

Giles is a fingerspinner and he got one.

Most people have (I've got 4 or 5) - it's merely a figure of speech (or, in this case, typing), one used by tec far more often than me, I assure you.

 

[marc71178]

Most people have (I've got 4 or 5) - it's merely a figure of speech (or, in this case, typing), one used by tec far more often than me, I assure you.

You've got 4 or 5 medals?

What are they for?