Best ever medium pacer? - Page 10

pasag · 14-02-2008, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morgieb

sigged.

Please take note of the forum rules:

Digging Threads - Please do not dig up old threads unless there is something of value being contributed by the dig. Pointless digs may lead to an official warning and excessive digging and spamming of the forum may lead to an instant seven day ban.

Arrow · 14-02-2008, 03:12 AM

Stop mentioning mcgrath he was medium fast. Averaged about 130s. I think we all know what a medium pace is and its someone like symonds. I vote Terry Alderman. He was a brilliant swing bowler and I think many forget how good he was.

Days of Grace · 14-02-2008, 04:03 AM

Bedser must have been medium pace, as Evans stood up to the stumps when keeping to him. Maybe Bedser is the best ever medium pacer.

Or, if you say Barnes was a medium pacer, then you must surely concede that he was the best ever, by some distance.

JBMAC · 14-02-2008, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migara

Gary Gimour, how many matches?

TESTS

number.....15 (1973-77)
wickets..... 54 @ 26.04
Best Innings......6/85
Best Match........9/157
Econ rate......3.17

ODIs

number......5
wickets.....16 @ 10.31
Econ rate.....3.09
strike rate.....20.00

Listed as left arm medium pace bowler.

bond21 · 14-02-2008, 05:37 AM

only person I rate as express now is Lee.

Tait is but hes not playing, Akhtar can be but he doesnt bowl fast all the time.

McGrath wasnt a medium pacer, someone like Styris or Collingwood are medium pacers. McGrath used to crank it up over 140 on occasions a few years ago, and has slowed down since, but still 130.

sledger · 14-02-2008, 05:38 AM

styris, ugh.

bond21 · 14-02-2008, 05:41 AM

I rate styris as a bowler.

In ODIs.

Id bowl him ahead of Collyflour

sledger · 14-02-2008, 05:47 AM

in an ideal world i'd rather not have to watch either of them.

Richard · 14-02-2008, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pasag

Please take note of the forum rules:

Digging Threads - Please do not dig up old threads unless there is something of value being contributed by the dig. Pointless digs may lead to an official warning and excessive digging and spamming of the forum may lead to an instant seven day ban.

TBH, I think the h post will mean this thread might end-up the most dug in history, both for mundane and sensible reasons.

BTW - did I ever say this? All due respect to Matt of '79, I don't think there's any point in trying to decide who was the best bowler who bowled at a certain speed (particularly given that for the vast majority of cricket's history we could only guess at what speeds bowlers were bowling at). And we see that by the "no way was so-and-so a medium-pacer". Bowlers' speeds vary, both over a career and ball-to-ball.

TBH, anyway, virtually no medium-pace bowlers have ever been successful at Test-cricket, you need to be medium-fast at the very quickest. Even they've only had small numbers who can purvey it with success, and no-one really recent. Fast-medium is mostly a requistite.

JBMAC · 14-02-2008, 05:59 AM

Quote:

TBH, anyway, virtually no medium-pace bowlers have ever been successful at Test-cricket, you need to be medium-fast at the very quickest. Even they've only had small numbers who can purvey it with success, and no-one really recent. Fast-medium is mostly a requistite.

With some 49,000 posts this statement really proves you have absolutely NO idea about the game of Cricket and it's History.

Richard · 14-02-2008, 06:01 AM

No, it doesn't. No-one knew how fast bowlers bowled before 1998. So we can only guess at what was medium and medium-fast.

JBMAC · 14-02-2008, 06:32 AM

It was pretty simple

If a ball came through at a good clip and shaved you it was bloody fast
If a ball came through and you were able to score anything from 1-3 runs that was medium pace
If a ball came through and you hit a four or six then the bowler was a slow/spinner.
No Science involved just that[you Knew

Richard · 14-02-2008, 06:44 AM

Yes. IOW, all judgement was on the part of the batsmen. And batsmen are well-known to be notoriously poor judges of speed, when scientific implements make their proper judgements.

Nnanden · 14-02-2008, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sledger

Ian Harvey

Word.

Pup Clarke · 14-02-2008, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bond21

someone like Styris or Collingwood are medium pacers.

Have seen both crank it up to 130kph on quite a few occasions. Can't classify that as medium pace.

14-02-2008, 04:03 AM	#138 (permalink)
Days of Grace International Regular Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Takasaki, Japan Posts: 3,851	Bedser must have been medium pace, as Evans stood up to the stumps when keeping to him. Maybe Bedser is the best ever medium pacer. Or, if you say Barnes was a medium pacer, then you must surely concede that he was the best ever, by some distance. __________________ Greatest Ever Test XI (according to my ratings): Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman (c), Headley, Lara, Sobers, Gilchrist (wk), Hadlee, Marshall, Steyn, Muralitharan 12th man: Imran Khan Favorite XI: Grace (c), Trumper, Richards, Lara, Compton, Gilchrist (wk), Cairns, Jessop, Warne, Bond, Trueman

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Official Bangladesh Domestic Cricket	Jungle Jumbo	Cricket Chat	885	11-01-2013 04:58 PM
Official CW Grade Cricket discussion and results thread	Samuel_Vimes	CW Grade Cricket	210	26-11-2005 05:15 PM
Canterbury players that im willing to trade	deckard	World Club Cricket	29	02-09-2002 06:45 AM
Mumbai players available	Sriram k	World Club Cricket	18	28-08-2002 12:39 AM

14-02-2008, 03:12 AM	#137 (permalink)
Arrow U19 Vice-Captain Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 542	Stop mentioning mcgrath he was medium fast. Averaged about 130s. I think we all know what a medium pace is and its someone like symonds. I vote Terry Alderman. He was a brilliant swing bowler and I think many forget how good he was.

14-02-2008, 05:37 AM	#140 (permalink)
bond21 Banned Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New York, New York Posts: 953	only person I rate as express now is Lee. Tait is but hes not playing, Akhtar can be but he doesnt bowl fast all the time. McGrath wasnt a medium pacer, someone like Styris or Collingwood are medium pacers. McGrath used to crank it up over 140 on occasions a few years ago, and has slowed down since, but still 130.

14-02-2008, 05:38 AM	#141 (permalink)
sledger Spanish_Vicente Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: cricsim, lol Posts: 28,060	styris, ugh.

14-02-2008, 05:41 AM	#142 (permalink)
bond21 Banned Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New York, New York Posts: 953	I rate styris as a bowler. In ODIs. Id bowl him ahead of Collyflour

14-02-2008, 05:47 AM	#143 (permalink)
sledger Spanish_Vicente Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: cricsim, lol Posts: 28,060	in an ideal world i'd rather not have to watch either of them.

14-02-2008, 06:01 AM	#146 (permalink)
Richard Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: 2005 Posts: 80,407	No, it doesn't. No-one knew how fast bowlers bowled before 1998. So we can only guess at what was medium and medium-fast.

14-02-2008, 06:32 AM	#147 (permalink)
JBMAC State Vice-Captain Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Qld/Australia Posts: 1,304	It was pretty simple If a ball came through at a good clip and shaved you it was bloody fast If a ball came through and you were able to score anything from 1-3 runs that was medium pace If a ball came through and you hit a four or six then the bowler was a slow/spinner. No Science involved just that[you Knew

14-02-2008, 06:44 AM	#148 (permalink)
Richard Cricket Web Staff Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: 2005 Posts: 80,407	Yes. IOW, all judgement was on the part of the batsmen. And batsmen are well-known to be notoriously poor judges of speed, when scientific implements make their proper judgements.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)