• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ryan Sidebottom

shortpitched713

International Captain
Kidding, right? Batsmen slam balls into the outfield far, far more often than not when it hits the bat. In fact, the ball can travel faster off the bat than it does into the pitch.
No. Most balls are not hit into the outfield with the same kind of force as they hit the pitch. Rolling along the grass is not nearly the kind of impact as hitting the pitch during a delivery. And as I've previously mentioned, the damage that the pitch does to the ball can be irreversible, no matter how lush the outfield.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
You make life so uninteresting. :(
I'd like to hear more Goughy. :)
Oh ok then :)

I grew up playing with both and one was obviously far superior than the other. Hoggard was also much quicker. Dont be fooled by the speed guns, Hoggard is capable of bowling quicker than he does. Now obviously things can change in 10 years but their records since still back Hoggard.

Firstly they are roughly the same age of around 30 so potential is kind of a non-issue

Sidebottom has never been anything special, though I am willing to conceed that he could have dramatically improved. However, he has only played 7 Tests, all in the UK, and not done anything overly special. He had a good series against WI and a very average one against India. Unspectacular if steady and little to suggest there is more to come.

Nothing close to merit overtaking a guy with 240 wickets @ 30 and a number of Test winning performances.

Give me the guy with the proven record and better pedigree than a player that has shown a little bit and is flavour of the month.
 

FBU

International Debutant
I don't think Sidebottom will do better than Hoggard but Moores will like a left arm bowler as Sussex have had success with Lewry and the variety of a bowler with a different angle. I read that it was mainly down to Andy Flower that Sidebottom got into the side. Probably he found Sidebottom harder to face that other bowlers in his time in county cricket.

I don't think Sidebottom will have the same fitness that Hoggard has had over the years.

Average wickets per game

Tests - 3.42 ODIs - 2.00 - Sidebottom (first year syndrome?)
Tests - 3.75 ODIs - 1.23 - Hoggard (better in Tests and mentally not for ODIs)
Tests - 3.79 ODIs - 1.45 - Harmison (much better internationally)
Tests - 3.15 ODIs - 1.48 - Anderson (hasn't settled into Tests yet)

County cricket

F/c 3.05 - l/o 1.00 - Sidebottom
F/c 3.33 - l/o 1.43 - Hoggard
F/c 3.34 - l/o 1.14 - Harmison
F/c 3.57 - l/o 1.44 - Anderson
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Oh ok then :)

I grew up playing with both and one was obviously far superior than the other. Hoggard was also much quicker. Dont be fooled by the speed guns, Hoggard is capable of bowling quicker than he does.
Indeed, have seen Hoggard hit 90mph, though not for a fair few years admittedly. Sidebottom has never come close.
Now obviously things can change in 10 years but their records since still back Hoggard.

Firstly they are roughly the same age of around 30 so potential is kind of a non-issue

Sidebottom has never been anything special, though I am willing to conceed that he could have dramatically improved. However, he has only played 7 Tests, all in the UK, and not done anything overly special. He had a good series against WI and a very average one against India. Unspectacular if steady and little to suggest there is more to come.

Nothing close to merit overtaking a guy with 240 wickets @ 30 and a number of Test winning performances.

Give me the guy with the proven record and better pedigree than a player that has shown a little bit and is flavour of the month.
Perhaps some element of clarification is required - I'm not for a second suggesting Sidebottom currently has a more notable Test-career than Hoggard. Nor that he's about to any time in the immediate future. Nor, I presume, is anyone else.

Though I'd very much disagree with the suggestion that Sidebottom had an average series against India - he could quite easily have matched his wicket tally against WI had the cookie crumbled that way. He didn't bowl any differently, just the nicks - for the most part -came against WI, they resulted in play-and-misses against India.

All I've ever said is that Sidebottom, with a bit of extra height and greater consistency, could yet do better than Hoggard in the next 3 or 4 years.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No. Most balls are not hit into the outfield with the same kind of force as they hit the pitch. Rolling along the grass is not nearly the kind of impact as hitting the pitch during a delivery.
Of course it's not, but balls are hit into the outfield with great force plenty often enough. Once the ball hits anywhere near the middle of the bat it's going to go into it with some force. Then, what's more, it rolls along for any length of time.
And as I've previously mentioned, the damage that the pitch does to the ball can be irreversible, no matter how lush the outfield.
Equally, the damage that the outfield does to the ball can be irreversible, no matter how damp the pitch.
 

FBU

International Debutant
Sidebottom has reached 90mph, even though it was only one ball. In the ODI series in Sri Lanka they were commenting that he had bowler faster than Malinga and the rest of the bowlers. He said he can bowl fast but doesn't in county cricket because there are so many games. I think he was trying to prove that in England in the ODIs and the result was a side strain. That reminds me of Chapple, who for a televised game and a chance of an England recall, upped his speed to the high eighties and also ended up with the same problem.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
Of course it's not, but balls are hit into the outfield with great force plenty often enough. Once the ball hits anywhere near the middle of the bat it's going to go into it with some force. Then, what's more, it rolls along for any length of time.

Equally, the damage that the outfield does to the ball can be irreversible, no matter how damp the pitch.
Please, the outfield does little to no damage to the ball. You had earlier stated that a lush outfield would allow for the maintenance of swing, and I had stated that a significantly hard or abrasive pitch, might do irreversible damage to the ball which would clearly affect the swing.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
The outfield can and does do damage to the ball, not quite so much by rolling on it but by being hit, hard, into it. Let's remember that the batsman by-and-large aims to hit the ball downwards and when he middles it or even comes close it goes into the outfield with one hell of a lot of force.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
The outfield can and does do damage to the ball, not quite so much by rolling on it but by being hit, hard, into it. Let's remember that the batsman by-and-large aims to hit the ball downwards and when he middles it or even comes close it goes into the outfield with one hell of a lot of force.
No point continuing this any further. No, this doesn't mean you've won.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
For anyone who watched the Twenty20 World Cup, did the ball ever come off the bat quicker than what the ball was bowled, according to the speedometer? I didn't watch all that much of it, but I never saw that happen, no matter how big the six was.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
For anyone who watched the Twenty20 World Cup, did the ball ever come off the bat quicker than what the ball was bowled, according to the speedometer? I didn't watch all that much of it, but I never saw that happen, no matter how big the six was.
Interestingly, it did not but 9 times out of 10 it came off the bat at the same approximate speed as the ball would have reached the batsman at.
 

Top