Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 54

Thread: "Critically Acclaimed"

  1. #31
    International Coach archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Anil View Post
    top three? how would tate fit into the company of hadlee, mcgrath, lohmann, bedser, davidson, botham, kapil etc(i'm sure i have missed some other big names)?
    It can very hard to compare the pace of these bowlers, for instance some say Hugh Trumble was a medium fast bowler.

    Suffice to say for awhile Tate was the best bowler in the World, so I think he would lose nothing with those bowlers you mention

    And you missed SF Barnes
    You know it makes sense.

  2. #32
    International Coach Anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    13,453
    Quote Originally Posted by archie mac View Post
    It can very hard to compare the pace of these bowlers, for instance some say Hugh Trumble was a medium fast bowler.

    Suffice to say for awhile Tate was the best bowler in the World, so I think he would lose nothing with those bowlers you mention

    And you missed SF Barnes
    it's not easy to compartmentalize barnes as a bowler, that's why i didn't mention him, in any case i did say i missed some big names didn't i? i am not disputing tate's quality but when you say top three, there are some illustrious names there, so i am not sure it's exactly cut-and-dried...

  3. #33
    International Coach archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Anil View Post
    it's not easy to compartmentalize barnes as a bowler, that's why i didn't mention him, in any case i did say i missed some big names didn't i? i am not disputing tate's quality but when you say top three, there are some illustrious names there, so i am not sure it's exactly cut-and-dried...
    Nothing is, but the fact you can make a case for Tate suggests that he was pretty close to those you list

    As far as English medium fast goes, they usually have Barnes-Tate-Bedser

  4. #34
    International Regular Beleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,450
    dude, it's ridiculous to extrapolate tate's performance based on the sample size we have.


  5. #35
    International Coach archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Beleg View Post
    dude, it's ridiculous to extrapolate tate's performance based on the sample size we have.
    Read a book, and learn your cricket

  6. #36
    Global Moderator vic_orthdox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    29,569
    Bruce Reid.

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by SJS View Post
    By the way, Bland's exhibition that day gives a lie to the impression that good fielders are something very recent. What has happened, however, is that bad fielders are not tolerated as they were then if they were good in their other speciality so overall standards have improved. Plus, the diving and sliding to save boundaries is a new addition.
    Abso-God-damn-lutely. Lost count of the number of times I've thought that.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Anil View Post
    top three? how would tate fit into the company of hadlee, mcgrath, lohmann, bedser, davidson, botham, kapil etc(i'm sure i have missed some other big names)?
    I think that list just shows the futility of trying to separate "medium" pacers from "fast" pacers.

    Seam-up is seam-up, and those bowling at 80mph can easily be as good and better than those bowling at 90.

  9. #39
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Engle View Post
    Statham, who should also be on the ' Critically acclaimed ' list
    I'd argue that Statham is not devoid of case for being England's greatest-ever seam-bowler (at least at Test level) myself. Only Trueman and Bedser do I generally place in his class.

    Agree completely about Tate - a few other English seam-bowlers for that list would be Bob Willis, Mike Hendrick, Angus Fraser, Bill Voce, John Snow, David Brown, Ian Botham, and several more besides. All excellent "second-tier" bowlers.

  10. #40
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    I think the only separation can be with regular seam up bowlers and those who regularly topped 150kph for a large portion of their careers, such as Akhtar, Lee, Thompson and Tait. Lee is probably lesser so in that category as he has had a long portion of his career at 140-150kph due to injuries but the other three can be separated from medium pace bowlers as the lion share of their wickets comes as a result of sheer pace (and other factors in minimum, such as slight swing).
    The speed at which a fielding team gets through the innings is overrated.

  11. #41
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I think that list just shows the futility of trying to separate "medium" pacers from "fast" pacers.

    Seam-up is seam-up, and those bowling at 80mph can easily be as good and better than those bowling at 90.
    The difference is that different conditions suit bowlers of different pace. A 75 mph bowler would want a different type of wicket to prosper than a 95 mph bowler.

    To illustrate, Larwood always stated Bowes was too slow to be effective in Aus and needed the softer greener wickets of England whereas he wanted a track as hard as possible.

    They are as seperate as any bowling type can be.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

  12. #42
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Manee View Post
    I think the only separation can be with regular seam up bowlers and those who regularly topped 150kph for a large portion of their careers, such as Akhtar, Lee, Thompson and Tait. Lee is probably lesser so in that category as he has had a long portion of his career at 140-150kph due to injuries but the other three can be separated from medium pace bowlers as the lion share of their wickets comes as a result of sheer pace (and other factors in minimum, such as slight swing).
    Tyson pretty much unquestionably topped 150kph, and more, for a year or so, very possibly bowling for a few months faster than anyone else in history has ever bowled.

    But I don't think it's wise to start talking about bowlers who topped 150kph when they weren't timed to have done so. Yes, of course it's as good as certain that Tyson, Thomson and others did. But it's also very possible that, for instance, Ray Lindwall and Dennis Lillee did. Yet few would mention them.

  13. #43
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Tyson pretty much unquestionably topped 150kph, and more, for a year or so, very possibly bowling for a few months faster than anyone else in history has ever bowled.

    But I don't think it's wise to start talking about bowlers who topped 150kph when they weren't timed to have done so. Yes, of course it's as good as certain that Tyson, Thomson and others did. But it's also very possible that, for instance, Ray Lindwall and Dennis Lillee did. Yet few would mention them.
    I was careful to use 'such as'.

  14. #44
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    The difference is that different conditions suit bowlers of different pace. A 75 mph bowler would want a different type of wicket to prosper than a 95 mph bowler.

    To illustrate, Larwood always stated Bowes was too slow to be effective in Aus and needed the softer greener wickets of England whereas he wanted a track as hard as possible.

    They are as seperate as any bowling type can be.
    I've never believed any bowler can be "too slow" for any type of pitch. The fact that spinners can bowl at 50mph and still be effective illustrates this.

    Different conditions do indeed suit bowlers of different style - someone completely reliant on a seaming pitch, whether they bowl at 75mph or 90mph, will need softer, greener wickets (in whatever country) to prosper. One who does not rely solely on seam-movement and has other weapons in his arsenal (whether he bowls them at 75mph or 90) will be able to prosper on a wider range of wickets.

    Of course, once you get too slow (eg, 70mph) as a seam-bowler who cannot use flight and loop, you're not very likely to be successful on any surface. There's a reason virtually no Test bowlers ever last long when they bowl at such a pace. But once you get into the late-70s in mph, there's no reason whatsoever to separate them IMO.

    Apart from the fact that no two bowlers bowl the same speed constantly. Fast, fast-medium etc. can only ever be a cosmetic definition - totally different to right-arm\left-arm, seam\spin, out\not-out etc.

  15. #45
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Manee View Post
    I was careful to use 'such as'.
    Oh, certainly, wasn't criticising your lack of examples. Simply saying that someone who bowled 150kph+ is near enough impossible to know until very recently. So it's not wise to start subdividing bowlers up according to the pace they appeared to have bowled at, as that can easily be misrecognised, especially when your resolution is so small as 5mph or so. Nothing can tell a speed that acutely other than a speedgun.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Chaulk - "Chulk" or "Chork" ???
    By Hoggy31 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18-03-2007, 06:05 AM
  2. "Attacking" \ "Defensive" fingerspin
    By Richard in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 15-03-2006, 05:45 AM
  3. Replies: 225
    Last Post: 10-08-2005, 12:29 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 22-08-2004, 05:10 PM
  5. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 28-02-2004, 02:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •