Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 207

Thread: Fastest over EVER bowled in test cricket history

  1. #1
    U19 12th Man HMas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    256

  2. #2
    JJD Heads Athlai's Avatar
    Duck Hunt Champion! Plops Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl:lsFJg/s
    Posts
    27,475
    Fastest over ever RECORDED in Test Cricket History.
    Direbirds FTW!

    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Wellington will win the whole thing next year. Mark my words.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I'll offer up my avatar to Athlai forever if Wellington wins the Champions League.
    President of T.I.T.S
    Tamim Is Talented Society

  3. #3
    State Regular Maximus0723's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    921
    and that's after chucking and taking roids...

  4. #4
    U19 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    BANGALORE
    Posts
    205
    How about a certain over bowled in Sabina Park in 1981 ?
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    Think I must be Indian as well. All it takes is to criticise an NZ bowler that I think is good and bam!


  5. #5
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,704
    Don't think they had speed guns there.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  6. #6
    International Captain Migara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Colombo, SL
    Posts
    5,664
    Come on Akthar is quicker than Holding (Of course I agree with drugs business. But Holding also extended it more than 5, so a chuck under old law). Jeff Thompson's "box inside-out" turning over to lloyd would have been a good candidate too.
    Diuretics are used to look good at TV shows

    I played for 20 years in the Lankan team, I did not have any problems as a Tamil - Muralidaran

  7. #7
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Hvae vague memory of this Akhtar spell. Akhtar was sharp in the entire series though.

    The fastest overs i think i have ever seen in this. Live or highlights (can't remember speeds):

    - Donald to Atherton 98

    - Akhtar to NZ, Karachi (i think) in 2002

    - Aktar to Waugh, Lee, Gilchrist 2002 (Colombo)

    - Akhtar to Tendulkar, Dravid, Kolkotta 2000

    - Johnson 1st over vs SA in Durban last month

  8. #8
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Migara View Post
    Come on Akthar is quicker than Holding
    By 1981, he probably was (ie, Akhtar for most of his career was quicker than Holding in 1981 was). But the Holding of 1976, before his most serious injury, might very well I think have been as quick as Shoaib.

    Of course we'll never know for certain, because there were no speedguns in his day. But I reckon Holding and Thomson of the mid-'70s were probably as quick as the like of Akhtar and Tait today.

    And Frank Tyson in that one series in '54/55 might have been a bit quicker still. Or he might not.
    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

  9. #9
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,077
    The only thing I can say with any degree of certainty is that Akhtar is the fastest I have seen since I started following cricket in the mid-late 80s.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  10. #10
    U19 12th Man
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    london
    Posts
    206
    There you go again Richard...speaking absolute rubbish.

    I am going to keep harrassing you whilst you continue to make up opinion. Holding quicker than Akhtar? Youre dreaming....

    Have you spoken to anyone, who is impartial about this or again are you just offering what you think and expect everybody to take it as the way it is

    I have asked this very question to a former 80s NZ Test batsman and he said none, thats right NONE of the Windies bowlers of the 70s and 80s were quicker than todays Windies bowlers. They were just considerably better bowlers

    I believe him, because unlike most, he doesnt have a prejudice towards his day being better than everybody elses and he was honest enough to be honest.

    Now, i could be wrong here and indeed you have spoken to others about this. If so i would hope that you could mention thats its not just your opinion because, as youve probably gathered, not many hold your opinion in such high regard

  11. #11
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,704
    Players frankly are really bad at judging pace, especially differences of 5-6mph. I remember right after the introduction of speed guns, players were shocked as some of the bowlers they thought were express turned out to be mid eighties. It seemed that way because of their action, or because of their other characteristics, they were simply harder to face.

    They may have been faster, they may not. I'd say not, but I'm sure as heck not going to take players words for it. To listen to some of the players, every leg spin bowler they faced was 200mph and fast bowlers were breaking mach III.

  12. #12
    Cricketer Of The Year zaremba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rolling right Inuit
    Posts
    8,897
    Quote Originally Posted by trapol View Post
    There you go again Richard...speaking absolute rubbish.

    I am going to keep harrassing you whilst you continue to make up opinion. Holding quicker than Akhtar? Youre dreaming....

    Have you spoken to anyone, who is impartial about this or again are you just offering what you think and expect everybody to take it as the way it is

    I have asked this very question to a former 80s NZ Test batsman and he said none, thats right NONE of the Windies bowlers of the 70s and 80s were quicker than todays Windies bowlers. They were just considerably better bowlers

    I believe him, because unlike most, he doesnt have a prejudice towards his day being better than everybody elses and he was honest enough to be honest.

    Now, i could be wrong here and indeed you have spoken to others about this. If so i would hope that you could mention thats its not just your opinion because, as youve probably gathered, not many hold your opinion in such high regard
    Whoah! Take a deep breath.

    To maintain that Holding in the 1970s was as quick as Akhtar (and if you read Richard's post you'll see that he didn't claim Holding was faster than Akhtar) is not ridiculous. Not sure I'm in a position to judge either way (in fact I'm sure I'm not) but it's not outside the realms of possibility. Holding was bloody quick.
    Last edited by zaremba; 10-04-2009 at 02:14 PM.

  13. #13
    School Boy/Girl Captain steve132's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    193
    I didn't see Frank Tyson in 1954-55 in Australia, but those who did are convinced that he was the fastest bowler ever.

    The fastest I have seen were (in chronological order) Hall, Thomson, Holding and Shoaib. I don't know if there is anyone who can provide a definitive judgment on their respective speeds.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Players frankly are really bad at judging pace, especially differences of 5-6mph. I remember right after the introduction of speed guns, players were shocked as some of the bowlers they thought were express turned out to be mid eighties. It seemed that way because of their action, or because of their other characteristics, they were simply harder to face.

    They may have been faster, they may not. I'd say not, but I'm sure as heck not going to take players words for it. To listen to some of the players, every leg spin bowler they faced was 200mph and fast bowlers were breaking mach III.
    Yeah, speed out of the hand and ease of reaction are not the same thing. Too many former high-level players have a tendency to regard the "quickest" as those who were hardest to sight, or those who lost least pace off the pitch. But the speed out of the hand is what's given on guns and is the only thing the bowler truly has in his command.

    Of course, shortest reaction time is far more important than quickest.

  15. #15
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by trapol View Post
    There you go again Richard...speaking absolute rubbish.
    Wrong.
    I am going to keep harrassing you whilst you continue to make up opinion. Holding quicker than Akhtar? Youre dreaming....
    No, I'm not.
    Have you spoken to anyone, who is impartial about this or again are you just offering what you think and expect everybody to take it as the way it is
    I've not actually spoken as such - not held a conversation - but I have read and listened.
    I have asked this very question to a former 80s NZ Test batsman and he said none, thats right NONE of the Windies bowlers of the 70s and 80s were quicker than todays Windies bowlers. They were just considerably better bowlers

    I believe him, because unlike most, he doesnt have a prejudice towards his day being better than everybody elses and he was honest enough to be honest.
    That's frankly ridiculous. It is perfectly possible that Edwards and Lawson (no-one else) were as quick as the likes of Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Croft, Clarke, etc. (notice - not Holding) but to suggest they were quicker makes precisely zero sense. There is no way one person's view on this is of the remotest relevance. Not a single other person has ever made that suggestion when I've been observing, for starters. For seconds, every other person who has talked of the majority of West Indian quicks of the '70s and '80s says they were quick. Only Holding was ever said to be insanely quick (Shoaib\Tait sort of speed) but no-one thought they were below fast.

    And no-one who has played for West Indies of late has been anything other than fast (ie, 92-93 mph at best). This we know beyond question.

    If anyone could actually provide a remotely cogent reason why the likes of Roberts and Marshall were not 90mph merchants I'd like to hear it. Not one person has ever done so to me before now.

    And everyone who faced Michael Holding in 1976 has spoken of how he was occasionally simply too quick. So quick you couldn't lay bat on him, even deliveries that didn't move a smidgen. For a top-class batsman, this requires pace in the high 90s. 92-93 mph - doesn't cut it, top-class batsmen can still play this easily with no sideways movement. After '76 Holding was never, quite, this quick again - again, every account I've heard has suggested this, including the bowler himself. Similar to how Thomson was never as quick after '76/77 as he had been for the couple of years up to then (again, every account suggests this).

    The trouble is that most accounts of Holding tend to centre on his time with Roberts, Garner and Croft, and later Marshall, Garner and Baptiste\Walsh\Patterson. Because this was the time when the West Indian pace quartet was active, and the time which has easily most fame. In '76 there were only a couple of occasions where there was a quartet of them (and the other two were Wayne Daniel and Vanburn Holder, whose fame is nowhere near so considerable). Also, '76 is now quite a while ago, and to get accounts of that you need to do a bit of looking around yourself, rather than using the stuff you're spoon-fed. I can do this; not everyone can.

    Holding's best year was '76. Of course he was still magnificent thereafter, but in '76 he was truly special. And he was quick. About as quick as anyone - maybe bar Frank Tyson - has ever been.
    Now, i could be wrong here and indeed you have spoken to others about this.
    As I say, I haven't engaged others in conversation, but I have listened.
    If so i would hope that you could mention thats its not just your opinion because, as youve probably gathered, not many hold your opinion in such high regard
    Actually they do, a hell of a lot of people in fact - you just don't yourself, so therefore you'd prefer it if others didn't. However, I, unlike you, actually know a hell of a lot about the posters on this site, so therefore your inexperienced and ineducated comments are of no significance to me.
    Last edited by Richard; 10-04-2009 at 05:39 PM.

Page 1 of 14 12311 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Indian Premier League Fantasy Cricket!
    By James in forum Fantasy Cricket
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 23-05-2009, 05:49 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-04-2009, 06:14 AM
  3. Indian Premier League Fantasy Cricket!
    By James in forum Cricket Web Forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31-03-2009, 03:59 AM

Posting Permissions

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