Which is harder?

[Shri]

Playing pace bowling or playing spin? Any particular reason?

[honestbharani]

Depends on where you are brought up.. In the subcontinent, you face spin a lot. So facing fast bowlers is tougher and the converse is true for an Aussie or an Englishman..

[Matt79]

There's no answer other than "depends what you're good at".

[Richard]

If you're equally good at both - which in any case is pretty much impossible and certainly impossible to unequivocally quantify - then facing top-quality seam on a bouncy, seaming, uneven deck with a new ball is harder in my book than facing top-quality spin on a bouncy, turning, uneven deck with a 40-odd-over-old ball.

But in either case all you're really doing is waiting for the bowler to get you out and trying to score as many as you can before he does. With the right tools, quality bowling will out and there's nothing any batsman, however good, can do about it.

[Richard]

Depends on where you are brought up.. In the subcontinent, you face spin a lot. So facing fast bowlers is tougher and the converse is true for an Aussie or an Englishman..

Not really. There are some examples of the other way around. What it depends on is how you are brought-up, and how you build your technique. Overwhelmingly it is indeed true that the type of bowling you face more often as your game comes into its own will tend to be the one you end-up most proficient against, but that is not absolutely neccessarily the case. Nor is it remotely neccessarily the case that every subcontinental will face more spin and every Aussie\Brit\SAffie\Kiwi\WIndian will face more seam.

[Matt79]

What you see at test level in batsmen is also more reflective of what kind of bowling prospers in their country, rather than what attributes batsmen from that country possess. For instance there could in theory be many batsmen in India in junior ranks who prefer pace to spin, however batsmen who can't play spin are unlikely to make it to senior sides, let alone FC, let alone internationals, because most of the number of decent spinners they'll encounter on their way. The same probably applies for Saffies or Aussies and quick bowling or Poms and swing.

Obviously these are generalities and there may be the odd exception.

[Prince EWS]

If you're equally good at both - which in any case is pretty much impossible and certainly impossible to unequivocally quantify - then facing top-quality seam on a bouncy, seaming, uneven deck with a new ball is harder in my book than facing top-quality spin on a bouncy, turning, uneven deck with a 40-odd-over-old ball.

Well no, not really, because then you aren't actually equally good at both, are you?

[Goughy]

Playing fast bowling is harder. It requires an extra element in courage.

A mistake against a spinner can make you look silly, a mistake against a fast bowler can put you in hospital (I think Ive taken that line from Danny Green).

[Shri]

Playing fast bowling is harder. It requires an extra element in courage.

A mistake against a spinner can make you look silly, a mistake against a fast bowler can put you in hospital (I think Ive taken that line from Danny Green).

Kumble split Nayan Mongia's mouth open when bowling once iirc. Wore a helmet after that.

[G.I.Joe]

You need more power and stamina against spin. You can't keep using the bowlers pace like you can against the pacers. There's no cheat code.

[aussie]

Playing pace.

Facing the Windies 4-prong at the Kensington Oval at its peak was harder than facing the Indian spin quartet of Chandra/Bedi/Prasanna/Ventak on a sub-continent dustbowl.

[G.I.Joe]

Thats probably because the WI bowlers were better bowlers than the spin quartet, full stop. Not because they were pacers and the spin quartet were spinners. You only need to see the contemporary batsmen make fools of themselves on genuine turners against average spinners.

[Lillian Thomson]

Playing pace.

Facing the Windies 4-prong at the Kensington Oval at its peak was harder than facing the Indian spin quartet of Chandra/Bedi/Prasanna/Ventak on a sub-continent dustbowl.

That's not true at all. You were just more likely to be physically injured. Staying at the crease and scoring runs wasn't any easier.

[Uppercut]

See: "which is harder- taking a five-fer or scoring a hundred?"

What's up with all the unanswerable questions?

[Shri]

See: "which is harder- taking a five-fer or scoring a hundred?"

What's up with all the unanswerable questions?

ok