Variable bounce is bad, just as cracks are, you never know what the balls going to do as it pitches and that is not a good surface to play on as players can seriously get hurtWhy is it then that the pitches with variable bounce are always considered "bad" for cricket?
IMO consistent bounce is not as beneficial for fast or spin bowling, once a good batsman knows it then its quite useless because the element of surprise is gone.
Bowling has become all about deception and variable bounce brings the surprise package which is always going to be a major factor in fast and spin bowling.
People shouldn't play sport if they don't like getting hurt. At least, thats what we tell the opponent after making a nasty tackle in soccer.Variable bounce is bad, just as cracks are, you never know what the balls going to do as it pitches and that is not a good surface to play on as players can seriously get hurt
good bouncy wickets which offer consistence bounce are still tough to play on, but if you are good enough, you can deal with the bounce and it allows you to also play powerful shots off the backfoot.
DWTA. He showed that on two tours to OZ playing on pitches so flat, several aircraft were sighted on short final for them.If there was no variable bounce, Kumble wouldn't have played international cricket for long.
Barcelona dont make the nasty tackles most english clubs do, yet they are the best in the game and the most beautiful to watch. If you want to see people getting hurt, watch MMA.People shouldn't play sport if they don't like getting hurt. At least, thats what we tell the opponent after making a nasty tackle in soccer.
Ever heard of rugby? Ever heard of injuries suffered while playing soccer? Did I say that I like to see people get hurt? The fact is, cricketers are a bunch of sissies compared to other sportsmen.Barcelona dont make the nasty tackles most english clubs do, yet they are the best in the game and the most beautiful to watch. If you want to see people getting hurt, watch MMA.
Kumble wasn't a huge turner of the ball, he was a master of manipulating invariable bounce if the pitch offered assistance to him. Compare his record in Delhi to his record in other grounds. He looked like he worked hard to get wickets on flat pitches, bowl him in a pitch with uneven bounce and he was better than any bowler in the world.DWTA. He showed that on two tours to OZ playing on pitches so flat, several aircraft were sighted on short final for them.
Anyway, there are many bowlers playing at lower levels of the game who can swing the ball miles but without bounce, they just don't get out really top batters. It just makes a bowler that much tougher to play (and that much easier if the pitch negates them). Essential for any pace bowler to learn to hit the seam.
Hang on, that's not what you said. You said if it wasn't for variable bounce he wouldn't have played international cricket for long. Yes he was unplayable on uneven pitches and less dangerous on flat pitches but he still found a way to take Test wickets. Don't believe for a second if he played on flatter pitches, he'd have had a shorter career. You don't take 500+ Test wickets by being anything other than a quality bowler.Kumble wasn't a huge turner of the ball, he was a master of manipulating invariable bounce if the pitch offered assistance to him. Compare his record in Delhi to his record in other grounds. He looked like he worked hard to get wickets on flat pitches, bowl him in a pitch with uneven bounce and he was better than any bowler in the world.
Yeah rage posted that bit when my mouse went funny and selected a large part of my post and I erased the said part.Hang on, that's not what you said. You said if it wasn't for variable bounce he wouldn't have played international cricket for long. Yes he was unplayable on uneven pitches and less dangerous on flat pitches but he still found a way to take Test wickets. Don't believe for a second if he played on flatter pitches, he'd have had a shorter career. You don't take 500+ Test wickets by being anything other than a quality bowler.
Are they?Why is it then that the pitches with variable bounce are always considered "bad" for cricket?
I agree that cricketers are sissies but at the same time i think its important to distinguish between a contact sport and a sport like Cricket/Baseball/Volleyball/Tennis/Badminton which can't be contact sports.Ever heard of rugby? Ever heard of injuries suffered while playing soccer? Did I say that I like to see people get hurt? The fact is, cricketers are a bunch of sissies compared to other sportsmen.
Most of the time i have heard that oh the wicket has too much variable bounce and that is "dangerous"....i don't understand why is it becoming so biased...?Are they?
I hate low bounce. Variable bounce is fine. It doesn't make for fantastic cricket to watch but there's a competitive contest between bat and ball. Low bounce is just, ugh.