Do you prefer watching a paceman or a spinner rip through a side?

[Jayzamann]

First innings would definitely be pace, 3rd and 4th innings I'd side with a spinner.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Loved to see Warne bamboozling the opposition, but the greatest sight in cricket ever has to be Waqar destroying the stumps with his in-ducker.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

One thing though, if it is your side doing it you don't care which bowler it is and what they bowl as long as you win.

 

[Top_Cat]

If batsmen are suffering, I'm down.

 

[Uppercut]

If batsmen are suffering, I'm down.

Haha this.

 

[NasserFan207]

I don't think I've ever seen a pacer dominate a lineup to the extent Warne or Murali did, though that is probably due to the fact that they could bowl longer spells.

Regardless, there was a feeling of utter helplessness and despair when Warne/Murali at their best ran through your team. Like they were totally unstoppable.

 

[fredfertang]

I don't think I've ever seen a pacer dominate a lineup to the extent Warne or Murali did, though that is probably due to the fact that they could bowl longer spells.

Sabina Park in March '04 was before your time presumably? - still can't believe that actually happened actually - I'll away to youtube to check

 

[fredfertang]

still there

 

[smash84]

I don't think I've ever seen a pacer dominate a lineup to the extent Warne or Murali did, though that is probably due to the fact that they could bowl longer spells.

Regardless, there was a feeling of utter helplessness and despair when Warne/Murali at their best ran through your team. Like they were totally unstoppable.

I am not sure about this.

To me personally (might be biased watching the Ws bowl at their peak) a fast bowler on song seems unstoppable. And with a spinner it always seems somewhat easier to take the attack to.

I remember Waqar with the old ball. Would clean up sides so quickly.

 

[G.I.Joe]

The spinners probably did it more often though.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

One thing though, if it is your side doing it you don't care which bowler it is and what they bowl as long as you win.

Alternatively, if it's the other side doing it, you grow to hate the style that is ruining you. Although I appreciate Murali, I hate watching him bowl to the BCs because we just couldn't figure him out.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Loved to see Warne bamboozling the opposition, but the greatest sight in cricket ever has to be Waqar destroying the stumps with his in-ducker.

Yep, Waqar seemed to defy physics with the lateness of his swing. As often as not it was a hapless Englishman whose furniture was rearranged, but it was very hard not to admire the man's bravura talents. Utterly thrilling to behold.

As much as I like to see a great spinner in action, for sheer visceral excitement I'd take a quick as a personal preference. For largely the same reasons as I enjoy boxing more than tennis. One admires the artistry of the latter, but the possibility of blood on the canvass appeals at a more primal level; facing up to a quick genuinely tests a batsman's mettle. With the protective equipment they wear nowadays batsmen aren't likely to get seriously hurt (thankfully) but (as Kallis bouncing the rabbitish Fernando in the first test showed, after he'd first been discomforted by a bumper from the latter) a quick can still make a batsman hop about & it isn't much fun to face.

 

[smash84]

The spinners probably did it more often though.

Only two spinners mainly. Many more fast bowlers

 

[NasserFan207]

Sabina Park in March '04 was before your time presumably? - still can't believe that actually happened actually - I'll away to youtube to check

Wasn't before my time, but I never saw that spell. There are exceptions I guess.

Its just you nearly always find that pacers rip through sides in pairs, which is different to a single spinner going it alone.

Also protective equipment has taken the danger element of fast bowling out of the game for me.

 

[smash84]

Yep, Waqar seemed to defy physics with the lateness of his swing. As often as not it was a hapless Englishman whose furniture was rearranged, but it was very hard not to admire the man's bravura talents. Utterly thrilling to behold.

As much as I like to see a great spinner in action, for sheer visceral excitement I'd take a quick as a personal preference. For largely the same reasons as I enjoy boxing more than tennis. One admires the artistry of the latter, but the possibility of blood on the canvass appeals at a more primal level; facing up to a quick genuinely tests a batsman's mettle. With the protective equipment they wear nowadays batsmen aren't likely to get seriously hurt (thankfully) but (as Kallis bouncing the rabbitish Fernando in the first test showed, after he'd first been discomforted by a bumper from the latter) a quick can still make a batsman hop about & it isn't much fun to face.

gun post

 

[Lostman]

Yep. The lasting memory of 2011 for me.

Can't wait for this GIF

 

[Migara]

I love it when a part timer rips through a side. Especially the WTF look on the batsmen's face.

 

[ankitj]

^ I hate Michael Clarke

 

[Xuhaib]

neither my favorite is medium pacer like Asif or Clark.

 

[smash84]

tbf Asif could clock to 135 km regularly