CW All Time XI Fast Bowlers

[watson]

But on the other hand, here we have Lillee bowling to Gary Sobers at about Glen McGraths pace.

Dennis Lillee: 8-29 against World 11 - YouTube

 

[silentstriker]

Interesting to note that before speed guns became common, people thought McGrath was a lot faster than he was because he was so hard to play. People were surprised at his speed. People appear a lot faster than they were in many cases.

 

[silentstriker]

That's the frustrating yet intriguing thing about the history of the game. There's so much that we want to know yet will always remain unanswered. I love it

Well, this one has been answered .

But in any case, interesting to note that McGrath was said to be a lot faster than he was. In fact, there are several sources which expressed surprise at his bowling speed once speed guns came around - because he was so hard to play, people who played him thought he bowled 5-10kph faster than he was.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Damn who says Indians are slow..we got Ishant and Agarkar and Munaf Patel who've clocked higher speeds than Holding!

 

[silentstriker]

Damn who says Indians are slow

No one.

They say Indian fast bowlers aren't express, and more importantly, aren't any good, which are both separate and true.

 

[Jager]

No one.

They say Indian fast bowlers aren't express, and more importantly, aren't any good, which are both separate and true.

 

[fredfertang]

What difference did the old back foot no ball law make ie Frank Tyson and his contemporaries could, effectively, get away with bowling over 20 rather than 22 yards?

 

[Jager]

What difference did the old back foot no ball law make ie Frank Tyson and his contemporaries could, effectively, get away with bowling over 20 rather than 22 yards?

Tyson definitely didn't appear to shave two yards off his eventual delivery, but undoubtedly there was at least some shortening.

frank tyson - YouTube

 

[Cabinet96]

I can't speak to 1976 because I have no idea about how those speeds were recorded, or how accurate they were. I tried to find out but no information is available - if you know something, I'd definitely be willing to followup on it.

I did speak to Dr. Pyke about 1979 (the person who ran the tests), so I do know that the 1979 competition was measuring speeds out of the hand. So until I get some accurate information about 1976, I'm going to go by 1979 competition results.

I have some doubts about the accuracy of the tests if Michael Holding was bowling 150kph at 22 but only 141 at 27.

 

[silentstriker]

What do you doubt? I have more doubts about the earlier 150 than the 1979 tests which were done very scientifically. Dr. Pyke was very gracious about responding last time, and I'm sure he'd clarify his methods if I asked - do you have any specific concerns?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Hmm, I don't know if he'll be all that responsive, Manan.

 

[silentstriker]

Damn .

RIP

 

[Cabinet96]

What do you doubt? I have more doubts about the earlier 150 than the 1979 tests which were done very scientifically. Dr. Pyke was very gracious about responding last time, and I'm sure he'd clarify his methods if I asked - do you have any specific concerns?

I doubt the 1975 tests more than the 1979 ones.

 

[watson]

There may be some truth in this.......

Speed obsession is hurting fast bowling

Speedometers need to be removed from cricket grounds and television coverage, so that the current global obsession with bowling at speed can be replaced by a rounded view of a bowler’s talents.

During the first day of the Boxing Day Test, I was amazed by some of the Channel Nine commentators’ opinions about the performance of Zaheer Khan.

He’s flat they said, he’s bowling terribly. How did they measure that, you may wonder? Bowling figures? The number of balls the batsman has had to play at?

If you thought these were the ways to judge a bowler’s performance, apparently you’d be wrong.

So why did Tony Greig and Mark Taylor think Zaheer was no good? It was his speed. Greig explained with a mixture of amazement and sympathy that Khan was sometimes even dropping into the dreaded 120s! Taylor said he looked ‘short of a gallop.’

Now there is little doubt Zaheer Khan is below full fitness in this test match, and he is not bowling as quickly as he can. However to use that as proof that he was bowling poorly is so simplistic as to make one question the amount of money these commentators are paid.

When they turned to his figures, he had bowled 14 overs, no wicket for 30. They seemed genuinely surprised! A bowler below 140kph not getting slogged, impossible!

As it happened, Zaheer continued to bowl with that tidy consistency, and in return for his patience took the game changing wickets of Michael Clarke and Mike Hussey.

While Umesh Yadav took one more wicket he did so at more than twice the expense, and so it was hard to go past Zaheer as the day’s best bowler. All this at less than blinding speed.

Unfortunately it seems this focus on speed as an indicator of ability is a growing craze. We are only about ten years into the life of the cricket speedometer.

It was introduced as Brett Lee and Shoaib Akhtar vowed for world’s fastest bowler honours, back at the start of the millennia.

However now the speedometer has grown tentacles, and instead of being a novelty device to help promote a prize fight within a cricket match, it is now a measure of weather a bowler deserves to take part at all.

Look at Channel Nine’s now tea break challenge, whereby during each test half a dozen young bowlers from the host city attempt to bowl the fastest ball of the summer.

What is the subtext of such a contest? It suggests to young bowlers, both participants and the audience, that it does not matter where the ball goes, as long as it gets there quickly.

It is as if Glenn McGrath never existed, as if his miserly line and length of only moderate pace has evaporated from the memory, replaced only by images of Brett Lee firing bouncers ten feet over the batsmen’s head and stalking down the wicket pouting his lips.

I suspect if Glenn McGrath were new to the game now he would struggle to get a look in. He would either be shunned by representative teams, or coached to pick up his pace in exchange for his deadly consistency.

Trent Copeland has been shunned by the selectors after three tests because he is less than rapid. In the 25 First Class games he has had to hone his game his average (24.72) is far superior to Ben Hilfenhaus (30.20), Peter Siddle (28.19), or Mitchell Starc (34.18).

That’s not to say he is a superior bowler to all of them, but it suggests he deserves a greater chance than he has been given. Now they are all ahead of him in the queue in spite of these statistics, because they are ahead of him on the speed list.

This obsession with speed must end, or we will be left with far more Mitchell Johnsons and far less Glenn McGraths. Speed is one trait which can make a bowler dangerous, but is neither the only nor the most important one.

The prevailing logic in the world cricket community seems to be that it is everything. Instead, speedometers should be removed from the analysis of cricket, so that alleged experts may have to actually watch the game to comment on a bowler’s performance.

Speedometer affecting quality fast bowling | The Roar

 

[watson]

Of course, that article begs the question - why was the great Alec Bedser overlooked as a possible choice? Any bowler who can duplicate 'Warne's ball of the century' but at a significantly faster pace should be considered.

Farewell to bowler who baffled Bradman

All anybody needs to know to be certain of Alec Bedser's status as a bowler is contained in a simple sentence. "The ball with which he bowled me in the Adelaide Test match," said Don Bradman, "was, I think, the finest ever to take my wicket."

Since Bradman was the greatest batsman in the history of the game, his statistics reducing all others to innocent bystanders, the judgement can bear the closest scrutiny. "It must have come three-quarters of the way straight on the off stump," elaborated the Don, "then suddenly dipped to pitch on the leg stump, only to turn off the pitch and hit the middle and off stumps."

After 63 years it still sounds one peach of a delivery (it bowled Bradman for a duck in Australia's first innings in the fourth Test in 1947). Sir Alec Bedser, who died on Easter Sunday at the age of 91, was a pioneer of the leg-cutter, in effect a fast leg- spinner which swung in and moved sharply away on pitching. But he was much more besides: of nobody could it be more emphatically said that he gave his life to cricket.

Bedser was a truly great bowler, not of the fastest vintage but quick enough, and combining so many of the other verities such as accuracy, movement, bounce and a lion heart, as to render his speed meaningless......

Farewell to bowler who baffled Bradman - Cricket - Sport - The Independent

 

[Pup Clarke]

The 'Glenn McGrath wouldn't get a look in now' argument is very weak. It was well known that he was Fast-Medium when he debuted and was bowling in the early 130kph's in the 06/07 ashes.

 

[uvelocity]

the whole article is rubbish

 

[Arachnodouche]

Of course, that article begs the question - why was the great Alec Bedser overlooked as a possible choice? Any bowler who can duplicate 'Warne's ball of the century' but at a significantly faster pace should be considered.

See, this is why I find it hard to take the great oldies too seriously. That is such an exaggeration..spin is a function of the number of revolutions you impart to the ball. More time in the air = more chance for the ball to revolve. Unless that ball hit a crater on the pitch, you just can't get a ball to turn square like Warne-Gatting at a pace similar to Kumble-Afridi (and Bedser was quicker from all accounts). Leg-cutters, yes, but genuine turn around corners?

 

[Jager]

See, this is why I find it hard to take the great oldies too seriously. That is such an exaggeration..spin is a function of the number of revolutions you impart to the ball. More time in the air = more chance for the ball to revolve. Unless that ball hit a crater on the pitch, you just can't get a ball to turn square like Warne-Gatting at a pace similar to Kumble-Afridi (and Bedser was quicker from all accounts). Leg-cutters, yes, but genuine turn around corners?

From memory, that article said that it pitched leg and took middle and off- that isn't the biggest deviation by a long shot, just a marvelous delivery. Naturally it may have been slightly glorified for the sake of the story, but it is very possible. Warne's delivery pitched outside leg and clipped the top off the off stump. I see no reason why oldies couldn't do what the bowlers of today can... it's not like the human species has evolved since then.

 

[kyear2]

But on the other hand, here we have Lillee bowling to Gary Sobers at about Glen McGraths pace.

Dennis Lillee: 8-29 against World 11 - YouTube

Why Lillee should have been in the second team.