There was a recent piece on cricinfo on Fazal
And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW
Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta
Medium pacer is a pretty liberal term. I read someone on Davis' blog (from memory) measured the slips standing back to Tate and found out they were the same distance away as Kasprowicz's. Bedser was similar to Tate and Fazal was likened to Bedser. I can't recall who mentioned it but I've read that Hammond was quicker than Tate and Bedser which is a claim I find surprising. But he was a man who had to be goaded into bowling most of the time. To repeat my earlier aside, I still think Philander should make Watson's team.
Terry Alderman generally bowled in the mid 120s and was classified as 'medium'. I've also heard him described as 'medium fast' which is somehow a category between 'medium' and 'fast medium'. But I think that's being overly pedantic. Just 'medium' will do.
Graeme Swann is pretty quick as far as spinners go and sends them down at speeds in the mid 90s. Occasionally topping the 100 mark.
It's difficult estimating the speed of bowlers like Tate, Bedser, and Mahmood because we rely upon written descriptions or inferior black and white footage if we are lucky. However, my opinion is that they bowled at a range of speed similar to Terry Alderman. Occasionally hitting the 130 mark but typically a little slower. It is possible that they bowled consistently in the Philander range of around the early 130s, but I think that we an safely say that they were faster than Swann but slower than a real fast bowler like Steyn who cruises in the 140s, but can crank it up to 150 when he wants to.
Incidentally, I read recently that SF Barnes bowled at 70 to 75 mph (113 to 121 kph) but I'm not sure how the author calculated that;
Last edited by watson; 24-02-2014 at 04:10 AM.
I'm not arguing with you, I'm just explaining why I am right.
I've seen a bit of footage of Bedser, and to me he looks quicker than someone like Alderman. Bedser seems to have had a really quick arm action.
I remember Bobby Simpson in commentary recalling a net session with Bedser and saying that he was hit black and blue by the bowler. Simmo would have been young at the time but Bedser in his late 30s. It is interesting to speculate about their bowling and they must have had something special to hurry up so many guys.
Here is some good footage of Bedser claiming his 100th wicket against Australia.;
What is pretty obvious to me from the tape is the steep bounce that Bedser obtained from his action. I think that it must have been Bedser's cutter, combined with his steep bounce to beat the edge of the bat, that would have left batsman like Simpson 'black and blue'. Either that or the constant jarring of the ball hitting the splice which leaves the hands bruised and sore.
Last edited by watson; 24-02-2014 at 06:07 PM.
I don't think you can really judge pace using anything other than a speed gun. The whole reason we have terms like "heavy ball bowler", "sneaky quick", "floaty pace (especially common when describing Shane Watson's early career bowling)", "The speed gun doesn't do McGrath justice" (Michael Atherton) is because what our eyes see isn't matching with what the speed gun is saying. How often do you see a commentator exclaim "ooh that was quick!" and then your eyes flick down to the little box with the speed in it and it's stubbornly sticking to 135kph?
Almost every great bowler to play the game prior to the advent of common speed guns has been described as fast. Alan Davidson and Sydney Barnes are the only exceptions I can think of and no one can decide what the latter even bowled.
I think many people would be very surprised at what we might find if we were able to travel back in time with a modern speed gun and get some of the past greats clocked. I think the majority would be 140+ but there would be the odd one who was high 130s and if we expanded the survey to all past bowlers we would pick up a fair few supposed medium pacers bowling low 140s who were just crap imo.
Cult Heroes XI:
1. Michael Papps +
2. Chris Harris
3. Arjuna Ranatunga*
5. Nasir Hossain
6. Andrew Flintoff
7. Ajit Agarkar
8. Merv Hughes
9. Jeetan Patel
10. Phil Tufnell
11. Chris Martin
no one except pews likes papps
Looking at Watson's signature and he has 5 superb teams. Not identical to what by selections would be, but close enough. Which would have the best chance of winning a competition between them.
Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2
Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4
Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2
Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)