How quick was Harold Larwood?

[GuyFromLancs]

Based on my keen eye for guessing speed based on grainy footage, and numerous interviews conducted with myself, i'm of the honestly held opinion that he was in the upper 80s, climbing up to the 92 mark. Meaning I'd put his range in the 88-92 mark. Very quick in the days when it was commonly assumed a moustache was more important than head protection.

Although, I also believe that in being in this "genuinely quick, even by today's standards" zone; he was an exception. And about 10mph quicker than your average fast bowler of the era.

 

[Viscount Tom]

This wasn't Larwood at his fastest iirc from his biography I read a few month back he'd been injured and lost a bit of pace.

I think with Larwood people forget hew wasn't just quick he was an excellent bowler to boot.

 

[fredfertang]

There is some film of Larwood bowling in 1930 (when he wasn't at his best) as well as 32/33 (when he was) - Lol himself, as well as everyone else in a position to judge, agreed he bowled faster in 32/33 than at any other time

 

[watson]

I think that Larwood would be classified as really fast in any era. But does anyone know whether he was able to swing the ball at pace? Lindwall had an identical action to Larwood and was well known for his late out-swinger and in-swinging Yorker. Was Larwood able to do the same?

The reason I ask is that Bradman reckoned that Farnes was a better bowler than Larwood "because he moved the ball off the wicket better." Is the observation that Larwood really didn't 'do much' with the ball, accurate?

 

[fredfertang]

He had a renowned breakback, but that apart was a bit too quick to swing it much

 

[Goughy]

Larwood used to bowl outswing in England at pace. He struggled to do the same in Aus. Of course Bodyline was designed because Bradman was 'yellow' but it was equally because the shine went off the new ball so quickly in Australia.

I have no issue with believing Larwood bowled 90 mph. He was in a different category of pace compared to anything before and until Tyson blew on to the scene.

I also have no issue with anyone doubting him. He was doubted throughout his early career as being too small and too weak. If his contemporaries doubted him then it is natural for people to doubt him 80 years later. However, he happened to be an exceptional athlete, tough and blessed with an action that developed massive amounts of torque.

 

[MartinB]

WA Universitity

From what I remember as part WA university investigation into fast bowling in
the 70's, they looked at the speeds of past fast bowlers (Larwood, Lindwall, Tyson etc)
using film. The peak speeds calculated for all three was in the 92 - 95 (Larwood got the 95).
It is quite likely all three bowled faster on other days that where not filmed. Basically there bowling speeds where
very similar to a lot of modern Fast bowlers (Steyn, Lillee, Marshal etc).

The University identified several factors related to speed including:

• The distance the bowler carried the ball through is hugely important the longer the better. Tall bowlers have an advantage here. Also Jeff Thomsons action carries the ball through a longer arc than the normal conventional bowling action.
• Storing energy in the body.
  • Jeff Thompson almost threw his arm back which would store energy in the body.
  • Aktar had a lot of flex in his elbows which may have helped him.
• Keeping the front knee straight or braced during bowling. Keeping the front knee straight will stop the bodies forward motion and allow you to bring the arm over faster. This also has a big issue with it - have you ever jumped in the air and landed with you legs straight - it tends to hurt.
  
  But keeping the knee straight/braced puts a huge strain on the body, the heavier the bowler is the bigger the strain.
  
  Bowlers who rely on pure pace all the time tend to have very short careers (e.g. Tyson, Jack Gregory).
  
  McGrath on the hand runs through the crease ==>> a lot of give at the knees. McGrath was not that quick but had very few injuries (except when he stepped on the cricket ball).
  
  I suspect the difference between Steyn bowling at 140kmph and 150kmph is the bracing
  of the knee.
  

For raw pace using a convetial action, tall wiry bowlers (e.g. Brett Lee or Micheal Holding) have an advantage.

But shorter guys can have a slightly heavier build which would help compensate.

I would think that Thomson / Holding / Lee / Aktar where probably slightly faster
than Larwood, but it would be at most 5mph.

 

[Top_Cat]

The sole qualified resident of the McGraridor definitely had fewer injuries over his career than most but, when he had them, they were major; missed an entire season twice with side strains.

 

[watson]

From what I remember as part WA university investigation into fast bowling in
the 70's, they looked at the speeds of past fast bowlers (Larwood, Lindwall, Tyson etc)
using film. The peak speeds calculated for all three was in the 92 - 95 (Larwood got the 95).
It is quite likely all three bowled faster on other days that where not filmed. Basically there bowling speeds where
very similar to a lot of modern Fast bowlers (Steyn, Lillee, Marshal etc).

The University identified several factors related to speed including:

• The distance the bowler carried the ball through is hugely important the longer the better. Tall bowlers have an advantage here. Also Jeff Thomsons action carries the ball through a longer arc than the normal conventional bowling action.
• Storing energy in the body.
  • Jeff Thompson almost threw his arm back which would store energy in the body.
  • Aktar had a lot of flex in his elbows which may have helped him.
• Keeping the front knee straight or braced during bowling. Keeping the front knee straight will stop the bodies forward motion and allow you to bring the arm over faster. This also has a big issue with it - have you ever jumped in the air and landed with you legs straight - it tends to hurt.
  
  But keeping the knee straight/braced puts a huge strain on the body, the heavier the bowler is the bigger the strain.
  
  Bowlers who rely on pure pace all the time tend to have very short careers (e.g. Tyson, Jack Gregory).
  
  McGrath on the hand runs through the crease ==>> a lot of give at the knees. McGrath was not that quick but had very few injuries (except when he stepped on the cricket ball).
  
  I suspect the difference between Steyn bowling at 140kmph and 150kmph is the bracing
  of the knee.
  

For raw pace using a convetial action, tall wiry bowlers (e.g. Brett Lee or Micheal Holding) have an advantage.

But shorter guys can have a slightly heavier build which would help compensate.

I would think that Thomson / Holding / Lee / Aktar where probably slightly faster
than Larwood, but it would be at most 5mph.

Do you have a source for that WA Uni study MartinB?

 

[kyear2]

From what I remember as part WA university investigation into fast bowling in
the 70's, they looked at the speeds of past fast bowlers (Larwood, Lindwall, Tyson etc)
using film. The peak speeds calculated for all three was in the 92 - 95 (Larwood got the 95).
It is quite likely all three bowled faster on other days that where not filmed. Basically there bowling speeds where
very similar to a lot of modern Fast bowlers (Steyn, Lillee, Marshal etc).

The University identified several factors related to speed including:

• The distance the bowler carried the ball through is hugely important the longer the better. Tall bowlers have an advantage here. Also Jeff Thomsons action carries the ball through a longer arc than the normal conventional bowling action.
• Storing energy in the body.
  • Jeff Thompson almost threw his arm back which would store energy in the body.
  • Aktar had a lot of flex in his elbows which may have helped him.
• Keeping the front knee straight or braced during bowling. Keeping the front knee straight will stop the bodies forward motion and allow you to bring the arm over faster. This also has a big issue with it - have you ever jumped in the air and landed with you legs straight - it tends to hurt.
  
  But keeping the knee straight/braced puts a huge strain on the body, the heavier the bowler is the bigger the strain.
  
  Bowlers who rely on pure pace all the time tend to have very short careers (e.g. Tyson, Jack Gregory).
  
  McGrath on the hand runs through the crease ==>> a lot of give at the knees. McGrath was not that quick but had very few injuries (except when he stepped on the cricket ball).
  
  I suspect the difference between Steyn bowling at 140kmph and 150kmph is the bracing
  of the knee.
  

For raw pace using a convetial action, tall wiry bowlers (e.g. Brett Lee or Micheal Holding) have an advantage.

But shorter guys can have a slightly heavier build which would help compensate.

I would think that Thomson / Holding / Lee / Aktar where probably slightly faster
than Larwood, but it would be at most 5mph.

Always wondered why science couldn't be used to calculate speed from film.
Guess they can.

 

[Riggins]

Yea the distance between release and batsmen is pretty uniform. you'd think they could get a decent guess from a rudimentary analysis.

 

[kyear2]

Yea the distance between release and batsmen is pretty uniform. you'd think they could get a decent guess from a rudimentary analysis.

would think so.

 

[Dan]

Isn't speed measured from the hand now though? Old footage could give you an average speed across the length of the pitch, but wouldn't be clear enough to calculate the out-of-the-hand speed, surely.

 

[hendrix]

Isn't speed measured from the hand now though? Old footage could give you an average speed across the length of the pitch, but wouldn't be clear enough to calculate the out-of-the-hand speed, surely.

should be able to figure out a rate of deceleration

 

[GuyFromLancs]

should be able to figure out a rate of deceleration

Between 8 and 15% they reckon

 

[smash84]

no ****

 

[MartinB]

Do you have a source for that WA Uni study MartinB?

I do not have any specific referrence for thew study. This video comes from a TV show on there work. They do mention the carrying the ball through; Also if you watch the video, the front legs of Imran / thompson are very straight

 

[Riggins]

Isn't speed measured from the hand now though? Old footage could give you an average speed across the length of the pitch, but wouldn't be clear enough to calculate the out-of-the-hand speed, surely.

I don't know. I don't really care though, the time between you bowling it and the batter having to hit it should be the only thing that matters wrt speed.

 

[harsh.ag]

I don't know. I don't really care though, the time between you bowling it and the batter having to hit it should be the only thing that matters wrt speed.

Bingo!

 

[cnerd123]