Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 70
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Is Pace An Overrated Asset?

  1. #1
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195

    Is Pace An Overrated Asset?

    These days many bowlers are selected for international teams on the basis of their pace alone, with little or no attention paid towards their performances in domestic cricket or their accuracy (Brett Lee, Simon Jones and Mohammed Sami spring to mind).

    The most effective pace bowlers since the late 90s, like McGrath and Pollock, have been more focused on putting the ball in the right place ball after ball, with a little movement, rather than trying to break the speed barrier. Many of the fastest bowlers compromise accuracy for extra speed and thus become expensive as a result, yet they still get selected over more accurate bowlers with less pace, who usually perform better. The selectors seem to ignore the principle that speed minus accuracy equals waywardness, and line and length at reasonable pace equals reliability. To many international selectors, pace is everything, and the ability to take wickets cheaply is not.

    Obviously a bowler that is fast, accurate and is taking wickets cheaply (ie Shoaib or Harmison), should be playing for his country. The question I am asking is should bowlers with great pace but an inconsistent line and length, and mediocre stats (ie Lee has a Test bowling average of 39 since 2001, Jones has a Championship average of 38 and Sami averages almost 50 with the ball in Tests), be selected for their country?
    Last edited by a massive zebra; 21-07-2004 at 04:36 PM.
    THE ULTIMATE CRICKET WEB ARCADE EGGS CHAMPION

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1990-2006
    RIP Craig Walsh (AKA "Craig"), 1985-2012

  2. #2
    Soutie Langeveldt's Avatar
    Pinball Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Leeuwarden, Netherlands
    Posts
    29,567
    Harmison springs to mind.. But he has learnt to combine pace and accuracy, and touch wood he is lethal..

    Im a pretty quick bowler, but when i try and bowl flat out i nearly always get tanked.. So I guess a Saggers could well be more lethal than a Simon Jones..

    Depends on the conditions though, id rather have Lee bowling for me at Perth or Joburg where he can use his pace to the max, but on most pitches id take the accuracy...
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    Don't like using my iPod dock. Ruins battery life too much.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Thanks Dick Smith. Will remember to subscribe to your newsletter for more electronic fun facts.

    ****.

  3. #3
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    Sheer pace can be devestating in its own right...see Shoaib when he is on fire,or even Lee when he gets it right..just a notch down from those two is Harmison who is the second ranked bowler in the world.One bowler who can combine occasional great pace with accuracy is Flintoff, who can bowl in the low 90mph region and is pretty much on the mark...and his bowling is getting better and better.

    The speed gun things can be misleading...I personally dont think there is TOO much difference in pace between McGrath/Pollock and those bowlers who are thought to be faster (obviously not your Lee's or your Shoaibs).A bowler like McGrath gets bounce out of the pitch,which is very hard to play..hence the wickets he takes.

    There have been many example of pure pace doing the business...Thomson,Tyson,Larwood.

    I think you go with whats best for the team at that time...but if you have a 100mph bowler up your sleeve...lucky you.
    rave down, hit the ground


    MSN: djjacksono@hotmail.com

  4. #4
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    Sheer pace can be devestating in its own right...see Shoaib when he is on fire,or even Lee when he gets it right..just a notch down from those two is Harmison who is the second ranked bowler in the world.One bowler who can combine occasional great pace with accuracy is Flintoff, who can bowl in the low 90mph region and is pretty much on the mark...and his bowling is getting better and better.

    The speed gun things can be misleading...I personally dont think there is TOO much difference in pace between McGrath/Pollock and those bowlers who are thought to be faster (obviously not your Lee's or your Shoaibs).A bowler like McGrath gets bounce out of the pitch,which is very hard to play..hence the wickets he takes.

    There have been many example of pure pace doing the business...Thomson,Tyson,Larwood.

    I think you go with whats best for the team at that time...but if you have a 100mph bowler up your sleeve...lucky you.
    I am not saying pace is a bad thing. People like Tyson, Shoaib, Thomson and Larwood at their best have been devastating. When they found some form and put it in the right place at their great pace, they could be almost unplayable.

    What I am saying is that very fast bowlers like Lee, Jones and Sami who pay no attention to accuracy whatsoever, are highly overrated and not worth their place in the side. They get selected just for their pace even though slower bowlers could get the opposition out more cheaply.

    Don't really see where Flintoff comes into it - he's not really fast but certainly not slow either, he's not inaccurate, and not a particularly effective or ineffective bowler.
    Last edited by a massive zebra; 21-07-2004 at 05:00 PM.


  5. #5
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    Quote Originally Posted by a massive zebra
    I am not saying pace is a bad thing. People like Tyson, Shoaib, Thomson and Larwood at their best have been devastating, when they found some form and put it in the right place.

    What I am saying is that very fast bowlers like Lee, Jones and Sami who pay no attention to accuracy whatsoever, are highly overrated and not worth their place in the side. They get selected just for their pace even though slower bowlers could get the opposition out more cheaply.

    Don't really see where Flintoff comes into it - he's not really fast but certainly not slow either, he's not inaccurate, and not a particularly effective or ineffective bowler.

    Jones isnt too bad you know

  6. #6
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    Jones isnt too bad you know
    He's not good either. Has never averaged under 30 in any Test series, and his county championship average is 38! We have more effective bowlers but the selectors pick Jones purely for his pace.

  7. #7
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    i guess there will be a place in most teams line up for an express bowler if one is available just for variety...my ideal bowling line up would be along these lines

    1.Express (Shoaib type speed, to use in short bursts, for shock value)
    2.Fast Medium (or medium fast,ever know the difference ) who can get plenty of bounce (ie Gillespie)
    3. Fastish (like Pollock)
    4. Medium swing bowler (no-one springs to mind)...(maybe a Vaas type guy although he is faster than medium))
    5. A good spinner (leg or off..as long as good)

    2 3 and 4 do most of the donkey work in the pace section,1 doing stuff in short blasts...and the spinner doing what he needs to do when required.

  8. #8
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    i guess there will be a place in most teams line up for an express bowler if one is available just for variety...my ideal bowling line up would be along these lines

    1.Express (Shoaib type speed, to use in short bursts, for shock value)
    2.Fast Medium (or medium fast,ever know the difference ) who can get plenty of bounce (ie Gillespie)
    3. Fastish (like Pollock)
    4. Medium swing bowler (no-one springs to mind)...(maybe a Vaas type guy although he is faster than medium))
    5. A good spinner (leg or off..as long as good)

    2 3 and 4 do most of the donkey work in the pace section,1 doing stuff in short blasts...and the spinner doing what he needs to do when required.
    1.Express - H.Larwood
    2.Fast Medium - R.Hadlee
    3. Fastish - M.Marshall
    4. Medium swing bowler - S.Barnes
    5. A good spinner - M.Muralitharan

    But I would definitely not pick Larwood in my all time XI - too inconsistent. The other four would probably make it. Imran over Hadlee for his batting. I would pick Marshall, Barnes, Murali, Imran, Sobers.

    Current players...

    1. Shoaib
    2. Pollock
    3. Harmison
    4. Vaas
    5. Murali

    Pretty close to my bowling attack in my current World XI. Warne should be in there though above Vaas and I would only play four main bowlers plus Kallis. Probably Shoaib, Pollock/Harmison, Murali, Warne, Kallis.
    Last edited by a massive zebra; 21-07-2004 at 05:28 PM.

  9. #9
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    Quote Originally Posted by a massive zebra
    1.Express - H.Larwood
    2.Fast Medium - R.Hadlee
    3. Fastish - M.Marshall
    4. Medium swing bowler - S.Barnes
    5. A good spinner - M.Muralitharan

    But I would definitely not pick Larwood in my all time XI - too inconsistent. The other four would probably make it.
    oooh...Marshall only fastish....let me tell you (in case you never saw him play)...he was mighty fast...and coz of his action he was fast off the pitch as well.....but what made him so great was that he could move the ball at will. He was one of the most intelligent bowlers ever to play the game.

    Having never seen Barnes play, I would go for Botham at his peak as 4th bowler,the best swing bowler (who relie on swing as opposed to pace, although he could fling the ball pretty quick sometimes as well) I have ever seen

  10. #10
    International Captain Swervy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    An Aussie with a Lancashire accent living in Keighley,West Yorks
    Posts
    7,361
    Quote Originally Posted by a massive zebra
    1.Express - H.Larwood
    2.Fast Medium - R.Hadlee
    3. Fastish - M.Marshall
    4. Medium swing bowler - S.Barnes
    5. A good spinner - M.Muralitharan

    But I would definitely not pick Larwood in my all time XI - too inconsistent. The other four would probably make it. Imran over Hadlee for his batting. I would pick Marshall, Barnes, Murali, Imran, Sobers.

    Current players...

    1. Shoaib
    2. Pollock
    3. Harmison
    4. Vaas
    5. Murali

    Pretty close to my bowling attack in my current World XI. Warne should be in there though above Vaas and I would only play four main bowlers plus Kallis. Probably Shoaib, Pollock/Harmison. Murali, Warne, Kallis.
    i wasnt trying to pick the best bowling line up..i was just saying for me that type of bowling set up would be ideal

  11. #11
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    It's a shame Shane Bond hasn't played more cricket..he was perhaps one of the more consistent fast bowlers with no problems over his action too.

  12. #12
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    oooh...Marshall only fastish....let me tell you (in case you never saw him play)...he was mighty fast...and coz of his action he was fast off the pitch as well.....but what made him so great was that he could move the ball at will. He was one of the most intelligent bowlers ever to play the game.

    Having never seen Barnes play, I would go for Botham at his peak as 4th bowler,the best swing bowler (who relie on swing as opposed to pace, although he could fling the ball pretty quick sometimes as well) I have ever seen
    OK you are right I never saw Marshall play. Who would you pick in the fastish category then? If you only want to pick bowlers you have seen then that is fair enough, but it is blindingly obvious to anyone with decent knowledge of cricket that you cannot compare Botham to Barnes purely as a bowler, however many more Test wickets he took.

  13. #13
    U19 Debutant Will Scarlet's Avatar
    Indiana Jones In Odd-World Champion! Jet Pac Stan Champion!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, AUS
    Posts
    335
    I totally agree that express pace is over-rated. When Bond initially got injured a couple of years back NZC decided they had to replace him with another express paceman, no matter what. They brought in Ian Butler, who at the time was only the #4 bowler for ND in FC cricket. Butler's contribution was predictably terrible (wayward and very expensive). He has since improved a little, but based on form should not have been given a chance at that stage. Yovich, Schwass, and Penn must have all been thinking, "Why not me instead of Butler?"

    Pace can be very effective on the correct pitches and against selected opposition. Pakistan has a great record against NZ in recent times simply because our batting's inability to deal with the likes of Akram, Younis, Aktar, and Sami's pace.

  14. #14
    International Vice-Captain a massive zebra's Avatar
    Eggs Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my ass @ the PC
    Posts
    4,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Swervy
    Having never seen Barnes play, I would go for Botham at his peak as 4th bowler,the best swing bowler (who relie on swing as opposed to pace, although he could fling the ball pretty quick sometimes as well) I have ever seen
    Massie at his best (1 match!!!!) was the most devastating swing bowler ever. Maybe Botham at his peak was the best swing bowler of the last 30 years to maintain his ability for a sustained period, although he was pretty quick at times and his bowling did eventually decline alarmingly.

  15. #15
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    Schwass & Penn were not of international standard despite putting the numbers on the board. It's fair to say they were helped greatly by favourable bowling conditions over their careers.

    Butler has more talent..if he gets it right he can get steep bounce with pace which can be more threatning on any type of surface, whereas Penn & Schwass would only be good on pitches that have seam movement in them.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •