Negative spin bowling...

[Richard]

Erm, no.

If the bowler has natural flight, then yes maybe.

But tell Anil Kumble to flight it and he'd get smashed.

Well, Kumble bamboozles the best with loop and dip occasionally.
Only very occasionally, though...
But I've always thought Kumble gets a lot less credit than he deserves for variance in flight.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Yes, he varies it, but between 55 and 65 miles an hour!

Warne or Murali vary it between 45 and 55 or so.

 

[Richard]

Darren Gough's slower-ball, at 75mph, still has some flight and dip.
Christopher Cairns and, of course, the man he learnt it from, Franklyn Stephenson, both have\had brilliant 70mph slower-balls that dipped\dip viciously.
It's all about the arm pace, you don't have to bowl slowly to flight it.

 

[Swervy]

Darren Gough's slower-ball, at 75mph, still has some flight and dip.
Christopher Cairns and, of course, the man he learnt it from, Franklyn Stephenson, both have\had brilliant 70mph slower-balls that dipped\dip viciously.
It's all about the arm pace, you don't have to bowl slowly to flight it.

?????

Erm..the physics comes out again here...A simple study of ballistics/projectile formulae would suggest that in order for a ball to have what us cricketers would call 'flight' or 'dip' (or a ball which initally goes above the height of the point of release then travels downards, as opposed to a ball which travels in a downward direction immediately) and for that ball to to hit ceratin spots on the pitch within 20yards of its release point ie for the ball to pitch....the ball must be bowled slowly....if it wasnt then it would not pitch within the area of the pitch...or alternatively any flight perceived by the spectator would be an illusion, in that the ball would have to have been delivered towards the ground

I dont see how arm pace has anything to do with it, its the velocity and angle the ball comes out of the hand that is important.

Oh and 70mph for Stephenson was his bowling slowly

 

[Son Of Coco]

?????

Erm..the physics comes out again here...A simple study of ballistics/projectile formulae would suggest that in order for a ball to have what us cricketers would call 'flight' or 'dip' (or a ball which initally goes above the height of the point of release then travels downards, as opposed to a ball which travels in a downward direction immediately) and for that ball to to hit ceratin spots on the pitch within 20yards of its release point ie for the ball to pitch....the ball must be bowled slowly....if it wasnt then it would not pitch within the area of the pitch...or alternatively any flight perceived by the spectator would be an illusion, in that the ball would have to have been delivered towards the ground

I dont see how arm pace has anything to do with it, its the velocity and angle the ball comes out of the hand that is important.

Oh and 70mph for Stephenson was his bowling slowly

Doesn't the fact that the ball's spinning have something to do with achieving flight and the resulting dip? For example your spinners are applying spin on the ball which results in the seam rotating towards its intended target, wouldn't this ultimately result in the ball dipping towards the end of its flight? Conversely, you average quick/medium pace bowler imparts an element of backspin on the ball at release and combined with the pace the ball is travelling this basically results in no chance of any dip during the delivery. Presuming that when you're talking about dip you're not referring to a ball just dropping out of the sky when it loses velocity.

I'd suggest Richard that perhaps the dip you have seen from quicks bowling slower balls is either a result of the method they use to deliver the ball (eg: some bowlers use an off-spin (see Brett Lee) or Leg Spin (see big swervyn Mervyn Hughes) action to deliver a slower ball. It's usually held in a different position in the hand though and the arm speed is generally similar no mateer what action is used. If a bowler bowls a slower ball with a noticably different arm speed then I'd have doubts to its effectiveness.

Does anyone have any slower ball suggestions while we're at it, cause mines crap! haha

 

[Swervy]

Doesn't the fact that the ball's spinning have something to do with achieving flight and the resulting dip? For example your spinners are applying spin on the ball which results in the seam rotating towards its intended target, wouldn't this ultimately result in the ball dipping towards the end of its flight? Conversely, you average quick/medium pace bowler imparts an element of backspin on the ball at release and combined with the pace the ball is travelling this basically results in no chance of any dip during the delivery. Presuming that when you're talking about dip you're not referring to a ball just dropping out of the sky when it loses velocity.

I'd suggest Richard that perhaps the dip you have seen from quicks bowling slower balls is either a result of the method they use to deliver the ball (eg: some bowlers use an off-spin (see Brett Lee) or Leg Spin (see big swervyn Mervyn Hughes) action to deliver a slower ball. It's usually held in a different position in the hand though and the arm speed is generally similar no mateer what action is used. If a bowler bowls a slower ball with a noticably different arm speed then I'd have doubts to its effectiveness.

Does anyone have any slower ball suggestions while we're at it, cause mines crap! haha

yeah..side spin on a ball creates drift across the pitch...top spin creates a dipper....but to have any noticable effect, the ball would need to be bowled slowly relative to the speed a fast bowler normally bowls at.

The arm speed has nothing to do with the flight of the ball..arm speed with a slower delivery is more of a deception tool....its how that ball comes out of the hand that matters.

 

[Son Of Coco]

yeah..side spin on a ball creates drift across the pitch...top spin creates a dipper....but to have any noticable effect, the ball would need to be bowled slowly relative to the speed a fast bowler normally bowls at.

The arm speed has nothing to do with the flight of the ball..arm speed with a slower delivery is more of a deception tool....its how that ball comes out of the hand that matters.

haha obviously, a guy that could impart spin, drift and dip on a ball at 160kms an hour would be impressive to watch though.

Doesn't arm speed combine to help you to rip the ball though when bowling spin to create the spin required to gain all these other advantages?

 

[Swervy]

haha obviously, a guy that could impart spin, drift and dip on a ball at 160kms an hour would be impressive to watch though.

Doesn't arm speed combine to help you to rip the ball though when bowling spin to create the spin required to gain all these other advantages?

a top spinner at 90mph ...now that would be something!!!!!

If you think about it, the only time the balls flight is influenced by the player is at the exact moment the ball leaves the fingers/hand..and so it can only be the fingers/hand that does anything to the ball.

By arm speed I think it is assumed we are talking about the speed the the arm travels from the horizontal behind the bowling shoulder to the point of release in that line between those two points (ie along the line the arm is travelling)...any influence the arm could possibly have on the ball could only be in twisting of the arm/wrist to impart spin on the ball..so that wouldnt be to do with arm speed....See what I mean..I think I do

 

[Son Of Coco]

a top spinner at 90mph ...now that would be something!!!!!

If you think about it, the only time the balls flight is influenced by the player is at the exact moment the ball leaves the fingers/hand..and so it can only be the fingers/hand that does anything to the ball.

By arm speed I think it is assumed we are talking about the speed the the arm travels from the horizontal behind the bowling shoulder to the point of release in that line between those two points (ie along the line the arm is travelling)...any influence the arm could possibly have on the ball could only be in twisting of the arm/wrist to impart spin on the ball..so that wouldnt be to do with arm speed....See what I mean..I think I do

I see what you mean. BUt if you hold a ball in your hand and simply spin it it turns a hell of a lot less than if you introduce the arm as well - well in my case it does anyway, but I'm not a spinner.

 

[Swervy]

I see what you mean. BUt if you hold a ball in your hand and simply spin it it turns a hell of a lot less than if you introduce the arm as well - well in my case it does anyway, but I'm not a spinner.

mmm. i see what YOU mean as well...but I am too tired to think about it ...will figure out this mind experiement in the morning

 

[Richard]

?????

Erm..the physics comes out again here...A simple study of ballistics/projectile formulae would suggest that in order for a ball to have what us cricketers would call 'flight' or 'dip' (or a ball which initally goes above the height of the point of release then travels downards, as opposed to a ball which travels in a downward direction immediately) and for that ball to to hit ceratin spots on the pitch within 20yards of its release point ie for the ball to pitch....the ball must be bowled slowly....if it wasnt then it would not pitch within the area of the pitch...or alternatively any flight perceived by the spectator would be an illusion, in that the ball would have to have been delivered towards the ground

I dont see how arm pace has anything to do with it, its the velocity and angle the ball comes out of the hand that is important.

Oh and 70mph for Stephenson was his bowling slowly

Err, yes, I know that - 70mph is slow for Stephenson and Cairns, and any fast-medium bowler. That's the gist of what I was saying.
You look at that Cairns ball to Read in 1999 - 72.7mph, and you tell me it didn't dip, violently. You tell me that was a spectator illusion.
Similar example with many of the balls bowled at Graham Thorpe in 2000, some successful, some not, but all achieving dip at 70mph and more.
I can't quite get my head round how the projectile theory would fit in with this, but obviously it can't defy the laws. Clearly the significant thing is the point at which the vertical (downward) vector starts to kick-in and turn the path from a straight one into a curved one.
But it is not, I don't think, up for question that it is possible to achieve loop and dip at any pace, if your arm comes over fast enough, and equally has slowing action put upon it.
All the best slower-balls are bowled with the same arm-speed, be they off-breaks (common), leg-breaks (rare), back-of-the-hand (see lots of that now Ian Harvey has publicised it) or held further back in the hand (Dilhara Fernando has perfected this best). The slower-ball where the bowler slows down his arm is very, very easy to pick.
But it also goes without saying that he who has looped and dipped the ball at 80mph is yet to grace public cricket!