Yeah, will have to have some humble pie here. Has been a genuinely herculean effort from the suspiciously aged-looking twenty four year old today.
When he gets it wrong he looks so awful I still can't quite bring myself to say I was wrong, but has gone a lot better than I thought possible based on what I saw of him in the Caribbean.
TBF, unlike in Pakistan there are many fewer who have dodgy ages reported for India.Pfft. I'd sooner believe his kids are 24.
I believed Afridi was 28 aswellGreat find for India. The ball that took out Trott was bloody good. How does he generate so much swing at such little pace, is it the wrist position or is it to do with something else.
I thought he looked 30 but if he says he is 24 than I will take his word for it because I was one of the people who believed Amir was 17.
He doesnt look serious with a nicely trimmed 5 o'clock shadow -I think hangover type stubble makes all blokes look older, I still look about 15 when clean shaven.
That doesn't make a dramatic amount of sense as it's usually the 75-80mph bowlers that generate the most swing, and we've all seen club bowlers sending them down at 60 getting extravagant movement... I've seen kids bowling at 35/40 getting big hoop.Great find for India. The ball that took out Trott was bloody good. How does he generate so much swing at such little pace, is it the wrist position or is it to do with something else.
I thought he looked 30 but if he says he is 24 than I will take his word for it because I was one of the people who believed Amir was 17.
Don't mind my lack of cricketing knowledge, as I have seriously picked up cricket only recently, before which I was just a casual watcher.That doesn't make a dramatic amount of sense as it's usually the 75-80mph bowlers that generate the most swing, and we've all seen club bowlers sending them down at 60 getting extravagant movement... I've seen kids bowling at 35/40 getting big hoop.
But yeah, wrist position one would imagine.
Amir looked closer to 17 than Kumar does to 24 for my money.I thought he looked 30 but if he says he is 24 than I will take his word for it because I was one of the people who believed Amir was 17.
It's not difficult to fake your age in the Indian ranks. A lot of U-17, U-19 and other age group players are comfortably 3 or 4 years older than what ages they provide. Such affidavits can be obtained quite easily. I imagine the case is similar for other sub-continental nations too.Amir looked closer to 17 than Kumar does to 24 for my money.
Might just look old for his age, obviously; some people do. However I was genuinely surprised was only 24. I assumed he was one of those old salts who'd been around the domestic scene forever before finally getting the call to the national team.
I understand what you are saying, but if it came down to it I would always prefer to watch an Akhtar rather than a Kumar.It's not difficult to fake your age in the Indian ranks. A lot of U-17, U-19 and other age group players are comfortably 3 or 4 years older than what ages they provide. Such affidavits can be obtained quite easily. I imagine the case is similar for other sub-continental nations too.
Back to the topic, respect for PK. I always had confidence that he would do well in English conditions. On a personal note, I am very happy that a bowler who bowls in the mid-late 70s and relies on swinging the ball has been successful. The lad had been written off by a lot of people even before the test series started. It just goes to emphasise that top pace without direction and bowling acumen is perhaps viewed too leniently. That SHOULD NOT be the case. Bowlers must be gauged on merit and by no means does greater pace equate to greater potential. Other factors are just as important, if not more.
Go, swing bowlers!![]()
It is not that easy to fake age at this level in India these days.
I understand that. Personally, I would watch a pure swing bowler like Alderman or Kumar over an out-and-out pace bowling guy with no ball skills. Akhtar doesn't quite fit the bill because he was very clever (as a bowler) and could reverse it beautifully.I understand what you are saying, but if it came down to it I would always prefer to watch an Akhtar rather than a Kumar.
Maybe Kumar is confused about how old he is.Amir looked closer to 17 than Kumar does to 24 for my money.
Might just look old for his age, obviously; some people do. However I was genuinely surprised was only 24. I assumed he was one of those old salts who'd been around the domestic scene forever before finally getting the call to the national team.