5 greatest cricketers since Don’s retirement.

[capt_Luffy]

Viv would do fine.

You are dumb

Sobers was one of the absolute greatest ever batsmen against genuine pace and we'll before his peak opened to Lindwall and Miller, and was told to attack them.

Bodyline was significantly more than just pace. Do you really think Larwood never bowled fast bouncers aimed for the head before? Look at this image. It's not just the bowling, but more so the fielding.

 

[Migara]

You are dumb
View attachment 48462

Bodyline was significantly more than just pace. Do you really think Larwood never bowled fast bouncers aimed for the head before? Look at this image. It's not just the bowling, but more so the fielding.

It is always about pace. Get Mustafizur Rahman, Ronni Irani and Manoj Prabhakar to bowl bodyline. They will get destroyed by most of the batsmen, what ever the field it is.

It was only Larwood. There was nothing after that even remotely quick as a WI pacemen. You don't need bodyline if you don't give much time to react.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It is always about pace. Get Mustafizur Rahman, Ronni Irani and Manoj Prabhakar to bowl bodyline. They will get destroyed by most of the batsmen, what ever the field it is.

It was only Larwood. There was nothing after that even remotely quick as a WI pacemen. You don't need bodyline if you don't give much time to react.

If this is true why did Larwood get demolished by bradman in every other series they played? What was the difference?

 

[Migara]

If this is true why did Larwood get demolished by bradman in every other series they played? What was the difference?

Difference with WI pace trio, Imran / Wasim, or Donald / Pollock bowling is that they are lot better than Larwood and faster than Larwood (perhaps Pollock later in the career was slower) and there is no playing a single bower out. Makes a huge difference.

It looks like other than for cricket, very sport has improved competitiveness and quality of the game.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Difference with WI pace trio, Imran / Wasim, or Donald / Pollock bowling is that they are lot better than Larwood and faster than Larwood (perhaps Pollock later in the career was slower) and there is no playing a single bower out. Makes a huge difference.

You didn't answer my question. You said the pace of Larwood was the issue in bodyline, not the field placing. So why did his pace get demolished by bradman in other series apart from the bodyline one? And earlier ashes in 1928 and 1930, Larwood was younger and presumably even faster. Did Larwood just not bother pitching it short?

 

[Migara]

You didn't answer my question. You said the pace of Larwood was the issue in bodyline, not the field placing. So why did his pace get demolished by bradman in other series apart from the bodyline one? And earlier ashes in 1928 and 1930, Larwood was younger and presumably even faster. Did Larwood just not bother pitching it short?

Nope. The field placing to be effective you need pace. Mustafizur, Ronii irani and Prabhakar is not going to do anything with that field.

Secondly, WI and Pak pacers of 80s was faster and better than Larwood and had way more tricks up their sleeve. Even with a limited version of the "bodyline" they can bring about the effect. Two things can be correct at the same time.

 

[Johan]

Secondly, WI and Pak pacers of 80s was faster and better than Larwood and had way more tricks up their sleeve. Even with a limited version of the "bodyline" they can bring about the effect. Two things can be correct at the same time.

Larwood is easily quicker than Imran and Wasim just to set things straight, and quicker than all the WI pacers except Holding as well unless I see something worth looking at from Clarke, He was a freak of speed who was treated as the fastest until Tyson and then Thomson. Secondly, Larwood in the famed Bodyline got 17 of his 33 wickets either bowled or LBW, Nothing to do with the field, Bumrah got 10 bowled in his big series, Ambrose got like 4. Larwood dismissing Bradman with bowled twice in one series is a boon for him and not a curse for Bradman, considering even old Bradman easily slapped around peak Lindwall, we have seen even mid players reach transcendent levels of short patches (Mitchell Johnson anyone?) and Larwood was a bowler of fairly high class, at his peak too.

Now field placements, once again you're very wrong, because Bodyline worked for the likes of William Voce who were very much medium pacers, all you really need was extra bounce and the trick worked, you name medium bowlers but bodyline was a strategy equipped for fast bowlers, not medium bowlers. Now, we literally saw how the restrictions change cricket last match when Siraj was simply knocking the ball to the leg side, you can't do that with bodyline, as one of the five fielders will eventually get the catch

what does any pacer of the 70s and 80s pacers have over Bradman that's not leaching off of Larwood's achievements?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Larwood is easily quicker than Imran and Wasim just to set things straight, and quicker than all the WI pacers except Holding as well unless I see something worth looking at from Clarke,

I'm a big Larwood fan, but he wouldn't have been faster than Patrick Patterson.

 

[Johan]

I'm a big Larwood fan, but he wouldn't have been faster than Patrick Patterson.

Patterson wasn't all that quick on average, it was his fastest deliveries that were absurdly quick, on average I don't reckon he was all that in pace.

 

[Johan]

Also, Larwood with Bodyline would destroy Viv, his game has too many leg side strokes with the pulls and hooks, would work if he can clear the field but eventually he'd give a top edge and give out, with 5 or 6 fielders on the leg side tempting for a hook or pull any mistiming is out. Even if he gets 10 pulls off before one bad one he'd still not get to 60-70, and that's with absurd luck considering Larwood is quicker than anyone Viv faced barring Thomson, and Larwood is a lot more accurate and has more movement than Thomson. Can't see him averaging more than 45, likely the same as McCabe, one big innings and then just the cutting and hooking comes back to bite in the ass.

Again, asking a leg side dominant player to be consistently successful against bodyline is no different than asking a human to breathe in space, it just does not work.

 

[shortpitched713]

Also, Larwood with Bodyline would destroy Viv, his game has too many leg side strokes with the pulls and hooks, would work if he can clear the field but eventually he'd give a top edge and give out, with 5 or 6 fielders on the leg side tempting for a hook or pull any mistiming is out. Even if he gets 10 pulls off before one bad one he'd still not get to 60-70, and that's with absurd luck considering Larwood is quicker than anyone Viv faced barring Thomson, and Larwood is a lot more accurate and has more movement than Thomson. Can't see him averaging more than 45, likely the same as McCabe, one big innings and then just the cutting and hooking comes back to bite in the ass.

Again, asking a leg side dominant player to be consistently successful against bodyline is no different than asking a human to breathe in space, it just does not work.

Peak Viv could just see him out, as assuming this is an English bowling attack, there would be no other threats.

 

[Johan]

Peak Viv could just see him out, as assuming this is an English bowling attack, there would be no other threats.

Who do you want him to attack? Voce was a damn excellent bowler, and Verity was the master of tying up an end. What made Bodyline so successful was an actually competent all round attack rather than reliance on one or two star bowlers, Larwood was exceptional, but then you have guys like Voce, Bowes and Allen who bowled very well too, and Verity was exceptional at his craft even if a bit defensive. At the end of the day, High level Cricket is about eliminating weaknesses and that's exactly what Jardine did with the attack.

 

[shortpitched713]

He'd attack the rest with impunity, because they simply didn't have the pace and/or movement to trouble the eye and reflexes of peak Viv. It's really that simple. He did it all the time in his heyday with "very good" Test class bowlers.

It wouldn't always come off, but it would often enough to get good returns. Bradman did pretty well himself against Bodyline, and I'd expect similar results for Viv.

 

[Johan]

Considering the bowlers who dismissed Viv the most included the likes of Kapil Dev (similar to Alec Bedser) and Ian Botham who was about Bedser speed through air, much slower through the pitch, and the likes of Alderman dismissed him who was slow too, I'd reckon Pace isn't really a part of equation as slower bowlers than either Allen or Voce did him in many times. Nothing to suggest the movement they gained is different.

and that's my point, it wouldn't always come out, he'd have on and off output rather than consistency against an average/decent attack using Bodyline, but an attack of Peak Larwood-Voce-Allen-Verity is easily above 98% if not 99% of the attacks Viv faced, and his career average is 50, and now you're trying to convince me that somehow his output (50) won't drop when facing the attack with a fielding setting that is the direct antithesis to Viv's style? eh

Expecting Viv to consistently have Bradman level results is also not reasonable, it's like expecting Kagiso Rabada to have the same batting output as Ian Botham, it's simply not possible.

 

[kyear2]

You are dumb
View attachment 48462

Bodyline was significantly more than just pace. Do you really think Larwood never bowled fast bouncers aimed for the head before? Look at this image. It's not just the bowling, but more so the fielding.

So let's take this step by step.

Is the threat getting out or getting hit?

Sobers nor Viv ever wore a helmet either. Viv faces just as hostile an attack in Australia in '75, limitless bouncers, Lillee bowling from a quarter way down the pitch with no no balls called. Larwood and Voce vs Lillee and Thompson .

You think a few extra fielders around the bat flustered either?

Have you ever watched fast bowling from the 70's and 80's? The WI used similar tactics vs Hammond, and similar tactics were used against us even well before then as well.

 

[capt_Luffy]

So let's take this step by step.

Is the threat getting out or getting hit?

Sobers nor Viv ever wore a helmet either. Viv faces just as hostile an attack in Australia in '75, limitless bouncers, Lillee bowling from a quarter way down the pitch with no no balls called. Larwood and Voce vs Lillee and Thompson .

You think a few extra fielders around the bat flustered either?

Have you ever watched fast bowling from the 70's and 80's? The WI used similar tactics vs Hammond, and similar tactics were used against us even well before then as well.

I will be genuinely concerned if you really think it wouldn't have mattered if Australia placed 7 close in leg side catchers. Let me rephrase, fast bouncer barrages wasn't the issue with Bodyline, bouncer barrages with that field placement was. The threat is of getting out while trying to protect body or getting hurt while grasping to hold onto your wicket. Nothing was the exact same as this before and definitely not since

 

[kyear2]

I will be genuinely concerned if you really think it wouldn't have mattered if Australia placed 7 close in leg side catchers. Let me rephrase, fast bouncer barrages wasn't the issue with Bodyline, bouncer barrages with that field placement was. The threat is of getting out while trying to protect body or getting hurt while grasping to hold onto your wicket. Nothing was the exact same as this before and definitely not since

And we obviously disagree.

According to the rules of cricket today, most of the field pictured is legal, and the rest quite frankly mostly redundant.

I recall when Australia used to lay hook traps for Richards and especially Richardson.

It wasn't 2 backward short legs, and 3 forward short legs, it was a fine leg, a square leg or some variation of the field that Stokes employed last week.

You got them out hooking on the boundary. It wasn't the skipping around, and before you ask, there was no body armour used and at that point Richie wasn't wearing a helmet either.

If someone thinks that field is an issue to top tier players of fast bowling, then they seriously need to revisit the 70's and 80's.

That field is used if your ability to pace is seen as a weakness or liability. No one is utilizing that field to Viv or a few others for that matter.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And we obviously disagree.

According to the rules of cricket today, most of the field pictured is legal, and the rest quite frankly mostly redundant.

I recall when Australia used to lay hook traps for Richards and especially Richardson.

It wasn't 2 backward short legs, and 3 forward short legs, it was a fine leg, a square leg or some variation of the field that Stokes employed last week.

You got them out hooking on the boundary. It wasn't the skipping around, and before you ask, there was no body armour used and at that point Richie wasn't wearing a helmet either.

If someone thinks that field is an issue to top tier players of fast bowling, then they seriously need to revisit the 70's and 80's.

That field is used if your ability to pace is seen as a weakness or liability. No one is utilizing that field to Viv or a few others for that matter.

It's literally not largely any longer. They literally changed the law in 1935 and restricted the no. of shortlegs to 2. What are you on?? Like, did you seriously just say Viv won't be bothered by this tactic, as much he was by a ****ing hook trap! WTF

 

[Coronis]

It's literally not largely any longer. They literally changed the law in 1935 and restricted the no. of shortlegs to 2. What are you on?? Like, did you seriously just say Viv won't be bothered by this tactic, as much he was by a ****ing hook trap! WTF

Leave the delusions alone. Some people think bouncers = bodyline and will never be able to make a meaningful distinction.

 

[Johan]

According to the rules of cricket today, most of the field pictured is legal, and the rest quite frankly mostly redundant.

I recall when Australia used to lay hook traps for Richards and especially Richardson.

It wasn't 2 backward short legs, and 3 forward short legs, it was a fine leg, a square leg or some variation of the field that Stokes employed last week.

You got them out hooking on the boundary. It wasn't the skipping around, and before you ask, there was no body armour used and at that point Richie wasn't wearing a helmet either..

Ignoring how you're entirely incorrect on the first statement.

The fact Viv was even vulnerable to Hook trap enough that Australia thought it's a viable strategy means that he's finished against bodyline, literally all it'd take is a single mistiming, which is very easily to do against a 150kmph+ barrage or extra bounce from Voce, and you have seven guys standing in the exact position needed for the trap to succeed instead of two.

single mistime, ball doesn't clear all the way to the boundary, easy catch, you cannot score against Bodyline with a leg side dominant game, period.