Best Death Over Bowlers?

[superkingdave]

Hall sure is overrated because of that one over!

argh did you have to bring that up!

 

[Richard]

Yep!
Poor old Mal Loye.

 

[Link]

Hall sure is overrated because of that one over!

What is that not rightly so?

 

[Swervy]

Not at all, wickets in hand don't make unhittable balls into hittable ones.

is there such thing as an unhittable ball..apart from a wide of course

 

[tooextracool]

Hall sure is overrated because of that one over!

i thought you were referring to this one:
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard_ODI.asp?MatchCode=1711

 

[tooextracool]

is there such thing as an unhittable ball..apart from a wide of course

well placed yorker.

 

[Link]

well placed yorker.

simple steps down the pitch turns this into a half volley or even a full toss.

 

[tooextracool]

simple steps down the pitch turns this into a half volley or even a full toss.

umm you can step down the pitch to a pace bowler, unless you do it before the ball is bowled, which again defeats the purpose.
and even if you manage to do that, it will still end up being a low full toss, which again isnt easy to hit.

 

[Richard]

is there such thing as an unhittable ball..apart from a wide of course

Fine, then, a realistically unhittable ball. Jesus Christ, do you have to take everything to pedantism?

 

[Richard]

i thought you were referring to this one:
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard_ODI.asp?MatchCode=1711

IIRR Hall was still considered far more of a batsman in those days - of course he was keeping wicket in that match. It was a quite remarkable coincidence that he bowled such a seemingly brilliant over.
Most people in this country call Hall a good death-bowler because of that over in the Worcs-Lancs game, when in fact he's far from a good ODI bowler full-stop, let alone a good death-bowler.

 

[Richard]

What is that not rightly so?

There's nothing more ridiculous than rating a player based on a single match or over.
People have got to do something well many times before they've proven themselves good at it.

 

[marc71178]

Fine, then, a realistically unhittable ball. Jesus Christ, do you have to take everything to pedantism?

Anyone else spot the irony?

 

[Richard]

Probably, but you're the one who most likes to label every single one of my posts "ironic", so you can't bet everyone else will see this one as such.

 

[C_C]

There's nothing more ridiculous than rating a player based on a single match or over.

yes there is.
Its called 'trying to make ridiculous suggestions about what constitues a wicket-taking delivery and what doesn't' .

 

[Richard]

And there's also making ludicrous suggestions about the start of the professional age, the ability to know how quick deliveries were before speed-guns and the time cricket started, all of which are far more ridiculous than saying that a wicket-taking delivery has to involve some degree of movement, either in it or previous deliveries.

 

[Swervy]

Fine, then, a realistically unhittable ball. Jesus Christ, do you have to take everything to pedantism?

to be honest I dont think I was being pedantic...hey ho!!!!

 

[Richard]

You most certainly were - of course everything in cricket must always be prefaced with "realistically" because nothing in cricket is set-in-stone, but I'd guess you could use sensible innuendo rather than forcing me to do everything with such exactness.

 

[C_C]

And there's also making ludicrous suggestions about the start of the professional age, the ability to know how quick deliveries were before speed-guns and the time cricket started

it may be ridiculous for YOU. Not to mention that you are actually lying in the above quote.
The ability to know how quick a delivery is ( a finite actual numerical figure) and the ability to guage the speed relatively between two deliveries are two different things.

Suggestions about the start of the professional age and relative measurements of the eye are both socio-economically and medically established.

 

[Richard]

it may be ridiculous for YOU. Not to mention that you are actually lying in the above quote.
The ability to know how quick a delivery is ( a finite actual numerical figure) and the ability to guage the speed relatively between two deliveries are two different things.

Yes, it is, and one is totally impossible, the other requires a large percentage difference before it can be done.
Once you get up to 70mph there's no way anyone is going to be able to tell 70mph from 75mph if one is directly after the other, let alone if they're years apart.
If they're years or even days and hours apart it's perfectly possible that a diference of 10mph could be misdiagnosed.

Suggestions about the start of the professional age and relative measurements of the eye are both socio-economically and medically established.

The start of the professional age is established, statistically.
By 1900 far more than 50% of the best cricketers were professional, and that figure increased gradually over the next 50 years.

 

[Natman20]

McGrath would have to be a great death bowler