• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

fastest bowler ever?

Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
That depends on the ground, surely? If you did it at adelaide it would be quite an effort
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I always think speed through the air is a pretty ordinary measurement of a bowler's real quote-unquote "pace". I reckon TV coverage misses a trick by not regularly showing the reaction time a batsman has. They may correlate perfectly, of course, but from watching the time the batsmen seems to have doesn't always tie up with the speed gun.

I mean, as an example when he first came onto the international scene (or at least the first I saw of him) Shane Watson was bowling over 85mph consistently, but they were naked little nuts that moved not a jot through the air or off the deck and the batsman looked as if he had time to fire up the briar, check the morning paper and decide what cereal to have before he needed to offer a shot.

Seemed to hurry them up more when he cut the air velocity back and got a wee bit of hoop.
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The recent WC saw a lot of rapid bowling

Wood
Archer
Ferguson
Henry
Starc
Shami
Bumrah

were all really quick
 
0

_00_deathscar

International Regular
BoyBrumby said:
I always think speed through the air is a pretty ordinary measurement of a bowler's real quote-unquote "pace". I reckon TV coverage misses a trick by not regularly showing the reaction time a batsman has. They may correlate perfectly, of course, but from watching the time the batsmen seems to have doesn't always tie up with the speed gun.
Click to expand...
Yea there's many variables (bounce, swing etc that can make it much harder than just a ball that is X was tougher than Y because batsman had less reaction time), but surely the 'speed' should be the time taken from the release to the time it gets to the batsman (or crease if left alone)?
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
stephen said:
Tbf I don't think an attack of Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose and Murali would have stopped Clarke back then. Bloke was in the form of his life.
Click to expand...
The year after he was in even better form v South Africa

made double centuries against Steyn, Philander & Morkel for fun





(they were roads but still)
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
BoyBrumby said:
I always think speed through the air is a pretty ordinary measurement of a bowler's real quote-unquote "pace". I reckon TV coverage misses a trick by not regularly showing the reaction time a batsman has. They may correlate perfectly, of course, but from watching the time the batsmen seems to have doesn't always tie up with the speed gun.

I mean, as an example when he first came onto the international scene (or at least the first I saw of him) Shane Watson was bowling over 85mph consistently, but they were naked little nuts that moved not a jot through the air or off the deck and the batsman looked as if he had time to fire up the briar, check the morning paper and decide what cereal to have before he needed to offer a shot.

Seemed to hurry them up more when he cut the air velocity back and got a wee bit of hoop.
Click to expand...
The action has a lot to do with it. Guys with slingy actions are harder to pick up and have less tells than blokes with more orthodox actions who are even a bit faster - eg Johnson cf Lee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top