Future of fast bowling in India

[kvemuri]

Um, yes, I do watch cricket. Many of his wickets have been against tailenders.

if you can't fight the stats, then you resort to "potential" and "talent".

If you go by stats only AA would be one of the finest strike bowlers India has produced, he has close to or more than 250 wkts in ODI cricket. Although stats do explain some amount of story, they necessarily don't depict the entire story. Against Pakistan in the 3rd ODI (in which Shoaib Malik smacked 108 ), Indian fielders dropped at least 3/4 catches in the slips off Sreesanth's bowling alone (including Malik on 12) which signifies how much he was troubling Pakistani batsmen initially and definitely shows a level of potential.

Let me guess, you're from his state.

Thats an absolute dumb and rubbish statement to say the least, totally negates any value to your arguement. You want the best players (whatever bleeping state they might be from) who can represent the nation and you root for them because they belong to the country that you bloody support, if you cannot get that through please stop posting rubbish as this. Statements like these only exemplfy your short sightedness and bigotory.

 

[adharcric]

Thank you kvemuri.
Although I think that guy abandoned CW out of shame already.

 

[kvemuri]

Thank you kvemuri.
Although I think that guy abandoned CW out of shame already.

anytime adharcric, off late statements like these are irritating me more and more, especially when i read some of the so called discussion boards on cricketnext and expressindia.com, its exasperating to say the least. Few years ago if you supported Ganguly, when they were booing him in Delhi, after he had done so much for Indian cricket, the comment used to be "you belong to Ganguly's state don't you", now when you don't want him in team cause of his prima donna attitude its because "you belong to Dravid's state don't you" and then you got idiot ministers commenting dropping Ganguly is an "insult to their state", what about the country you idiots? where does that go? where does that rank in your judgement? also what next today state tommorrow city, day after colony? what the hell is wrong with people?

I am from the same state as Laxman and Venu are from, hell from the same city and I feel very strongly that both are not suited to play the ODI format of the game as they suck at it and I completely support Kaif (who is in abysmal form right now) as I believe he is the one of the best ODI players India has produced over the past few years and am willing to give him some more chances, heck I even went a step further and stated that he should replace Laxman in tests, although I believe Laxman is an extremely talented test batsman. By standards shown by some people I should've been screaming for his and Viru's head about 6 months ago. Just irritates the hell out of me, anyways enough of my rant.

 

[adharcric]

You have every right to rant and you're right, the Indian cricket public as a whole really puts us all to shame. So many claim to be "true cricket fans" and then go around rioting, burning effigies and bringing politics into the game like idiots. Others show a pathetic lack of patience and overreact to success and failure alike ... the selectors have suffered from this disease in the past and Indian cricket has taken the hit.

As for me, I'm originally from Kashmir but I lived in Chandigarh before I came to the US. Yes, I am really fond of Suresh Raina and Yuvraj Singh, but it isn't just because the former is the first KP migrant to play for India and the latter is from my hometown. I've been backing Munaf, VRV & Sreesanth ... Dravid, Dhoni & Sachin ... hell, even the "foreign" Aussie Greg Chappell ... so someone accusing me of regionalism is bizarre. Anyways, there's my rant.

 

[Richard]

Bowling machine manufacturers use the pace settings as a guide. They are not, for example, held to the same standards as the manufacturers of medical equipment.

A bowling machine is a training tool and the speed is an approximation. The manufacturers make few claims that the speed is scientifically accurate to within 1kph or anything and cannot be sued if a ball set at 135 kph comes out at 125 kph (this does happen).

I'd like to know how approximate the things are (never loaded one, so have never looked).

 

[adharcric]

No one really gives a crap about whether bowling machines are accurate or not. Cut the bull and start a new thread for it if you want; don't pollute this one with off-topic stuff.

 

[Richard]

Really?
I'd say the accuracy of the speed of bowling-machines is extremely important if you're trying to use one.
In any case - why the hell does 1 or 2 people talking about that stop you from talking about what you want to talk about?

 

[adharcric]

It's not that they don't mean anything. If they do to you, that's perfectly alright. It's just strange to see a thread for "Future of fast bowling in India" clogged with debates about bowling machines. There is something called a new thread, you know?

 

[Richard]

Yes, and why create new threads when you can use one that already exists?
What does it matter what the title of a thread is? Discussion in any thread can be about anything so long as it's on-topic for the forum.

 

[Jono]

Surely you can see that its fairly irrelevant to the topic, and, just for sheer courtesy, should be placed in a new thread if the discussion gets heavy.

 

[Sanz]

Yes, and why create new threads when you can use one that already exists?
What does it matter what the title of a thread is? Discussion in any thread can be about anything so long as it's on-topic for the forum.

Oh Richards, do you ever say 'I am wrong' ?

Anyways - Why not abandon this idea of multiple threads, let's discuss everything in one master thread, a type I have seen on many non-cricket forums and evry time I have tried to visit those threads I have left without posting.

 

[luckyeddie]

Oh Richards, do you ever say 'I am wrong' ?

Anyways - Why not abandon this idea of multiple threads, let's discuss everything in one master thread, a type I have seen on many non-cricket forums and evry time I have tried to visit those threads I have left without posting.

Good idea.

Can we include locust and grasshopper-related subjects as well as cricket?

 

[Richard]

Surely you can see that its fairly irrelevant to the topic, and, just for sheer courtesy, should be placed in a new thread if the discussion gets heavy.

1, it hasn't got heavy.
2, it's not irrelevant to the topic - the topic of the forum is "Cricket Chat".

 

[Richard]

Oh Richards, do you ever say 'I am wrong' ?

Not very often, because I'm careful not to say too many things that could be proven conclusively wrong.

Anyways - Why not abandon this idea of multiple threads, let's discuss everything in one master thread, a type I have seen on many non-cricket forums and evry time I have tried to visit those threads I have left without posting.

Where was that suggested again?

 

[adharcric]

1, it hasn't got heavy.
2, it's not irrelevant to the topic - the topic of the forum is "Cricket Chat".

How convenient. You revert to the topic of the "forum" when what we're all talking about is the topic of the "thread". Really, it doesn't take that much to start a new thread. As Jono stated, just for courtesy sake and to keep the forum a little structured. Otherwise, we could go with Sanz's proposition of having one grand forum on the internet where people could freely discuss cooking, Shane Warne, yoga and neurobiology together. By your approach, they are all relevant to our world so we might as well discuss them in a single place.

If you're unwilling to budge, just drop the discussion and go on with what you're doing.

 

[Richard]

As I say - it's my estimation that discussion in threads evolves.
If you ban any discussion in a thread (aside from *Official* tour threads) that doesn't relate exactly to the title you'll have very few interesting threads.
As far as I'm concerned, as long as something relates to cricket, no-one has any right to say "you're not allowed to discuss this in this thread" (as long, obviously, as it's not just fire-throwing).

 

[adharcric]

You certainly have a right to discuss whatever you'd like.
I'm just saying that if you feel this topic of bowling machines is interesting, you might as well start a new thread dedicated to it and keep this thread dedicated to the intended subject.
For people who come to this thread wanting to read about the future of indian fast bowling, I'm sure they'd prefer to read about that rather than bowling machines.
Really, it's not such a big deal. Just courtesy, but if that's not the way you feel that's alright.

 

[Richard]

As I say - people wanting to read about Indian bowling really aren't likely to have a problem skipping the 2 or 3 posts about the accuracy of bowling-machine-speeds (or, indeed, the topic of keeping threads on title-topic)..
I don't think a thread of title-topic "are bowling-machine speeds accurate?" is likely to last more than 5 or 6 posts - which to me qualifies as something of a waste of a thread.
I think it's far better to have those 5 or 6 posts in another thread, around which others can discuss whatever they like.

 

[luckyeddie]

You certainly have a right to discuss whatever you'd like.
I'm just saying that if you feel this topic of bowling machines is interesting, you might as well start a new thread dedicated to it and keep this thread dedicated to the intended subject.
For people who come to this thread wanting to read about the future of indian fast bowling, I'm sure they'd prefer to read about that rather than bowling machines.
Really, it's not such a big deal. Just courtesy, but if that's not the way you feel that's alright.

That reminds me so much of one of Michael Palin's Ripping Yarns, "The Testing of Eric Olthwaite".

He found shovels fascinating, and his conversations were invariably about them, or observations about the colour of black pudding, as in "Black puddings are black today, mother - even the white bits are black".

He was a Yorkshireman too.

 

[Sanz]

Just courtesy, but if that's not the way you feel that's alright.

Awww, I wasn't looking for that kind of polite talk after all the 'crap talk'. I was expecting some tough stand from you softboy.