HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
Yeah, it’s hard to tell the difference as Trumper and Noble seem to have similar builds….
-
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.
What was crickets best decade?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
“Dog Shot“ aside, Victor Trumper’s longest six apparently travelled for 110 metres and was at Redfern Oval, 1903. However, an office window in a nearby street got in the way, so the hit should have travelled about 150 metres.
Just to put that into perspective Chris Gayle’s longest six was 116 metres and Shahid Afridi’s World Record hit was 153 metres.
But they weren’t using old turn-of-the-century bats
Just to put that into perspective Chris Gayle’s longest six was 116 metres and Shahid Afridi’s World Record hit was 153 metres.
But they weren’t using old turn-of-the-century bats
Last edited:
Socerer 01
International Captain
never said anything about them struggling to bat aggressively, i know they were all hitters then and that doesn't change. what does change is them being exposed. bowlers then did not challenge batsmen to the extent they do today with variations because they had no need to. a tactic of 'just bowl short balls at them lads continuously' was a revolutionary idea that attracted scorn and shock because of how unfound it was. today it would be just dismissed as Root being a stupid captain or someone trying to mimic Wagnerball
Frank Woolley: A giant among the great English all-rounders - Cricket Country
As Frank Woolley said himself, "when I am batting, I am the attack..."www.cricketcountry.com
no one uses it because it is very tough to do it against bowlers who bowl as quick as today consistently? there is a reason why Natmeg isn't a serious thing in men's cricket. this is underselling the development of new ways to bat and new techniques that have developed since those times. far more believable than 'ancient humans were geniuses omg and we are pale imitations of them who can never do what they did'
they were great fielders relative to their contemporaries back then who were village. Constantine's best fielding effort that made jaws drop as per articles was him running backwards to take a diving catch. that would be a routine thing in today's world of boundary catches, relay catches, runouts from boundary line and dives. competent enough that you say would be them standing idly and pretending to give a chase as the ball runs to the boundary, not diving to try and stop a fast shot, not aggressively hunting down loose balls to deny singles being converted into doubles or triples. this doesn't even bring in their own lack of aggressive running between wickets that wasn't the norm then. its simply because cricket now is a more professional sport with tighter margins and thousands of smaller things that matter with each giving an advantage
as i've said give it 20-30 years and you'll have writers waxing lyrically about today's cricketers, a bunch of people who grew up watching them or had their favourite years in life mirroring today's cricket and they'll also attach nostalgia to this era and claim that everyone playing now was incredible against the ones playing in the future. pretending that people from eras ago would not be only competitive but thrash them is a nice fairytale that pairs well with how Neville Cardus and others wrote about a lot of those cricketers as larger than life figures who could do nothing wrong on the field but has no basis in reality
Socerer 01
International Captain
Larwood and Constantine were quick compared to their peers. they wouldn't be called quick if you were to drop them into today's cricket let alone seriously quick
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
I disagree, particularly with regards to Larwood. But if that's your view, fair enough - I don't think you're going to change it.
HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
The Australian Institute of Sport has estimated Larwood‘s bowling speed to be between 137 and 147 kph using film from the Adelaide Bodyline Test.
So I don’t think that there is any doubt that Larwood was capable of bowling deliveries in excess of 150 kph - an ‘express’ speed.
You can watch the Institute‘s methods and results on this ABC programme. Just go to the 9 min 45 sec mark, and then the 32 min 45 sec mark.
Socerer 01
International Captain
looks like I was mistaken with Larwood, not sure if I’d call him seriously quick as bowling 150 consistently is a rare skill but he was quick indeed if he can consistently bowl 140 and above
srbhkshk
International Captain
That is the exact sort of bull**** that gets famous about old timers. Also Shahid Afridi does not have a "world record" 153 meters.
HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
Longest Six in Cricket History: A comprehensive list - Cricnerds
Who has hit the longest six in cricket history? We take a look at some of the top players who have hit some mighty sixes over the years.
cricnerds.com
srbhkshk
International Captain
Those claims are a load of crap.Longest Six in Cricket History: A comprehensive list - Cricnerds
Who has hit the longest six in cricket history? We take a look at some of the top players who have hit some mighty sixes over the years.
This is an actual properly researched article -
https://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1026113/the-longest-shot
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
State Regular
And Constantine was just slightly slower than Larwood.With Australian Eddie Gilbert supposedly quicker for a short amount of time which would translate perfectly in T20s.
subshakerz
International Coach
Australia kind of defeat that argument.
Socerer 01
International Captain
2000s had one super team winning both odi world cups and generally being super dominant. don’t think that’s very competitive at all
Yeah true. I admit as an England fan I am biased. My memories of the 90s are rather grim
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Absolute dog act from Trumper.To quote Monty Noble….
Victor Trumper - A Tribute
Oh I am sorry. You know I used to get very small print on size "1" earlier but of late my PC is showing it fairly large thats why I used the type. I am afraid cant change for any but the very last post which I have. Tell me if its okay. Now fine - thanks SJS. Zwww.cricketweb.net
HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
If we can be reasonably certain that Larwood bowled around the 140 kph mark and was seriously quick, then why not look for eye-witness comparisons between pre-WW1 Test bowlers and Larwood?
trove.nla.gov.au
Bob Crockett umpired from 1901 to 1925 and was indeed a ‘World famous’ umpire when the newspaper article was published in 1932. He umpired in 32 Test matches, an Australian record which lasted until Tony Crafter beat the record in 1992.
So if the umpire says that Ernie Jones was faster than Harold Larwood then you have to take him reasonably seriously as he would have witnessed Ernie Jones up-close. Personally, I think that Crockett was being rather parochial in his estimation, but I don’t think that there could have been too much difference in pace between the two fast bowlers.
And so, if pre-WW1 batsman were able to score runs off a good fast bowler who (perhaps) bowled consistently in the 130s on uncovered pitches then we can assume that their techniques must have been pretty solid.
In my opinion, quality cricket of a high technical standard has been played for about 12 decades at the Test level. Obviously, quality batting, bowling and fielding is far more common at the lower levels in modern cricket; but the elite cricketers of Crockett’s time were truly elite.
Fast Bowlers I've Known - The Mail (Adelaide, SA : 1912 - 1954) - 31 Dec 1932
Ernie Jones Acclaimed the Fastest —Australians have faced greater men than Larwood and Voce without flinching. 'Squealing was discountenanced in pre-war days — Australia favored for the Ashes. ...
trove.nla.gov.au
Bob Crockett umpired from 1901 to 1925 and was indeed a ‘World famous’ umpire when the newspaper article was published in 1932. He umpired in 32 Test matches, an Australian record which lasted until Tony Crafter beat the record in 1992.
So if the umpire says that Ernie Jones was faster than Harold Larwood then you have to take him reasonably seriously as he would have witnessed Ernie Jones up-close. Personally, I think that Crockett was being rather parochial in his estimation, but I don’t think that there could have been too much difference in pace between the two fast bowlers.
And so, if pre-WW1 batsman were able to score runs off a good fast bowler who (perhaps) bowled consistently in the 130s on uncovered pitches then we can assume that their techniques must have been pretty solid.
In my opinion, quality cricket of a high technical standard has been played for about 12 decades at the Test level. Obviously, quality batting, bowling and fielding is far more common at the lower levels in modern cricket; but the elite cricketers of Crockett’s time were truly elite.
subshakerz
International Coach
The 2000s weren't amazing for England in LOI. Vaughn's reign was a highlight but 2010s was definitely their best decade since the 50s.
Socerer 01
International Captain
helps that England didn’t give a **** about it back then too
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
State Regular
Larwood was probably the first bloke to bowl in 145 in consistent basis.I am sure there would be bowlers in 130s prior to WW1.Mcdonald made his debut in internationals right after WW1 and he does seem like 135-140 ish bowler.If we can be reasonably certain that Larwood bowled around the 140 kph mark and was seriously quick, then why not look for eye-witness comparisons between pre-WW1 Test bowlers and Larwood?
Fast Bowlers I've Known - The Mail (Adelaide, SA : 1912 - 1954) - 31 Dec 1932
Ernie Jones Acclaimed the Fastest —Australians have faced greater men than Larwood and Voce without flinching. 'Squealing was discountenanced in pre-war days — Australia favored for the Ashes. ...
Bob Crockett umpired from 1901 to 1925 and was indeed a ‘World famous’ umpire when the newspaper article was published in 1932. He umpired in 32 Test matches, an Australian record which lasted until Tony Crafter beat the record in 1992.
So if the umpire says that Ernie Jones was faster than Harold Larwood then you have to take him reasonably seriously as he would have witnessed Ernie Jones up-close. Personally, I think that Crockett was being rather parochial in his estimation, but I don’t think that there could have been too much difference in pace between the two fast bowlers.
And so, if pre-WW1 batsman were able to score runs off a good fast bowler who (perhaps) bowled consistently in the 130s on uncovered pitches then we can assume that their techniques must have been pretty solid.
In my opinion, quality cricket of a high technical standard has been played for about 12 decades at the Test level. Obviously, quality batting, bowling and fielding is far more common at the lower levels in modern cricket; but the elite cricketers of Crockett’s time were truly elite.