Carrying on the tradition of Lillee, Thomson, Lee, Johnson

[Clarke]

Australia found a certain Chadd Sayers 

 

Its so unlike so many pace/seam/swing bowlers that have worn the baggie green; are they so out of options besides the front line or is he better than first impressions (ABDV wicket notwithstanding) ? 

Edited March 30, 2018 by Clarke

[hhhhdmt]

3 minutes ago, Clarke said:

Australia found a certain Chadd Sayers 

 

Its so unlike so many pace/seam/swing bowlers that have worn the baggie green; are they so out of options besides the front line or is he better than first impressions (ABDV wicket notwithstanding) ? 

They have always had bowlers like that. Remember Bichel? Or Stuart Clark? Good bowlers but hardly scary ones. Hell, even McGrath operated around 135 kph but was exceptional. 

[Clarke]

Firstly, McGrath is incomparable to any bowler of all time.

 

Secondly, did you watch the game ? This guy looks a proper trundler. I caught his second to last spell and he was around 120 kmph. I wasn't sure, checked his cricinfo profile page which says right arm medium. 

 

 

[hhhhdmt]

Just now, Clarke said:

Firstly, McGrath is incomparable to any bowler of all time.

 

Secondly, did you watch the game ? This guy looks a proper trundler. I caught his second to last spell and he was around 120 kmph. I wasn't sure, checked his cricinfo profile page which says right arm medium. 

 

 

1. Disagree. He was great. But Hadlee was a similar pace and was every bit as good. Pollock was nearly as good. Hazlewood might be as good in time. Garner is another one. 

 

I watched a few overs. 

 

I did not look at the speeds. I assumed he was around 130 kph. I am surprised by this too. 

 

But they have Hazlewood and Cummins so they will be fine. 

[Clarke]

119 kph with the new ball 

 

Aus inspired by the meteoric rise in Unadkat's fortunes (strictly financial). 

[vijaydude]

Following that tradition for real, is my homeboy, Pat Cummo! 

[Rightarmfast]

On 3/30/2018 at 9:11 PM, hhhhdmt said:

1. Disagree. He was great. But Hadlee was a similar pace and was every bit as good. Pollock was nearly as good. Hazlewood might be as good in time. Garner is another one. 

 

I watched a few overs. 

 

I did not look at the speeds. I assumed he was around 130 kph. I am surprised by this too. 

 

But they have Hazlewood and Cummins so they will be fine. 

I havent seen much of Hadlee, but whatever I saw suggests me Mcgrath a much much superior bowler to Hadlee till his match. Shaun Pollock was good but he was a couple of notches below Mcgrath. He was toothless for his last 3-4 yrs in cricket. Nobody feared facing Pollock. In his initial years, around 97ish- 99/2000, Pollock was respected. Not after that, not how I recall it.

[Lala]

I can remember Shaun Tait got used to bowl speed of 145-155 kmph spells continuously. Tait, Lee and Starc are the fastest modern day bowlers Aussie had.

[Tattieboy]

50 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

I havent seen much of Hadlee, but whatever I saw suggests me Mcgrath a much much superior bowler to Hadlee till his match. Shaun Pollock was good but he was a couple of notches below Mcgrath. He was toothless for his last 3-4 yrs in cricket. Nobody feared facing Pollock. In his initial years, around 97ish- 99/2000, Pollock was respected. Not after that, not how I recall it.

Richard Hadlee was like Jimmy Anderson but more accurate. His weapon was the away swinger and leg cutter . Very nice action .

 

[Rightarmfast]

2 hours ago, Tattieboy said:

Richard Hadlee was like Jimmy Anderson but more accurate. His weapon was the away swinger and leg cutter . Very nice action .

 

Yes, Richard Hadlee could have been a green track bully too but he wasnt an absolute dud in the subcontinent. I hope so. In any event, Hadlee was a proper bowler unlike clouderson.

Hadlee's action I remember was very smooth. Wonder how he would have performed in 90's and now.

[Nikhil_cric]

He's one of the most consistent performers in Shield cricket apparently and those wickets are quite flat. Current Australian batsmen are not the best players of swing bowling so maybe that's why he is so good in OZ domestics. Having said that, you can be successful in international cricket bowling at 130 kph and with a lack of height as long as you as have 2 other tall/pacy strike bowlers. A perfect example would be Philander. Sayers might just hace been unlucky to debut in a series in which Hazlewood looked quite toothless.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Nikhil_cric

[Tattieboy]

2 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Yes, Richard Hadlee could have been a green track bully too but he wasnt an absolute dud in the subcontinent. I hope so. In any event, Hadlee was a proper bowler unlike clouderson.

Hadlee's action I remember was very smooth. Wonder how he would have performed in 90's and now.

He would have had the same results in the 90's and even better results today as test cricket is full of ODI players playing on the up outside off stump just exactly what he wanted . 

[Clarke]

10 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

He would have had the same results in the 90's and even better results today as test cricket is full of ODI players playing on the up outside off stump just exactly what he wanted . 

Would he be the same attacking bowler and able to extract that swing/seam movement ? In essence would he be the same bowler of old ?

 

I'm generally wary of extrapolations these days 

[rkt.india]

On 3/30/2018 at 9:11 PM, hhhhdmt said:

1. Disagree. He was great. But Hadlee was a similar pace and was every bit as good. Pollock was nearly as good. Hazlewood might be as good in time. Garner is another one. 

 

I watched a few overs. 

 

I did not look at the speeds. I assumed he was around 130 kph. I am surprised by this too. 

 

But they have Hazlewood and Cummins so they will be fine. 

hadlee, hzlewood, bichel all were quicker. Cant say about hadlee but Bichel bowled 140KPH and Hazlewood bowled 140-145KPH.

[Tattieboy]

7 minutes ago, Clarke said:

Would he be the same attacking bowler and able to extract that swing/seam movement ? In essence would he be the same bowler of old ?

 

I'm generally wary of extrapolations these days 

Simple answer is yes .

The post under puts Hadlee , Bitchel and Hazelwood in the same sentence , oh dear oh dear 

[Rightarmfast]

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

hadlee, hzlewood, bichel all were quicker. Cant say about hadlee but Bichel bowled 140KPH and Hazlewood bowled 140-145KPH.

Yes Andy Bichel wasnt slow. His action looked slow, but the speeds were normally 140's. i think I have seen him clocking 145 too.

[Straight Drive]

It's tough to carry on legacy of Thomson and Lillee.

 

Thomson was probably the most brutal pace bowler with deadly approach towards hurting the batsmen and taking pleasure from that. Roberts was another one who did not care much about how much the batsmenn were hurt by his bouncers. They would even bowl full toss purposely. The two most ruthless pace bowlers I have ever seen. Thomson at his peak pace was totally ruthless in all aspects. No other Pacer can be compared to Thomson in terms of aggression, pace, striking ability at his peak. Brett Lee was too soft when compared with Thommo. He atleast had some feelings towards batsmen who were injured by his bowling. Thommo was well built with strong shoulders as compared to Dennis Lillee. When they operated in tandem they where as best a pair one would have witnessed in the game of cricket ever. Australia do not have a pair of bowlers as good as them.

[Stan AF]

On 4/5/2018 at 9:01 PM, Rightarmfast said:

Yes Andy Bichel wasnt slow. His action looked slow, but the speeds were normally 140's. i think I have seen him clocking 145 too.

He was ruthless in the 2003 CWC for Australia. Produced MOTM performances with both the ball and the bat.