express bowling Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Nasty deliveries. A few of them were 145ishPeople talk a lot about Marshall, Akram, Imran etc ( I have generally been disappointed by their pace when you compare it to their reputation ) .....but it was Garner who bowled loads of nasty deliveries primarily because of his height ( 6'8" ), action and seam position. Edited January 5, 2016 by express bowling Link to comment
maniac Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Batsmen of the '70s and '80s did not have bowling machines to practice against. They were much slower in terms of body movement compared to modern batsmen too. The bats they used were far inferior and they did not have adequate protective gearAs a result ....In most of these old videos , the technique used by top international batsmen against short balls was horrible really. Also the technique adopted by later batsman with moving there backfoot across and trying to smack through the line .... Some of these bowlers would have been cannon fodder with the lines they are bowling.but credit where due to the older generation of batters, the unlimited short bowling adopted by windies and tosome extent the Aussies and the lack of good protective gear meant that these batsmen were constantly on their toes.....look at the helmets in that Marshall video.even with the new helmets we have had one of the greatest tragedy on the cricket field in the modern era of protective gear...... Aaron hitting broad, srinath hitting Pringle and that lankan keeper and other such incidents..... So can't really blame the older bats for having a bad technique against short pitch. Edited January 5, 2016 by maniac Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Also the technique adopted by later batsman with moving there backfoot across and trying to smack through the line .... Some of these bowlers would have been cannon fodder with the lines they are bowling.but credit where due to the older generation of batters, the unlimited short bowling adopted by windies and tosome extent the Aussies and the lack of good protective gear meant that these batsmen were constantly on their toes.....look at the helmets in that Marshall video.even with the new helmets we have had one of the greatest tragedy on the cricket field in the modern era of protective gear...... Aaron hitting broad, srinath hitting Pringle and that lankan keeper and other such incidents..... So can't really blame the older bats for having a bad technique against short pitch.Very true....which is why I pointed out the reasons in my post. But today's batsmen... with current super bats, protective gear, practice against bowling machines cranked up to 90 miles +, extreme fitness and modern batting techniques with back and across movement and wider feet stance...would have dealt with continuous short bowling much much better and smacked many 4's and 6's. Link to comment
Rightarmfast Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 Was going through epsn page, it labels Merv Hughes and Craig Mcdermott as " Right Arm Fast ". No way in the world was Hughes fast. Mcdermott would be fast medium at his fastest. So exactly the point, a lot of bias, based on the country or origin of the bowler and physical appearance. express bowling 1 Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Was going through epsn page, it labels Merv Hughes and Craig Mcdermott as " Right Arm Fast ". No way in the world was Hughes fast. Mcdermott would be fast medium at his fastest. So exactly the point, a lot of bias, based on the country or origin of the bowler and physical appearance.Both were fast-medium bowlers. Hughes got some extra bounce because of his height.Another good example of bias at play regarding pace bowlers. Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Here is a Youtube video of Merv Hughes bowling in 1986 aged 25Botham is not even wearing a helmet Rightarmfast 1 Link to comment
maniac Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Youtube video showing Imran Khan and other Pakistani pacers bowling on the bouncy tracks of Australia No wonder coke and Pepsi sales where a lot more in the 80s than now......it's not the product but more the bottlecaps that were in demand especially by the pakis sarfaraz nawaz the original tamperer Link to comment
Rightarmfast Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 And honestly speaking, Hughes is bowling much quicker by his standards in this video :P Link to comment
maniac Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 And honestly speaking, Hughes is bowling much quicker by his standards in this video :PHughes was a trundler.... McDermott was kind of like akram... quick when he started and then settled down basically focusing on his skills.anyone remember the allrounder Simon o donnell from Australia.....he once held the record for the fastest 50 in odis.....he was the first guy I ever remember breaking a stump while clean bowling a batsman.tom moody was another guy who was pretty quick when he started but then became a bits and pieces trundler. Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 And honestly speaking, Hughes is bowling much quicker by his standards in this video :PThat is because he is trying to bounce the ball as he is getting hit mercilessly.When he pitched the ball up, he often looked medium-fast. Link to comment
fineleg Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Did Curtly Ambrose extract bounce regularly? Link to comment
Rightarmfast Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 Yes, with that height of his, ofcourse he did. He was quicker than Courtney Walsh. He would be normally around 137- 145. Link to comment
putrevus Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Malcolm Marshall in this video didnt look so quick. The first ball was medium pace around 130'ish. The other deliveries looked a bit quicker than that. Still looks like 135-138 stuff to me.Imran has never looked express to me. Even in this video, he looks more of a 135ish bowler than a 150 bowler. Thats my take. What are your views?Marshall was bit faster than Dale Steyn with a better bouncer. It took time for him to hone his skills but once he got into WI team , he became the best bowler of his generation and may be the best fast bowler in history because in addition to speed he had all other skills , he could swing, seam and bowler cutters.I don't think any WI bowler knew how to reverse swing."Malcolm Marshall was the best bowler. He was not huge, released the ball late, bowled sharp, was up there, bowled pretty quick. He just got wickets everywhere, on pitches where we never did" Jeff Thompson.As Holding stated many times they did not need reverse swing as most of them were so quick thru the air and the bounce they generated they were more than enough to petrify any batting line up anywhere in world.Shaun Tait or Akthar might have cracked 160 but they would not be even good enough to tie laces of these WI bowlers, as they were so relentlessly accurate.Deadly pace with bounce combined with accuracy made those guys so great. Link to comment
rkt.india Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Marshall was bit faster than Dale Steyn with a better bouncer. It took time for him to hone his skills but once he got into WI team , he became the best bowler of his generation and may be the best fast bowler in history because in addition to speed he had all other skills , he could swing, seam and bowler cutters.I don't think any WI bowler knew how to reverse swing."Malcolm Marshall was the best bowler. He was not huge, released the ball late, bowled sharp, was up there, bowled pretty quick. He just got wickets everywhere, on pitches where we never did" Jeff Thompson.As Holding stated many times they did not need reverse swing as most of them were so quick thru the air and the bounce they generated they were more than enough to petrify any batting line up anywhere in world.Shaun Tait or Akthar might have cracked 160 but they would not be even good enough to tie laces of these WI bowlers, as they were so relentlessly accurate.Deadly pace with bounce combined with accuracy made those guys so great. Marshall quicker than Steyn then you are talking about Akhtar -lee category bowler which he wasn't. He just didn't have the action to bowl express. There's not a single video where heis shown to bowl express.what made those bowlers was batsmen who weren't able to handle the pace. adi B, Rightarmfast and putrevus 3 Link to comment
Rightarmfast Posted January 6, 2016 Author Share Posted January 6, 2016 A lot of batsmen found Ajit Agarkar ' pretty quick'. And that's because of his short and thin frame, they didnt expect him to be bowling at around 145k's which he used to do. Could be similar with Marshall. Marshall although would have been a couple of yards quicker than him, but not Akhtar category. Link to comment
rkt.india Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 A lot of batsmen found Ajit Agarkar ' pretty quick'. And that's because of his short and thin frame, they didnt expect him to be bowling at around 145k's which he used to do. Could be similar with Marshall. Marshall although would have been a couple of yards quicker than him, but not Akhtar category.Agarkar wasnt a 145K bowler, just here and there, he did, but he was usually a 136-142 bowler. Marshall looks a bit quicker than Agarkar in that ODI video but he too was not express, probably as quick as Umesh Yadav at best. Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Agarkar wasnt a 145K bowler, just here and there, he did, but he was usually a 136-142 bowler. Marshall looks a bit quicker than Agarkar in that ODI video but he too was not express, probably as quick as Umesh Yadav at best.Marshall bowled at his peak pace for only a few years. Could have been 135 k to 150 k at his peak 4 years or so but slowed down after that. Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) Marshall quicker than Steyn then you are talking about Akhtar -lee category bowler which he wasn't. He just didn't have the action to bowl express. There's not a single video where he is shown to bowl express. what made those bowlers was batsmen who weren't able to handle the pace. Exactly. Edited January 6, 2016 by express bowling Link to comment
express bowling Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) Marshall was bit faster than Dale Steyn with a better bouncer. It took time for him to hone his skills but once he got into WI team , he became the best bowler of his generation and may be the best fast bowler in history because in addition to speed he had all other skills , he could swing, seam and bowler cutters.I don't think any WI bowler knew how to reverse swing. "Malcolm Marshall was the best bowler. He was not huge, released the ball late, bowled sharp, was up there, bowled pretty quick. He just got wickets everywhere, on pitches where we never did" Jeff Thompson. As Holding stated many times they did not need reverse swing as most of them were so quick thru the air and the bounce they generated they were more than enough to petrify any batting line up anywhere in world.Shaun Tait or Akthar might have cracked 160 but they would not be even good enough to tie laces of these WI bowlers, as they were so relentlessly accurate.Deadly pace with bounce combined with accuracy made those guys so great. Marshall and Steyn were about the same pace in their peak years . Steyn is actually a quicker bowler than Marshall if we compare their later years.Marshall was a very very good bowler, combined high skill with good pace at his peak....no doubt about that.Jeff Thompson and a couple of other bowlers of his era depended mainly on bounce and pace off the pitch, to take wickets. They did not have other skills to succeed on non- bouncy tracks. Marshall and Lillee had the necessary tools to succeed in various types of conditions.It is true that the great West Indian pacers were very accurate. But their accuracy was aided a lot by the fact that the batsmen of that era rarely attacked the bowlers and basically defended with some rare shots. There were many batsmen who played at less than 20 SR for a large part of their innings. There were only a handful of players like Richards, Botham, Kapil etc. who played fast, especially in test matches. We saw how a spraygun bowler like Umesh bowled good line and length when the SA batsmen stopped attacking him in the last innings of the last test match against SA.Bad quality bats, compared to today ,was also responsible for the complete domination of great bowlers of that era.Lack of adequate protective gear and unlimited bouncer rule also contributed to their domination and hence accuracy. Most of those bowlers would still be good bowlers today but would not be able to dominate so much ....because of much better bats, much better protective gear, only 2 bouncers allowed, batsmen are far more attacking, have much better techniques against short balls, practice against bowling machines etc.I would guess Lillee, Marshall and Garner would be still very successful today, because of their wider range of skills whereas Thomson would have been very average.... Roberts and Holding would be successful too. Edited January 6, 2016 by express bowling Rightarmfast 1 Link to comment
Rightarmfast Posted January 6, 2016 Author Share Posted January 6, 2016 Those points are good. You are absolutly bang on when you say that the batsmen werent attacking enough and didnt have the techniques. Even if Waqar had to make a debut in this era, he may not have been so successful. During his time, batsmen were not used to hitting inswinging yorkers coming at pace. These days, batsmen in 20 20, murder those deliveries. express bowling 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now