From the vault : South African Magazine on Indian fast bowlers bowling speed -2003

[Muloghonto]

6 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

So your source of knowledge is youtube videos and not actual matches? lolz... Can you kindly explain how the power is transferred from legs to arms? I am a national level boxer, so I am dying to know..

If power wasn't transferred from legs to arms, then fast bowlers would not require a run-up and would be able to bowl just 120 kph from just standing at the spot, since our running speeds are 20-30 kph unless you are an olympic level athlete. 

I have no idea how it is transferred, since i am not a doctor or a physiotherapist. But Andy Roberts is not the only bowler to say power comes from legs.

My evidence isn't youtube, its one of the greatest fast bowlers ever.

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Rightarmfast]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Show evidence how he was the bottle-cap guy. There was no evidence of Wasim or Waqar ever using bottle-caps. Nobody has claimed they used bottle caps, they were monitored closely and still zero evidence of ball tampering. 

 

There is zero evidence that Srinath at his peak was faster than Akram at his peak. None,nada,zilch. 

Is 149 faster than 145?

[Rightarmfast]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If power wasn't transferred from legs to arms, then fast bowlers would not require a run-up and would be able to bowl just 120 kph from just standing at the spot, since our running speeds are 20-30 kph unless you are an olympic level athlete. 

I have no idea how it is transferred, since i am not a doctor or a physiotherapist. But Andy Roberts is not the only bowler to say power comes from legs.

My evidence isn't youtube, its one of the greatest fast bowlers ever.

 

Sums you right!

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Is 149 faster than 145?

not measured at their peaks.

Show evidence that Wasim was guilty of ball tampering.

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Sums you right!

that i have no idea how something works, doesnt change the fact that it works. Power is generated from the legs for a fast bowler- you have world class fast bowlers themselves saying that. No more arguments needed on that.

 

[express bowling]

Cricket  is a game which was greatly in the grip of  perceptions, prejudices and stereotypical  beliefs.

 

Thankfully, regular use of speed-guns from WC 1999, and then high-speed cameras later on,  changed some of these perceptions.  The cricket world is now seeing that the Indian fast bowlers are as quick as most other fast bowlers.

 

The English commentators in the test series in 2016, kept on saying that the Indian fast bowling duo of Shami and Umesh  were consistently quicker than the English seamers.  This would never have happened 25 years ago.  

 

In the old days, people would have thought that Josh Hazlewood was  faster than the current Indian quicks  but now we know the truth.

 

The pre 1999 days will always remain under the influence of these biases. Srinath will never get his due in terms of pace.   But, thankfully, the current bunch of Indian pacers ( Shami, Umesh, Aaron. Ishant, Bumrah, Pandya and some new ones )  are being recognized as genuinely quick by the cricket fraternity.

 

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by express bowling

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Cricket  is a game which was greatly in the grip of  perceptions, prejudices and stereotypical  beliefs.

 

Thankfully, regular use of speed-guns from WC 1999, and then high-speed cameras later on,  changed some of these perceptions.  The cricket world is now seeing that the Indian fast bowlers are as quick as most other fast bowlers.

 

The English commentators in the test series in 2016, kept on saying that the Indian fast bowling duo of Shami and Umesh  were consistently quicker than the English seamers.  This would never have happened 25 years ago.  

 

In the old days, people would have thought that Josh Hazlewood was  faster than the current Indian quicks  but now we know the truth.

 

The pre 1999 days will always remain under the influence of these biases. Srinath will never get his due in terms of pace.   But, thankfully, the current bunch of Indian pacers ( Shami, Umesh, Aaron. Ishant, Bumrah, Pandya and some new ones )  are being recognized as genuinely quick by the cricket fraternity.

 

 

But Josh Hazlewood was faster than all but Starc....IIRC he bowled faster than Umesh this very last series...

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Muloghonto

[express bowling]

3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

But Josh Hazlewood was faster than all but Starc....IIRC he bowled faster than Umesh this very last series...

 

No  YDNRC.

 

Umesh and Ishant were quicker than him in  the just concluded test series.

 

Umesh        135 k to 148 k

Ishant         135 k to 147 k

Hazlewood  132 k to 142 k   barring two innings where he bowled a  135 k to  146 k spells.

Edited April 12, 2017 by express bowling

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

No  YDNRC.

 

Umesh and Ishant were quicker than him in every game of the just concluded test series.

 

Umesh        135 k to 148 k

Ishant         135 k to 147 k

Hazlewood  132 k to 142 k   barring one innings where he bowled a  135 k to  146 k spell.

Which test did Ishant bowl 147 ?  Except for a couple of balls at 148 in the final test, i didnt see Umesh bowl at 144+ the entire series. 

Also, i think just quoting top speed ever attained is useless in this discussion. Batsmen rate bowlers as fast or not, based on their stock deliveries. Not their effort ball. If your effort ball is faster than mine, you will register higher top speed. But if my stock ball is faster than yours, batsmen will consider me the faster guy. So average speeds matter. But average speeds are hard to determine, because you'd have to take out the effort balls and slower delivery. I don't think we can do that based on the info provided on cricinfo 

[the don]

3 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Yes, they were. And whenever they were used, Akram was never clocked above 140's. The fastest he was ever clocked was 145! And when Srinath was clocked, he was clocked at 157 in South Africa, 152 in NZ and 149.6 in WC99, where he was the 2nd fastest bowler in the tournament, next to Shoaib. 

 

Thats also one of the reasons how we know Srinath was way faster than Akram and same pace or a tad quicker than Waqar at his peak!

No .

There have been speed gun errors in the past . Srinath was nowhere near 157 kph at any point of his career .

He was considerably slower than waqar who was the speed king of the 90s along with donald and would never be mentioned in the same breath as wasim by any neutral when it comes to speed or effectiveness . 

The two Ws formed the fastest and perhaps the most effective pair followed by various other bowlers at the time .

Srinath was way down the pecking order. 

Not even in the same ball park with all due respect to him.

 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, the don said:

No .

There have been speed gun errors in the past . Srinath was nowhere near 157 kph at any point of his career .

He was considerably slower than waqar who was the speed king of the 90s along with donald and would never be mentioned in the same breath as wasim by any neutral when it comes to speed or effectiveness . 

The two Ws formed the fastest and perhaps the most effective pair followed by various other bowlers at the time .

Srinath was way down the pecking order. 

Not even in the same ball park with all due respect to him.

 

But Srinath was in the same ballpark as speed and he was faster than Akram post 96/97. Also, neither Donald, nor Waqar were as fast as Brett Schultz, who all South Africans saw as their fastest bowler. 

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Which test did Ishant bowl 147 ?

The 2nd test match versus Australia.

 

Quote

 Except for a couple of balls at 148 in the final test,

Incorrect.  Umesh bowled  at 148 k in 3  separate innings of this test series and at 147 k in two others.

 

Quote

i didnt see Umesh bowl at 144+ the entire series. 

Again incorrect.  Umesh bowled  many many overs in this series  with 3 or 4 deliveries at 144 k and 145 k or even more. This point was at times discussed by the Aussie commentators also.

 

Even Ishant bowled quite a few overs where around 3 deliveries were between 143 k and 145 k.

 

It looks like you have watched very few deliveries in this test series.

 

Quote

Also, i think just quoting top speed ever attained is useless in this discussion. Batsmen rate bowlers as fast or not, based on their stock deliveries. Not their effort ball. If your effort ball is faster than mine, you will register higher top speed. But if my stock ball is faster than yours, batsmen will consider me the faster guy. So average speeds matter. But average speeds are hard to determine, because you'd have to take out the effort balls and slower delivery. I don't think we can do that based on the info provided on cricinfo 

 

I am not quoting top speeds ever attained or even only  top speeds attained in this series.  I watched 95%  or more deliveries bowled in this series by the  fast bowers.

 

Umesh's   stock delivery  ( or most commonly seen delivery )  was around 142 k and  stock delivery for Ishant was around  140 k  in this series and that would be around 137 k for Hazlewood and 145 k for Starc.

 

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by express bowling

[express bowling]

Average speeds as per BCCI.tv for the India -Australia test series

 

Umesh --      140 / 140 / 140 / 142 / 139 / 137 / 140 / 139  

 

Ishant --       139 / 136 / 138 / 139 / 138 / 139 / --- / ---

 

Hazlewood -- 136 / 138 / 139 / 139 / 135 / --- / 137 / 137

 

 

Even as per this, it is clear that Umesh was much quicker than Hazlewood and Ishant was a bit quicker than Hazlewood.

 

 

 

Cummins --     --- / --- / --- / ---  / 138 / --- / 142 / 140

 

Starc  --       145 / 146 / 144 / 145  / --- / --- / --- / ---

 

Bhuvi  --      --- / --- / --- / ---/ --- / --- / 138 / 135

 

 

Cummins was about as quick as Umesh and Starc was clearly quicker than everybody else

Edited April 12, 2017 by express bowling

[Rightarmfast]

4 hours ago, the don said:

No .

There have been speed gun errors in the past . Srinath was nowhere near 157 kph at any point of his career .

He was considerably slower than waqar who was the speed king of the 90s along with donald and would never be mentioned in the same breath as wasim by any neutral when it comes to speed or effectiveness . 

The two Ws formed the fastest and perhaps the most effective pair followed by various other bowlers at the time .

Srinath was way down the pecking order. 

Not even in the same ball park with all due respect to him.

 

Interview with Alastair Campbell, April 1997

by John Ward

Alistair Campbell tells the story of the recent Zimbabwean tour of South Africa for the triangular series, in conversation with John Ward. He includes some interesting insights into the players and the play.

At the back of the England series we went to South Africa, knowing we had a point to prove, knowing that after that success we needed to capitalise on it. We knew there was an air of expectation about the tour and we wanted to live up to that.

Our first warm-up match started well and Dave Houghton batted particularly well. Some of our batsmen got out to half-decent bowling but overall it was a good warm-up.

Then came our first international game against South Africa at Centurion Park. We knew the South Africans had probably the best one-day side in the world so we went out there to prove a point. Grant Flower played magnificently for 90 but there was a bit of a stutter in the middle of the innings before we came good at the end, with Paul Strang, Heath Streak and Guy Whittall all chipping in with a few. But the real crux of that match was when we had them 7 for three, but failed to convert it into a win. That shows the depth of their batting and their cricketing prowess as a whole. We failed to convert it, but we did give them a run for their money and we had many people in South Africa saying they were surprised at our improvement and that we were now a very competitive side. I think we gave the South Africans a bit of a shake-up and they realised that playing against us wasn't like two years ago when they were in cruise control; they now had to play a good game of cricket in order to win. That's one of the goals that I set out when we went to South Africa: to be competitive, because once we are competitive then there is every chance of winning games.

Our fielding under the lights there wasn't our greatest display and we did drop a couple of catches that went up into the lights -- well, you couldn't call them dropped catches as we didn't get a hand on them! Playing under lights was another new situation that we had to contend with, so fielding second we soon found we hadn't had enough practice catching balls under lights. Also with the dew the ball comes to you quicker than it does on a normal day, so there were a lot of misfields, guys getting their hands down too late. So we had a few things to work on after that game, but all in all the guys felt quite happy.

John Rennie gets very excited when he takes a wicket, and it's not advisable to be in his path when he comes running down the pitch, because the adrenaline is pumping and when he slaps you on the back you tend to know all about it. When he gives you high-fives, you run the risk of having your fingers broken as he bends them all the way back. As he gets excited, his glasses start steaming up and he could probably do with some windscreen wipers when he bowls. Craig Evans calls him 'Beetle-Juice' after that famous character who kicks open the double doors when going into the saloon, bursts in and says, "Hi, I'm here!" That's a bit like Johnny when he takes a wicket, a very excitable person!

We then moved on to our second game against India, at Boland Bank Park. In all 236 was quite a decent score, as it wasn't the easiest of pitches to bat on, and Srinath I think bowled the quickest that any of our guys had ever seen. He bowled a really quick spell early on, even quicker than Allan Donald; he was timed at 157 km/h, a good 10 km/h faster than Donald was bowling throughout the tournament. Grant Flower was hit on the thigh pad, and when he came off he said he thought he had broken his leg!

There was a good contest between Craig Evans and Kumble, and a few words were exchanged. Kumble inquired as to whether Evans thought he was Sir Donald Bradman; then he missed a ball and Kumble inquired as to whether he had brought his bat out with him. Then Evans hit him into the stands and pointed after it, a la Babe Ruth, only he did so after he had hit it instead of before!

We knocked over three quick wickets, thanks to Eddo Brandes again, and it looked like we were in total control. They needed nine an over for the last five or six overs, and the Robin Singh came in to play a gem of an innings. He hit Streaky for six in the penultimate over -- it was a no-ball as well, which cost us -- but we were disappointed only to tie that game because we were in the driving seat and had played the better cricket all the way through. That was probably the game people look back on and say, "If we had won that, we would have got into the finals."

It was a bit disappointing in that regard, and I suppose you have to look at my captaincy there, because I brought in the third man on the penultimate ball of the game, when they needed five runs to win, and the batsman opened the face of the bat and hit it over the fielder for four. I wanted to put another man out on the leg side, so I brought in the third man to do so -- and that's one of the things that happens. Funnily enough, I also toyed with that idea the other night, when we were down in Port Elizabeth for the Mashonaland match against Eastern Province, and decided to leave him back there this time. The batsman nicked the ball straight to the fielder and they only got one; had it gone for four, the match would have been tied and we would have had to replay the game the following night. So you can say one learns by his mistakes!

Then to beautiful Newlands, where we won the toss and decided to bat, because we had been advised that about 85% of teams batting first on that Newlands pitch had won the game, so we decided to go with the statistics. It wasn't the easiest pitch to bat on, though, and South Africa were a really good bowling side; it was a seamer's wicket. We lost Grant Flower early on and never really got above three an over until Dave Houghton and Guy Whittall played magnificently to get us up to 226. The commentators thought it was a good score, but our bowlers didn't bowl well enough, giving them a four-ball an over. We weren't really able to put them under enough pressure, so we lost that game -- but we were competitive. In this tournament, in the early matches we never seemed to get everything together: we either batted well and bowled badly and fielded half-decently, or we bowled well and batted badly, and couldn't get all the departments together.

We then went on to the Wanderers, where we had our best match yet; the guys played really well, and we thought we were in there with a total of 256. But again our bowlers, after the initial early breakthroughs, didn't follow it through. When they were 102 for five, we thought, "The game is ours," but then Pollock and Cronje, who was our main tormentor in the series, were able to score seventies each and won the game. We were very disappointed after this game because, no matter who you make it against, 256 is a big score in a one-day game and we should have converted again. But the three scores we made against South Africa, had we made them against any other side, I think we would have had a good chance of winning. It's a more difficult proposition against South Africa in their own back yard.

At about this time we had a team meeting, and Guy Whittall had gone to watch his mate Ian Noble play rugby. He phoned me up and said, "I'm just watching a rugby game; I won't be there for the team meeting, but you don't mind, do you?" I replied, "Yes, Guy, you take your time -- but for every minute you're late I'll increase the fine!" He came in eventually, looking very beleaguered -- "Sorry, guys." I said, "Never mind, Guy, it's just 300 Rand this time!" For that kit we bought down south for the Zimbabwe cricket development programme, most of the money came courtesy of Guy Whittall. We raised the money through a system of fines, especially for being late, and I think Guy ended up paying about $1500 this season! Guy is always late; he hasn't any sense of time. It's just a matter of discipline; if you are late, there is no arguing about, "Sorry, I was caught in a traffic jam," and so on. There are no excuses accepted, unless there are special circumstances; for example, if a guy had to walk to the ground because he pranged his car into a lamp-post or something, we will be a bit more sympathetic.

There were two more games against India, and we knew we had to win them both. And then came the thriller. At Centurion we put on our best bowling and fielding display of the tournament, and restricted them to 216 on a good batting wicket. We thought we had the game in the bag, but then the rain came down and we needed 170 in 34 overs. The wicket had spiced up with a bit of rain on it, and dew on the outfield -- but that, I suppose, is in the batsman's favour because the ball gets a bit harder to hold. But then our batting collapsed dramatically, and it was left to Evans and Strang, with Streak at the end, to pull us through. It was a very, very exciting game.

We had Nick Price and Mark McNulty, our Zimbabwean golf stars, in the changing room; they were there to play in a golf tournament and they were egging us on. The next day, in the South African Open, they wore our Zimbabwe caps because they were playing together in the same three-ball, and Fulton Allem was wearing his South African cap. We went to watch that, and they were very happy with our performance.

We thought we had done enough to get into the final, but you know what happened in the Benoni game: Tendulkar played one of the finest innings we'll ever see in one-day cricket. Mark McNulty came to me after that game and said, "It's the same as if you were leading by four shots going into the final round at a major golf tournament and someone shoots 62. There's nothing you can do about that!" I took heart from that, because those guys have played in pressure situations and they know a bit about life. The guys were very disappointed, to tell the truth; we played some good cricket, and had the crowds on our side; Price and McNulty had been going to fly down and watch us in the final in Durban; there were about 400 people due to fly down from Zimbabwe to watch us. The support was magnificent, and every South African, it seemed, wanted us in the final; we really made a lot of friends down there, so it wasn't just a personal disappointment but also that of letting down a nation and those people who had supported us through the whole season, because not only was it for them but it was our first final ever. It would have been magnificent to have played in front of a packed house at Kingsmead against South Africa, with half the ground filled with people supporting Zimbabwe. But that wasn't to be -- that's cricket.

We came back to Zimbabwe, and we extracted our revenge very comfortably in Bulawayo. I haven't seen the Queens wicket go like that, but I've been told how it does play up. Eddo bowled really quick early on before Streaky came on; John Rennie bowled really well on a seamer's wicket and in fact everyone did well. We kept them well behind the clock and kept on taking wickets. They got 168, which was never going to be enough. Grant Flower batted well, as he has done all season, and then Guy Whittall came in and the two of them finished it off by eight wickets, very comfortably.

It was a very dark and dismal day, and I was surprised to see so many people there; it was probably double the crowd that was there for England on a sunny day, and that just shows you what success does. From the England tour until now, we have had a really successful season and the onus is on us to continue with that.

 

http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/NATIONAL/ZIM/NEWS/ARTICLES_OLD/CAMPBELL_INTERVIEW_APR1997.html

 

 

This is also called data which you Pakistani dont have enough intellect to collect and then put forth your reasons.

[Muloghonto]

So wait, when its hear-say in Srinath's favour, its data. But when we have plenty of batsmen say Wasim bowled very fast, we must be Pakistani to think that.

[kira]

9 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

But Josh Hazlewood was faster than all but Starc....IIRC he bowled faster than Umesh this very last series...

 

 

Are you fking kidding me? How bloody clueless can you be? All you do is make up stories without ever backing it up with facts but at least I would expect you to not make stories about things that have data available with us, it makes you look like a fool. Do you even know that cricinfo's hawkeye page has average speeds of each bowler in that series? What were you thinking when you came up with that ridiculous statement? Did you really think your BS won't be exposed? Go check the link posted below and check for each match, both umesh and ishant were faster than hazlewood. 

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2016-17/engine/match/1062574.html?view=hawkeye

 

Now we know that your word on speed cannot be taken as you have no idea about bowling speeds, how can you so confidently say that hazlewood was faster? What's your pathetic excuse?

[Rightarmfast]

44 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

So wait, when its hear-say in Srinath's favour, its data. But when we have plenty of batsmen say Wasim bowled very fast, we must be Pakistani to think that.

Data is coming from speed gun with actual nos. Do you have eyes or you use your ass to look and read?

[Rightarmfast]

11 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Wasim was a match-fixer. But not a bottle-cap guy. That was Imran Khan. Try not confusing the charges. 

 

Except they were both genuine fast bowlers at their peak. I remember the legendary 99 series between WI and AUS, where McGrath was consistently bowling at 140kph speed. That is bonafide fast bowler territory.

By the time Walsh was measured on the speed guns, he was 38 years old and still getting 130-135kph.

 

Except there has never been a case for ball-tampering against Wasim. match fixing, yes. And yeah, Srinath was faster than a diabetic Akram bowling on one leg. At their peaks, i've never heard anyone say that Srinath was faster than Wasim. Even if batsmen do not have speed guns, i am pretty sure you can tell the quicker bowler from the slower one comparatively. 

I have already given you fact that speed guns were not used for that series. The only time speed guns were used in 99, it was in the World Cup 99. And I can give you official statements of the same. 

But you have claimed you saw Mcgrath bowling at 140+ in WI vs Aus series which ended in first week of April, 1999. 

 

Please admit that you were bloody lying and you are a compulsive liar. You just made it up. If you do not admit you are a liar, please show quotes and data to prove the same.

[Rightarmfast]

18 hours ago, the don said:

No but seriously i remember razzaq and srinath playing in the same matches and tournaments more specifically the late 99 early 2000 triseries in australia where razzaq was player of the series and he was clearly quicker and recorded quicker speeds on the gun.

What you also doing is comparing a razzak, who was probably at the peak of his career around 2000, to Srinath who was nearing the fag end of his career. And even then Srinath was registering quicker speeds on speed gun. but if you say Razzaq was quick, then Razzak would be quicker than Waqar and Wasim around that time. so you admit that Waqar and Wasim were slower than Razzaq? lolz!

[Rightarmfast]

16 hours ago, the don said:

Ummm yes i agree waqar  was at his quickest from 89 to 94 but even than he clocked 150 plus in 96 on that tour to.england as is documented . 

Waqar and donald were the two fastest guns of the 90s . Srinath was never in the race apart from a few quick deliveries that he may have bowled. 

This is based on watching him bowl and words of batsmen that faced him at the time . Never have i heard srinath being talked about as being anythimg other than medium fast . 

Wasim bowled at a pace where he could get optimum movement but he had an extra gear that srinath never had . He could turn on the heat as is mentioned by steve waugh and shane warne and the english batters

 

I have seen gough and gillespie clock 90 plus a lot more than srinath . I am not being biased . Its a fact .

Btw, have you even bothered reading both articles on which this thread is based? Please read as I am sure you would have missed out on the essential part before jumping in. Please read what the Pakistanis are saying about speeds and also please check the speeds of Waqar, Wasim and Srinath as early as 91 and please check the comments of Srinaths pace. :)