Thommo - how quick was he?'

[rkt.india]

45 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Irrelevant. They have : a) faced them on multiple types of pitches and b) faced them, you didn't. You are auto-disqualified agains their opinion on speeds you don't have credible data for and have not faced, either.

 

Sure. Except in this case, batsmen being helmeted mostly. 

 

I said 95mph, because thats roughly how fast Waqar was, at his peak, i.e. 93-95mph zone. There are players who've played Holding, who rated him at the same zone. Its a simple, association with evidence from people who credibly faced those two players. 

 

 

so ergo, when they say, that facing Holding was quicker or not versus Waqar, we can extend the same courtesy. And we have figures for Waqar, ergo, we can use that benchmark with high probability of correctness.

 

 

No, but if we know Shannon Gabriel is slower than Waqar, coz we had speed-guns for both and batsmen who played them both claim they are around the same speed as Waqar, we can effectively say if they were faster than Shannon Gabriel or not.

 

Gabriel bowls 90-95 mph so he isn't slower than waqar.

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

So ? thats an obvious figure of speech. Doesn't change their professional opinions. I am not talking about what one said during commentary. Thats a ridiculous assumption, really. 

 

So, now you are picking and choosing which expert opinions are " correct " and which are not, to suit your end     

[express bowling]

12 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

like megasthenis was just a traveler but tony cozier isnt just a writer and his opinion that holding could have become a 400 meter word champion is true.

 

And, even if we consider Cozier to be an expert on cricket, is he an expert on 400 m runners   !     

[Vijy]

4 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

And, even if we consider Cozier to be an expert on cricket, is he an expert on 400 m runners   !     

cozier was a great ambassador of WI cricket, but he is overly biased in favour of WI.

[Muloghonto]

7 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

like megasthenis was just a traveler but tony cozier isnt just a writer and his opinion that holding could have become a 400 meter word champion is true.

It wasnt his opinion that Holding could've been a great 400m runner, as i said, its common knowledge amongst Jamaican cricket fans that Holding was in contention for the 400m Jamaican relay team as an 18 year old. 

Cozier isn't looking at Holding running around and saying 'you know, that man could be a 400m champion'. Holding has several inter-school trophies in 400m, was invited to the training camp for World championship heats, etc.

Cozier is recollecting a FACT.

 

[Muloghonto]

7 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

So, now you are picking and choosing which expert opinions are " correct " and which are not, to suit your end     

No, now we are differentiating between an expert giving his opinion on the matter and making colourful commentary. 

Huge difference and rather disingenuous, when one cannot tell apart objective observation vs saying 'as fast as Rajdhani express' while commentating.

 

[Muloghonto]

8 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Gabriel bowls 90-95 mph so he isn't slower than waqar.

ok. I did not specifically say he is slow/not slow. You brought up Gabriel, i explained how we can use Waqar as a 'go-between' to compare Gabriel and people from the pre-90s.

 

[Muloghonto]

8 hours ago, rkt.india said:

How did they know what is 80 mph, what is 90 mph, what's 100 mph. There is no way anyone gauge speeds without proper speed guns. Pace depends batsmen to batsmen. For some one Rohit sharma or Sachin Tendulkar who can hit fastest of the bowlers out of the park, pace is different than someone like dravid or gavaskar who were mostly defensive and their first instinct against pace was defense and survival. Some batsmen can see and react to the ball early and they become good striker of the ball and can bat aggressively like SRT, Rohit, Kohli. Some don't like dravid or gavaskar. 

Again, they don't have to tell the speed of the ball in terms of value. I am NOT claiming a human being can see a ball (Cricket, tennis,whatever) coming at him and go 'hmm. that was 88mph, the previous one was 92mph'. I am saying that a human being, especially elite level athletes with decades of experience, can see a 88mph ball and categorically say' this ball is slower than the previous one' if the previous one was at 91mph.

 

[express bowling]

Ha ha

 

Anyone saw this incident in the SL -Pakistan match at around 22.50 IST today

 

Experts Danny Morrison and Roshan Abesinghe saying that Wahab Riaz bowling with a lot of pace, working up good speeds etc.  ( after he bowled a couple of bouncers, one of which got a wicket )

 

Telecasters immediately show fastest ball  135 k and average speed 131 k      

 

So much of what the experts say about speeds depend on their perceptions based on the reputation of the bowler, effective bouncers bowled etc.

Edited October 8, 2017 by express bowling

[express bowling]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

No, now we are differentiating between an expert giving his opinion on the matter and making colourful commentary. 

Huge difference and rather disingenuous, when one cannot tell apart objective observation vs saying 'as fast as Rajdhani express' while commentating.

 

When an expert says " X is bowling 100 mph ",   it means that he feels the bowler is bowling at express pace of 93 mph + atleast ..... and McGrath never did that.

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

When an expert says " X is bowling 100 mph ",   it means that he feels the bowler is bowling at express pace of 93 mph + atleast ..... and McGrath never did that.

Was the expert saying it as commentary or was it expert opinion solicited for the sole purpose of their opinion ? Was it a figure of speech ' as fast as the wind, etc?' these factors cannot be ignored, especially for experts who are also commentators. 

 

In either case, even if the expert is wrong about whether someone is bowling at 100mph or 92mph, they are fully qualified to judge if person X is bowling faster/slower than person Y. That is not assigning speed, that is comparing speed. 

Something you are not qualified to do, unless you've faced the said bowlers yourself.

 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

10 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Ha ha

 

Anyone saw this incident in the SL -Pakistan match at around 22.50 IST today

 

Experts Danny Morrison and Roshan Abesinghe saying that Wahab Riaz bowling with a lot of pace, working up good speeds etc.  ( after he bowled a couple of bouncers, one of which got a wicket )

 

Telecasters immediately show fastest ball  135 k and average speed 131 k      

 

So much of what the experts say about speeds depend on their perceptions based on the reputation of the bowler, effective bouncers bowled etc.

the expert opinion is of those who've faced the said bowlers. Sitting in a commentary box, is the same as sitting in the stadium and guessing.

I am specifically talking about expert opinion who've faced the said bowler. You are hell-bent on twisting what is expert opinion, what isn't, all in the flawed belief that you actually know what you are talking about and Gavaskar or such like, cannot.

 

[express bowling]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

In either case, even if the expert is wrong about whether someone is bowling at 100mph or 92mph, they are fully qualified to judge if person X is bowling faster/slower than person Y.

 

 

So why did experts feel that Fleming was distinctly slower than McGrath .... and shocked to see otherwise.?

 

Why were they surprised to see Lance Klusener clocking higher speeds than Donald ?

 

There are many many other such example that I can provide.

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

So why did experts feel that Fleming was distinctly slower than McGrath .... and shocked to see otherwise.?

 

Why were they surprised to see Lance Klusener clocking higher speeds than Donald ?

 

There are many many other such example that I can provide.

Did the same experts face Fleming or were they also watching ? 

Show me which expert who's faced fleming, said Fleming was quicker than McGrath.

 

Your examples are irrelevant, because you are conflating an expert speaking of their experience vs an expert being an observer. Huge difference.

 

[Rightarmfast]

Then again, going by your own logic,

48 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Again, they don't have to tell the speed of the ball in terms of value. I am NOT claiming a human being can see a ball (Cricket, tennis,whatever) coming at him and go 'hmm. that was 88mph, the previous one was 92mph'. I am saying that a human being, especially elite level athletes with decades of experience, can see a 88mph ball and categorically say' this ball is slower than the previous one' if the previous one was at 91mph.

 

The same experts speaking with experience, how can they say if Thommo was faster than Akhtar or Lee or Tait? Because anyone who faced thommo, would only be an observer to Shoaib, Lee or Tait?

 

In your own words, if they couldnt assign a value to the pace of the ball, how could they actually say Thommo was bowling at 170? We for sure know Shoaib bowled 150+, but wouldnt a 145 ball to an experienced guy seem quicker than 140k's, and both deliveries are quick?

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Then again, going by your own logic,

The same experts speaking with experience, how can they say if Thommo was faster than Akhtar or Lee or Tait? Because anyone who faced thommo, would only be an observer to Shoaib, Lee or Tait?

You keep going around in circles and i've already explained how it works:

Expert A has faced Thommo and Waqar. We know how fast Waqar was. Expert A then looks at how fast say Shami or Bhuvi or Yadav (or whoever) are, compares the speed to Waqar's known speed and concludes ' bowler X is faster/slower/same as the one i've faced, aka Thommo). 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

In your own words, if they couldnt assign a value to the pace of the ball, how could they actually say Thommo was bowling at 170? We for sure know Shoaib bowled 150+, but wouldnt a 145 ball to an experienced guy seem quicker than 140k's, and both deliveries are quick?

They can't. 

But they can for sure say if Thommo was faster or slower than Shoaib, if they are the ones who've faced the likes of Marshall, Thommo, Waqar, Wasim, etc. because for the last two, we have quantifiable speed readings.

 

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

the expert opinion is of those who've faced the said bowlers. Sitting in a commentary box, is the same as sitting in the stadium and guessing.I am specifically talking about expert opinion who've faced the said bowler. You are hell-bent on twisting what is expert opinion, what isn't,

 

Pardon me for thinking otherwise, but you yourself said the following earlier, which makes Danny Morrison and other top cricketers   experts according to your definition, even when commentating.

 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

highest level experience in a field while achieving elite status in said field makes one an expert. That makes all international cricketers, experts on cricket. Especially elite level international cricketer. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Because, as i said, they meet the definition of being experts at cricket:  high end career professionals at any field are experts

 

And surely, someone of Danny Morrison's experience  should be able to say than a 131 k ball is not fast, even by watching on TV.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

all in the flawed belief that you actually know what you are talking about and Gavaskar or such like, cannot.

 

 

I don't have that belief at all as far as matters relating to playing international cricket are concerned.

 

Gavaskar knows 1000x more than me about playing international cricket and ground realities of international cricket in the '70s and '80s.

 

This what I said earlier

 

9 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

Yes .... a Richards or a Gavaskar could say whether Holding felt quicker while playing or Roberts .... something which I know nothing about .... nor do I claim to

 

But they can't say whether Shanon Gabriel has higher release speeds or Michael Holding .... and nor can I .... that is where speed-guns or high-speed cameras are needed.

 

 

Edited October 8, 2017 by express bowling

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

Pardon me for thinking otherwise, but you yourself said the following earlier, which makes Danny Morrison and other top cricketers experts according to your definition even when commentating.

Nope, not even when commentating. It makes them experts on cricketing experience. If they are talking about their experience as cricketers...aka who was faster of the men they faced, who turned the ball more of the men they faced, their opinion overrides yours and mine. 

Why would you conclude that an expert opinion, is still an expert opinion, when they are not referring to their experience as experts but just innocent bystanders like you and me ??

 

 

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

I don't have that belief at all as far as matters relating to playing international cricket are concerned.

 

Gavaskar knows 1000x more than me about playing international cricket and ground realities of international cricket in the '70s and '80s.

 

This what I said earlier

 

 

 

Ok. I agree and accept. As i said, i can see how an expert, who has experience playing a guy who was not measured consistently(A) and another guy (B) who was measured consistently, can compare A to B and then B to C (C is also measured consistently but never faced them), to conclude if A is faster/slower than C. I don't see where the flaw in that process would be.

 

In practical terms, it'd mean cricketers who debuted in the late 70s/early 80s and played till mid-late 90s

 

[Rightarmfast]

16 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

You keep going around in circles and i've already explained how it works:

Expert A has faced Thommo and Waqar. We know how fast Waqar was. Expert A then looks at how fast say Shami or Bhuvi or Yadav (or whoever) are, compares the speed to Waqar's known speed and concludes ' bowler X is faster/slower/same as the one i've faced, aka Thommo). 

 

 

 

They can't. 

But they can for sure say if Thommo was faster or slower than Shoaib, if they are the ones who've faced the likes of Marshall, Thommo, Waqar, Wasim, etc. because for the last two, we have quantifiable speed readings.

 

Its not me, its you who's going in circles!

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Its not me, its you who's going in circles!

when you bring up a point that has already been addressed before, its called going around in circles. I'd already explained before, what is expert opinion : expert opinion is opinion of direct experience from said expert in said field of expertise. That means a cricketer talking about his cricketing experience. Or an electician talking about his experience. The moment a cricketer sits in the commentary box and talks about whats happening in front of him, he is not using expert opinion, he is an observer- just like an electrician who is watching the ISS circuitry being done on tv, commentating on how cool/hard/awesome it is, without actually knowing what exact circuits they are building and how.