Thommo - how quick was he?'

[Rightarmfast]

6 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes but to be fair, the Waqar who was regularly clocked, day in day out, was Waqar after multiple stress fractures. 

 I can see him being high 140s-low 150s regularly at his peak because he did bowl fuller lengths more often and they do tend to be the faster deliveries of bowlers.

 

Waqar touched such speeds only between 89-92,93. And that too, he was in early 150's. Not as claimed by some! So I hope you are talking about speeds from that period. Also, I asked you to quote the exact speeds Waqar touched as you claim of having seen. Also please provide the link!

[rkt.india]

9 hours ago, Vijy said:

yes, but border was quite old when he faced waqar in pomp. and most batsmen experience decline in reaction times, etc. it can make the bowlers look faster than one would expect. similarly, I feel that gooch was too raw when he faced holding in his prime.

Anyone heard of Duncan Spencer, an Austalian fast bowler, who made Viv Richards look like a novice in county cricket.  Vivi as at the fag end of his career.

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

8 hours ago, Vijy said:

it was undoubtedly fast, but what makes it look more deadly is the late swing, lara's exaggerated backlift and of course falling down. I don't know what the speed, but I'd guess around 90 mph.

Its not easy to beat BC Lara that easily.1997, Lara at his peak.

Yes, Lara had a very high backlift and bowlers with decent pace could beat him. Even Munaf Patel in 2006 series consistently troubled him and got him LBW too with full straight deliveries and then to counter Munaf he had to shortened his backlift and also batted outside the crease. Lara was damn good at short stuff but cant same about when balls full and at good pace. 

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

 

How fast is this @3.18

must be around 140, not more than that, got beaten by reverse there.

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Vijy said:

not to forget gray (tony gray). he was rated as being better than croft by some contemporaries. ended up with a stellar record in the few tests and ODIs he played.

Tony Gray was tall but he not more than the pace of Mervyn Dillon. 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

22 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Waqar touched such speeds only between 89-92,93. And that too, he was in early 150's. Not as claimed by some! So I hope you are talking about speeds from that period. Also, I asked you to quote the exact speeds Waqar touched as you claim of having seen. Also please provide the link!

Yes, indeed. 95mph = 152kph. Ie, early 150s. Finally we seem to be converging on the fact that Waqar was blazing quick before his stress fractures sidelined him in the early-mid 90s. IIRC he suffered them near the mid-late 94 and was never the same again. Though he did grow a lot in terms of setting up batsmen and still was touching high 80s/90mph till like 97/98.

 

[Muloghonto]

31 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Yes, they can say what was slower, what was faster. It also depends on batsmen's reaction when he is expecting and but bowler bowls a yorker which surprises him and reacts late and gets out. 

I expert experts in their trade to make a rational decision, especially when it converges. Batsmen arnt fools, all of which you say, would be factored in by any credible batsman, let alone elite test-level ones.

Still doesnt change the fact that when their opinions converge, weekend warrior non-experts like you or I get overruled.

 

[Muloghonto]

17 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Tony Gray was tall but he not more than the pace of Mervyn Dillon. 

 

 

Funny how an arm-chair critic who's never been within 20 feet of either of the two, can say that, but people with 1000 times more cricketing experience than you, who've faced bowlers they talk about, are wrong. Given that you have even less idea of comparing Dillon with Gray.

So why the hypocrisy/double standards ?

[rkt.india]

7 hours ago, express bowling said:

Happened or rather intensified later.

I think thee waning of interest happened from the mid 2000s.

 

 

We are seeing lots of tall men like Holder, Brathwaite, Pollard, Gayle, Gabriel, Joseph, Cummins, Thomas etc. nowadays

 

More than the  1976 to 1985 team had.

 

Also, height is not mandatory for a fast bowler if you have the skills like Marshall. Even Roberts was around 6'1", not super tall.

Merveyn Dillon, Cameron Cuffey, Franklyn Rose, Marlon Black all tall bowlers in late 90s to early 2000s. One of them were fast.

[rkt.india]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Funny how an arm-chair critic who's never been within 20 feet of either of the two, can say that, but people with 1000 times more cricketing experience than you, who've faced bowlers they talk about, are wrong. Given that you have even less idea of comparing Dillon with Gray.

So why the hypocrisy/double standards ?

i dont need to be close to them say he was quick or slow like I dont need to be close to Lee or Akhtar or Starc to say whether they are quick or not. More experienced you are talking about are all from 70s, 80s. The eras with vbery poor batsmanship on display. Enough videos are available to say whether he was quick or not. Check the video about, he is n quicker than Dillon, or cuffey or Marlon Black.

[rkt.india]

12 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes, indeed. 95mph = 152kph. Ie, early 150s. Finally we seem to be converging on the fact that Waqar was blazing quick before his stress fractures sidelined him in the early-mid 90s. IIRC he suffered them near the mid-late 94 and was never the same again. Though he did grow a lot in terms of setting up batsmen and still was touching high 80s/90mph till like 97/98.

 

no one said Waqar was not quick but his quick years didnt last long. 1996 WC is an example where Ajay Jadeja thrashed him. He was certainly under 140 after 95.

[rkt.india]

 

 

 

 

Watch these two videos. One is from 91 Tony Gray and one is from 93 Duncan Spencer and anyone can differentiate who is quick who is not. Tony Gray isnt quick while Spencer is.

Edited October 9, 2017 by rkt.india

[Muloghonto]

37 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

no one said Waqar was not quick but his quick years didnt last long. 1996 WC is an example where Ajay Jadeja thrashed him. He was certainly under 140 after 95.

In terms of his average pace, sure. But he was still hitting 140+ every now and then all the way till the very late 90s/early 2000s when he was clearly a fast-medium bowler. 

 

39 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

i dont need to be close to them say he was quick or slow like I dont need to be close to Lee or Akhtar or Starc to say whether they are quick or not. More experienced you are talking about are all from 70s, 80s. The eras with vbery poor batsmanship on display. Enough videos are available to say whether he was quick or not. Check the video about, he is n quicker than Dillon, or cuffey or Marlon Black.

Yes, you do. Because your judgement is entirely based on watching TV from inconsistent camera angles and a 2d projection- i.e., total nonsense, if you can tell from tv, which ball is faster than another. You cannot compare two bowlers on video and say which one is faster. That is, 100% nonsense and i can demonstrate with physics why that is nonsense. 

Very poor batsmanship or not, they are still thousand times the cricketer you are.

I just find  it funny that in the same breath you can say expert professionals with 1000x the experience than you are wrong about bowlers they themselves faced, but you give credibility to your own views from watching tv and never being within 20 meters of the said bowlers.

 

Classic example of egotistic nonsense, where you rate your inferior experience at a far higher pedestal than people far, far more qualified than you.

 

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

In terms of his average pace, sure. But he was still hitting 140+ every now and then all the way till the very late 90s/early 2000s when he was clearly a fast-medium bowler. 

 

Yes, you do. Because your judgement is entirely based on watching TV from inconsistent camera angles and a 2d projection- i.e., total nonsense, if you can tell from tv, which ball is faster than another. You cannot compare two bowlers on video and say which one is faster. That is, 100% nonsense and i can demonstrate with physics why that is nonsense. 

Very poor batsmanship or not, they are still thousand times the cricketer you are.

I just find  it funny that in the same breath you can say expert professionals with 1000x the experience than you are wrong about bowlers they themselves faced, but you give credibility to your own views from watching tv and never being within 20 meters of the said bowlers.

 

Classic example of egotistic nonsense, where you rate your inferior experience at a far higher pedestal than people far, far more qualified than you.

 

only a neural observer can give the right opinion or right judgement. Other than that, they all boast those experts you are talking about, all boast about how they faced such extreme fast bowlers.  Yes, they did. There were extreme fast bowlers too likes of Holding, Thommo, Marshal, Lilliee who were quick but not every second bowler had extreme pace as they seem to talk about. The videos I have posted have cleared everything. These are the evidence. Tony Gray was not fast. Duncan Spencer was fast. You may refute the evidence saying 2D-3D, but in the end both are videos and one bowler is fast and another slow that is evident.

 

We all have ability to assess and i would assess those fast bowlers by the evidence I have and not based one what an ex-cricketer says.  2-3 years back, a coach said about Sandeep Warrier that he bowls up to 145KPH but he was played under Radar he was barley hitting 135.  This exaggeration are made. Coaches were saying Umar Nazir from Kashmir is quicker than Ishant and clocked 145 and her recently played one day domestic shown live on TV, he was struggling to clock 135 KPH. Same as said about Abid Nabi by his coaches that he bowls 147kph and when he played games shown live, he was struggling to his 130. So, please stop going by what ex-cricketers or coaches say. I never will believe one word of them until I see the evidence of prove that and videos are best evidence irrespective of whether they are 2D or not. a 2D video won't make Shoaib or Brett Lee a trundler or thommo or holding a trundler even if we dont have speed guns. 

 

like these videos tell that Holding was quick. certainly around 145 or more.

 

 

 

[Rightarmfast]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes, indeed. 95mph = 152kph. Ie, early 150s. Finally we seem to be converging on the fact that Waqar was blazing quick before his stress fractures sidelined him in the early-mid 90s. IIRC he suffered them near the mid-late 94 and was never the same again. Though he did grow a lot in terms of setting up batsmen and still was touching high 80s/90mph till like 97/98.

 

You do know that Srinath touched 97mph and he was touching 150's at will around 95-97?  Did your experts tell you so?

[Muloghonto]

36 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

only a neural observer can give the right opinion or right judgement. Other than that, they all boast those experts you are talking about, all boast about how they faced such extreme fast bowlers.  Yes, they did. There were extreme fast bowlers too likes of Holding, Thommo, Marshal, Lilliee who were quick but not every second bowler had extreme pace as they seem to talk about. The videos I have posted have cleared everything. These are the evidence. Tony Gray was not fast. Duncan Spencer was fast. You may refute the evidence saying 2D-3D, but in the end both are videos and one bowler is fast and another slow that is evident.

1. I have no reason to believe that legions of professionals are less 'neutral' than a fan.

2. Your opinion or judgement does not rely on whether you are neutral or not. it relies on whether you are expert or not. You are not an expert. Period. 

3. Videos you've posted have cleared nothing, as i've said repeatedly, stop spreading nonsense that you can tell how fast someone is bowling from watching tv. that is categorically false, scientifically. 

4. You have no credible basis on saying whether Tony Gray was fast or not, from your own observation. 

 

Quote

We all have ability to assess and i would assess those fast bowlers by the evidence I have and not based one what an ex-cricketer says.  2-3 years back, a coach said about Sandeep Warrier that he bowls up to 145KPH but he was played under Radar he was barley hitting 135.  This exaggeration are made. Coaches were saying Umar Nazir from Kashmir is quicker than Ishant and clocked 145 and her recently played one day domestic shown live on TV, he was struggling to clock 135 KPH. Same as said about Abid Nabi by his coaches that he bowls 147kph and when he played games shown live, he was struggling to his 130. So, please stop going by what ex-cricketers or coaches say. I never will believe one word of them until I see the evidence of prove that and videos are best evidence irrespective of whether they are 2D or not. a 2D video won't make Shoaib or Brett Lee a trundler or thommo or holding a trundler even if we dont have speed guns. 

You have no ability to assess that is greater than professionals. Get that though your egotistic head. If professional opinions converge on A is faster than B, then they automatically overrule you. 
I don't care what coaches say, i care about what people who've faced them say. They are professionals and highly skilled at telling if ball A is faster or slower than ball B. they've faced these guys, you have not and your TV analysis only shows how far ignorant you are on optical illusion and trying to tell stuff you cant scientifically back up. 

 

I don't care about you believing or not believing. What i care about, is pointing out that they are experts, you are not and if your opinion clashes with expert consensus, you lose. I hold the same standard for myself too. Rest is all just your egotistic bias. 

 

And for the last time, videos are not the best evidence for speed. because you say its 2D or not, it clearly shows, you have zero idea of what you are talking about. You are, in short, just stating your optical illusion, nothing more. 

 

Quote

 

like these videos tell that Holding was quick. certainly around 145 or more.

 

 

 

They tell no such thing, stop dreaming and making things up.

Nobody can gauge speed of a ball from a singular 2d angle. Period. 
And its ironic that you are 'certain' about something that is impossible via physics, but trash expert opinion with first hand experience.

Whats laughable, is you can tell whether a bowler is 140kph or not, sitting behind a tv and losing complete 3d perspective, while a professional who's faced a cricket ball thousand times more than you have, in a professional setting, are all wrong. 

We have two words for it: egotistical nonsense.

 

 

Edited October 9, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

You do know that Srinath touched 97mph and he was touching 150's at will around 95-97?  Did your experts tell you so?

No, not at will. That is desi exgaggeration. he was hitting low 150s at his very peak, for few balls here and there.

 

[Rightarmfast]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

No, not at will. That is desi exgaggeration. he was hitting low 150s at his very peak, for few balls here and there.

 

Quote your point of reference.

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Rightarmfast said:

Quote your point of reference.

Quote yours. you are the one making a claim that he did it at will. I have only seen or heard of maybe half a dozen balls bowled by Srinath at >150kph in his entire career.

That does not qualify as 'bowling 97mph at will'. Show me atleast 50 data-points or you have zero claim. 

 

[Rightarmfast]

In which case, you provide links to prove Waqar was bowling above 150 for more than 10 occassions. Wont ask you to quote 50. Waiting!