Tendulkar was uncomfortable facing Curtly Ambrose - Navjot Sidhu

[zen]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/95065.html

 

^ Above is recorded speeds for various bowlers. Ambrose was rated at 140 in 2000 so I would assume that he would be relatively quicker in early 90s 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

2 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

@Muloghonto

@Rightarmfast

 

What was Ambrose's avg. speeds during spells at his peak? I only saw him bowl from around 99-2000 and he was pretty much on his last legs by then. 

 

You gentlemen seem to know your stuff about fast bowlers hence why I'm asking. 

 

Ambrose from 88-94 was consistently 145ish kph. 

After 94, he had shoulder injuries to his bowling arm and his pace dropped a bit, i'd guess he'd be in the 137-140kph zone from 94-98. Then he really slowed down for the last year and half and was probably bowling low 130s/high 120s but amazingly enough, could still get batsmen out with zero problems.

 

These are my estimates for his stock ball. Even as late as 2000, he could crank a few out at 140kph. Just like how people keep telling how Srinath was an express bowler, one of the fastest, blahblah....yet, he was never consistently as quick as people make him out to be. His effort balls were in the 150-155kph zone when he was at his prime, but mostly his stock balls were in the 145 zone. 

 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Muloghonto

[cric_fan]

Son, I have observed and studied fast bowlers and speeds for over 25 yrs now. If there's anyone on this forum and the padosi forum who has genuine knowledge of bowlers and their speeds more than me, I would like to talk to them. My bet is, you won't find them. Eddie Smith is my personal friend and we have known each other for over 19 yrs now. Ever since I started my first job in Times of India as an assistant to the editor, and was closely involved with sports section. 

So don't use such language if you don't know about people closely.

 

 

The real experts are the batsmen who have had to face these bowlers day in, day out and the bowlers themselves.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sooda]

On 12/28/2017 at 5:55 PM, Laaloo said:

Would have won this final if Sachin wasn't afraid ;(

 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8553/scorecard/66078/south-africa-vs-india-final/

 

 

I remember watching this match and the series. Azhar was really good too.

 

Just so you know, We GOT to that final because of Sachin- the match below was effectively a semi final and Zimbabwe had tied with and beaten india in the other matches they had played.

 

Standard Bank International One-day Series, ninth qualifying match

Wisden home
Almanack archive home
1998 home

INDIA v ZIMBABWE

 

 

At Benoni, February 9. India won by six wickets. Toss: India.

With Zimbabwe two points ahead going into the last group game, India had to overtake their 240 in 40.5 overs or less to slip past them into the final on net run-rate. That meant getting cracking early. But Tendulkar returned to the top of the order and to his fluent best, scoring a chanceless 104, his 11th one-day international hundred, off 97 balls, with a six and eight fours. Even when he was out, India needed 83 from 80 balls. But Jadeja and Robin Singh completed the task in a spirited stand. Zimbabwe's captain, Campbell, had also regained his touch, scoring 86, but it was not to be enough.

 

 

 

 

[The Dark Horse]

I've never seen any batsman getting the better of Ambrose. Even McGrath, Warne were dominated by a few batsmen but not Ambrose. The best they have managed to do was to weather the storm, like Steve Waugh.

 

[Rightarmfast]

7 hours ago, cric_fan said:

 

 

The real experts are the batsmen who have had to face these bowlers day in, day out and the bowlers themselves.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wonder why there are analysts sitting outside the ground assessing the bowlers, doing their swot and assessing the bowling speeds when the batsmen are the best judges.

[rkt.india]

On 12/31/2017 at 2:07 AM, zen said:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/95065.html

 

^ Above is recorded speeds for various bowlers. Ambrose was rated at 140 in 2000 so I would assume that he would be relatively quicker in early 90s 

 

 

Srinath was clocked 149 in 99, so, he must be 160 in early 90s.

[rkt.india]

On 12/30/2017 at 9:40 PM, velu said:

 

Ishant bowled similar delivery to get ponting out at perth in 2008. Similar Pace too. That delivery was 137kph. Ambrose is 1-2 inch taller than Ishant.

[rkt.india]

On 12/30/2017 at 4:27 PM, Muloghonto said:

The science of expert testimonial. Something you are not qualified to override.

 

Expert testimonial. That's not science. That is just gospel.

[rkt.india]

On 12/31/2017 at 2:12 AM, Muloghonto said:

Ambrose from 88-94 was consistently 145ish kph. 

After 94, he had shoulder injuries to his bowling arm and his pace dropped a bit, i'd guess he'd be in the 137-140kph zone from 94-98. Then he really slowed down for the last year and half and was probably bowling low 130s/high 120s but amazingly enough, could still get batsmen out with zero problems.

 

These are my estimates for his stock ball. Even as late as 2000, he could crank a few out at 140kph. Just like how people keep telling how Srinath was an express bowler, one of the fastest, blahblah....yet, he was never consistently as quick as people make him out to be. His effort balls were in the 150-155kph zone when he was at his prime, but mostly his stock balls were in the 145 zone. 

 

Even Mitch starc, Mitch Johnson, Steyn, Morkel, Cummins dont bowl stock ball at 145 in test cricket and they all have bowled 150 plus.

[King Tendulkar]

Since speed guns came about . Fastest ball recorded in ashes history is 94.6 mph by Brett lee . So puts in perspective all this talk of o he was easily 95 mph blah blah 

[Muloghonto]

9 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Even Mitch starc, Mitch Johnson, Steyn, Morkel, Cummins dont bowl stock ball at 145 in test cricket and they all have bowled 150 plus.

Actually, Starc, Johnson & Steyn do bowl 145 kph stock balls in test cricket. 

 

Quote

Expert testimonial. That's not science. That is just gospel.

•  

They are still superior to your speculative nonsense and nonsensical unscientific ideas such as judging how fast a bowler is, from a non-orthogonal 2d angle of a 3d motion. How is that for science ?

We don't have a scientific knowledge of average bowling speeds of pre-speed gun bowlers. We have to compare them with bowlers who were consistently tested under speed guns at their peaks to get a rough idea. Ergo, expert testimonial, aka batsmen who've faced them, carry ALL the weight. Not a no-name science fail like you who thinks he can overrule professional expert testimonial based on watching a few youtube clips from bad angles.

 

Edited January 2, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Stuge]

what's up with digging old skeletal articles buried in grave?

[rkt.india]

15 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Actually, Starc, Johnson & Steyn do bowl 145 kph stock balls in test cricket. 

 

They are still superior to your speculative nonsense and nonsensical unscientific ideas such as judging how fast a bowler is, from a non-orthogonal 2d angle of a 3d motion. How is that for science ?

We don't have a scientific knowledge of average bowling speeds of pre-speed gun bowlers. We have to compare them with bowlers who were consistently tested under speed guns at their peaks to get a rough idea. Ergo, expert testimonial, aka batsmen who've faced them, carry ALL the weight. Not a no-name science fail like you who thinks he can overrule professional expert testimonial based on watching a few youtube clips from bad angles.

 

but how did batsmen know what pace is 145 and what is 155 and what is 135 without speed guns.  even today if there are no speed guns, batsmen wont be able to tell the exact speeds.

[Muloghonto]

22 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

but how did batsmen know what pace is 145 and what is 155 and what is 135 without speed guns.  even today if there are no speed guns, batsmen wont be able to tell the exact speeds.

By facing bowler A vs bowler B, batsmen can tell if bowler A is faster than bowler B or not. Now, if we have speed gun ratings on bowler B, then we can extrapolate if bowler A being faster/slower than the said number recorded by speed guns for bowler B. That is the *ONLY* scientifically valid methodology of determining comparative speed estimates of bowlers who we do not have a speed gun figure on. 

Not your 100% unscientific and BS method of 'watching random clips from non-linear camera angles. Its called being subject to optical illusions, which you dumbly argue as 'valid' or more valid, than professional expert opinion of people who are 1000x more qualified to talk about bowling speeds than you.

Let go of such egotistic nonsensical drivel. 

 

And lastly, if you think you cannot tell apart a 135kph ball from 155kph ball, you do not belong on this website parroting 'ideas and opinions' on the sport.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Suhaan]

On Sat Dec 30 2017 at 12:22 PM, rkt.india said:

akhtar was not naturally fast? even at his slowest, he was faster than most bowlers around.

Yes ,I will rather add Brett Lee as a bowler who had natural pace even today he can bowl 150k .Akhtar generated pace which didn't come naturally to him.Brett lee was the one with natural pace

[rkt.india]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

By facing bowler A vs bowler B, batsmen can tell if bowler A is faster than bowler B or not. Now, if we have speed gun ratings on bowler B, then we can extrapolate if bowler A being faster/slower than the said number recorded by speed guns for bowler B. That is the *ONLY* scientifically valid methodology of determining comparative speed estimates of bowlers who we do not have a speed gun figure on. 

Not your 100% unscientific and BS method of 'watching random clips from non-linear camera angles. Its called being subject to optical illusions, which you dumbly argue as 'valid' or more valid, than professional expert opinion of people who are 1000x more qualified to talk about bowling speeds than you.

Let go of such egotistic nonsensical drivel. 

 

And lastly, if you think you cannot tell apart a 135kph ball from 155kph ball, you do not belong on this website parroting 'ideas and opinions' on the sport.

You are contradicting yourself here.  

Edited January 3, 2018 by rkt.india

[Muloghonto]

6 hours ago, rkt.india said:

You are contradicting yourself here.  

No. the 135 kph vs 155 kph comment was in regards to batsmen. Ie, if YOU as a batsman, like you asked the question of, cannot tell whether the ball coming at you is 135 kph or 155 kph, then you don't belong here.

 

[zen]

Ambrose v S Waugh