Performance of Asian bowlers in South Africa

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, MultiB48 said:

line n length is the path of the ball which is in 3d.

No. Line and length are determined by the spot on the pitch where the ball touches. Which is a 2d patch on the surface. Which does not get distorted by a 2d camera. 

Speed can ONLY be judged by motion, which gets distorted when 3d gets compressed into 2d. 

 

[Gollum]

@Muloghonto Sehwag was a non factor overseas, he had no role in our away victories (except a small one in Perth) , in that para I was talking about why we started winning overseas (specifically in Eng, Aus, SA) after 2002 Headingley. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

@Muloghonto Sehwag was a non factor overseas, he had no role in our away victories (except a small one in Perth) , in that para I was talking about why we started winning overseas (specifically in Eng, Aus, SA) after 2002 Headingley. 

 

No, Sehwag was not a non-factor overseas. Seeing his overall stats make it seem that way, because Sehwag basically played overseas in two chunks - early 2000s and late 2000s. His latter chunk was horrible,which dragged his overseas averages down. But until like 2009 or so, Sehwag had succeeded overseas everywhere but South Africa. Had 40+ average in England, 50+ averages in Australia and West Indies. True, he had a horrible series in NZ but he only played one series in NZ before 2009- a series where NZ watered the pitches and neither them or us made more than 150-200 in ANY of the innings of all the tests. 

Either way, Sehwag factor was a big factor, simply because it gave our bowlers way more overs to work with. It also helped that Sachin had batting support from the likes of Dravid and Laxman (and to a lesser extent Dada) to exert scoreboard pressure. But it still comes down to the fact that the gap between the overseas bowlers and ours (particularly English and West Indies) closed between the 90s and now. I shall point out, that in the 90s, Dravid, Tendulkar and Ganguly all averaged 50+ in a series in England and we still got thumped. Because of our bowlers inability to bowl in English conditions, particularly an express bowler who can move the ball (Srinath), which is borderline criminal.

 

[Gollum]

@Muloghonto Peak Sehwag was good only in Australia, he was horrible in NZ and SA. In UK he had a good 100 in his 1st series but went missing after that (just like SA). What Karthik did in 2007 UK trumps everything Viru has ever done outside Asia. 

And it isn't right to set 2009 as cut off because Viru was test player of the year in 2010. I am ready to forgive his king pair in Edbagston 2011 when our no 1 ranking was on the line (respecting your argument about the 2 chunks) but will never forget how woeful he looked in 2009 NZ and 2010-11 SA. 

 

Our great wins outside Asia in the 2000s were:

Headingley 2002

Adelaide 2003

Jo'berg 2006
Kingston 2006

Trent Bridge 2007

Perth 2008

Hamilton 2009

Durban 2010

 

Apart from a few decent sub 50 scores in Adelaide/Perth, can't recall him doing much in these famous wins. 

Edited January 4, 2018 by Gollum

[Muloghonto]

16 minutes ago, Gollum said:

@Muloghonto Peak Sehwag was good only in Australia, he was horrible in NZ and SA. In UK he had a good 100 in his 1st series but went missing after that (just like SA). What Karthik did in 2007 UK trumps everything Viru has ever done outside Asia. 

And it isn't right to set 2009 as cut off because Viru was test player of the year in 2010. I am ready to forgive his king pair in Edbagston 2011 when our no 1 ranking was on the line (respecting your argument about the 2 chunks) but will never forget how woeful he looked in 2009 NZ and 2010-11 SA. 

 

Our great wins outside Asia in the 2000s were:

Headingley 2002

Adelaide 2003

Jo'berg 2006
Kingston 2006

Trent Bridge 2007

Perth 2008

Hamilton 2009

Durban 2010

 

Apart from a few decent sub 50 scores in Adelaide/Perth, can't recall him doing much in these famous wins. 

As i said, the biggest reason for those victories, is that the gap between our bowling attack and theirs closed compared to the 90s.

Otherwise, as i said, in the 90s, we had Sachin, Ganguly and Dravid ALL average 50+ in England and still got thumped. Why ? Because of our bowlers in the 90s. They were crap overseas. Not that our bowling in the 2000s was a world-beater bowling attack, but atleast our bowlers put in good performances in those wins, which were missing. 

Srinath's best bowling performances in Australia and England are 4-100+. His best bowling performance in New Zealand is 5-90+. His best bowling performance in West Indies was 3-60+. Only in South Africa did he perform well and thats the main reason why we failed overseas : our best pacer, by a country mile, couldn't take 5 wickets in an innings without conceding nearly 100+ runs everywhere but South Africa. 

 

Re: Sehwag, as i said, he was poor overseas from 2009 onwards, but prior to that, he was quite decent overseas. 

Edited January 4, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, MultiB48 said:

 your spot is on a xyz axis  but screen shows it on xy axis ,it is distorted

Doesn't matter due to aspect ratio remaining same. No such factor exists for 3d motion, which is why 3d motion often requires a frame of reference to gauge actual trajectory from the TV. Whether something landed on a spot,is completely different from how something is moving, when projections are done. 

You are simply arguing for argument's sake that just because you can't really tell how fast a bowler is bowling means you also can't tell which spot on the pitch the ball is landing on- which is complete nonsense.

I can tell, you have zero inkling of what imaging actually entails.

[Jimmy Cliff]

2 hours ago, Gollum said:

@Muloghonto Peak Sehwag was good only in Australia, he was horrible in NZ and SA. In UK he had a good 100 in his 1st series but went missing after that (just like SA). What Karthik did in 2007 UK trumps everything Viru has ever done outside Asia. 

And it isn't right to set 2009 as cut off because Viru was test player of the year in 2010. I am ready to forgive his king pair in Edbagston 2011 when our no 1 ranking was on the line (respecting your argument about the 2 chunks) but will never forget how woeful he looked in 2009 NZ and 2010-11 SA. 

 

Our great wins outside Asia in the 2000s were:

Headingley 2002

Adelaide 2003

Jo'berg 2006
Kingston 2006

Trent Bridge 2007

Perth 2008

Hamilton 2009

Durban 2010

 

Apart from a few decent sub 50 scores in Adelaide/Perth, can't recall him doing much in these famous wins. 

Sehwag was the second highest scorer in the Durban Test IIRC. But yeah in general his match-winning exploits were limited to the sub-con.

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

camera is from front on of the pitch so what you think is simple 2d is the z axis ,ie the depth ,it's a distorted image created by optical illusion but it looks real to you since you have been deceived by it ,anyway keep on believing your own false ideas over science and reality.

Z axis does not matter at point of impact, as the impact surface is only X and Y axis. as i said, you have no idea how digital image processing actually works, if you think you cannot get an accurate point-to-point distance equality between a 2d image and reality. 

its MOTION that is hard to tell, in terms of gauging speeds. 

 

Its a bit rich, when a guy defends the concept of 'can tell how fast a bowler is from watching TV like the jokers here do, tossing out make-believe numbers', is invoking 'science'. 

 

Edited January 5, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Vijy]

On 1/4/2018 at 8:05 AM, Muloghonto said:

That is because patriotism clouds judgement of actual player performances. This is the reason why nobody outside of India rates Srinath- they can see how crap he was as a bowler. There is so much debate about this, is because international cricket is a nationalistic sport and nationalism colours the view. I have been away from India long enough that i don't instinctively jump to defend anything and everything Indian anymore. There are a few here like that, but not many.

a lot of the SC pacers bowled much better on pitches at home rather than those that "assisted" them. I would suggest that, as much as the assistance from pitch/overhead conditions, the experience of bowling on a given type of pitch also matters. There is a big gap between calling Sri an "ATG" and calling him "crap". he was a pretty good bowler, but he had two limitations: (i) he did not bowl the right lines and lengths on pacer-friendly pitches, and (ii) he lacked the temperament of a fast bowler (compounded by all the dropped catches, albeit not as many as now).