Sreesanth haters come out of the cave

[mhr123]

Pacer Sreesanth bowled at an economy rate of 16.00 - the worst ever performance by any bowler in a three-over spell in ODIs. His own previous worst economy rate in an innings was 9.30 when he conceded 3.2-0-31-0 against South Africa at Centurion Park in 2006.:omg:

[IndianRenegade]

Pacer Sreesanth bowled at an economy rate of 16.00 - the worst ever performance by any bowler in a three-over spell in ODIs. His own previous worst economy rate in an innings was 9.30 when he conceded 3.2-0-31-0 against South Africa at Centurion Park in 2006.:omg:

At least he is getting himself into record books.... :D

[fineleg]

Aaah.... Shilpa Pappodom anybody ?

Ambika

[Guest Hiten.]

At least he is getting himself into record books.... :D

...for the wrong reasons. If he continues this trend of his, he will have to join the ranks of Tarannum (bar dancer) soon enough :giggle:

[msb1991]

The backspin of the ball doesnt ensure the ball moves forward and not down straight into the pitch' date=' but rather, its the horizontal component of the velocity of the ball.[/quote'] I have noted that the momentum of the action is also a component but if you have ever tried to completely wrap your wrist around a ball with no backspin, bowling pace, you'd realise that it'd go straight into the ground.

Again' date=' not entirely correct. You have interchanged the cause and effect. The backspin is an effect of the release of the ball by the bowler, and not a cause of the trajectory. The trajectory of the ball, similar to a stone thrown from the top of the cliff, is dependent mostly on its velocity components, gravity and atmospheric drag. The most common scientific analogy i can come up with is the bullet. Both the bullet's and the ball's trajectories are a parabola, but coz of the different value of the component velocities, they travel different distances. Atmospheric drag is generally considered negligible and therefore, omitted from most scientific calculations.[/quote'] Atmospheric drag cannot be considered negligable, since a similar force is the main cause for swing of cricket ball.

[maaki]

Some body rightly belongs in the MRF Space Acadamy

[Ram]

I have noted that the momentum of the action is also a component but if you have ever tried to completely wrap your wrist around a ball with no backspin' date=' bowling pace, you'd realise that it'd go straight into the ground. [/quote'] Not entirely accurate again. Pacers use similar grips for both yorkers and short balls, but their timing of the release is different, making the ball land at different lengths. I understand what you mean when you say if yout wrap your hand around the ball, it falls directly down, but i think thats a bit irrelevant. I was more interested in you saying the ball moves forward because of backspin and that is categorically incorrect.

Atmospheric drag cannot be considered negligable' date=' since a similar force is the main cause for swing of cricket ball.[/quote'] Yes, drag has a HUGE role in swing, but even the experts havent yet fully understood the mechanics of swing. For example, the ball swings more if its over-cast, which could potentially mean the moist air offers more drag to the ball. But, that still doesnt explain reverse swing, nor does it explain why spinners, who make the ball rotate faster the seam bowlers, dont actually "swing" or in the spinning language, drift the ball as much as they should. I see that you have drawn a lot of conclusions from having bowled a lot, and the feel you have gotten from the game, but I sincerely believe you have one too many assumptions, without fully understand the science behind it. For example, you saying that the ball landing with backspin on the pitch makes it behave differently to the one which doesnt have backspin in it seems hugely on weak grounds to me. Could you, if possible, elaborate on the science of your conclusion ?

[Rohan495]

Sreesanth will end up bein the next Balaji, he will have a similar future. Especially when RP and Zaheer come back from injury i feel like it will be Sreesanth who will be left out.

[head coach]

Good discussion msb and mania. Actually Sreesanth learned this delivery from his friend P Chandran at MRF pace foundation. He did get wickets too. It reduces the speed as msb explained but it surprises the batsman when it's delivered out of the blue.

[msb1991]

Not entirely accurate again. Pacers use similar grips for both yorkers and short balls' date=' but their timing of the release is different, making the ball land at different lengths.[/quote'] The timing of the release is not always different but the method of release such as shoulder drive and hip drive.

I understand what you mean when you say if yout wrap your hand around the ball' date=' it falls directly down, but i think thats a bit irrelevant. I was more interested in you saying the ball moves forward because of backspin and that is categorically incorrect.[/quote'] Perhaps you are right. I think it does play a part, but your scientific knowledge is making me think that that part is negligable.

Yes' date=' drag has a HUGE role in swing, but even the experts havent yet fully understood the mechanics of swing. For example, the ball swings more if its over-cast, which could potentially mean the moist air offers more drag to the ball. But, that still doesnt explain reverse swing, nor does it explain why spinners, who make the ball rotate faster the seam bowlers, dont actually "swing" or in the spinning language, drift the ball as much as they should.[/quote'] Spinners put side spin on the ball rather than backspin, meaning that there is less air drag. They do get drift from the overspin that they put on the ball and perhaps this is an indication of the difference between backspin and overspin in terms of swing.

I see that you have drawn a lot of conclusions from having bowled a lot' date=' and the feel you have gotten from the game, but I sincerely believe you have one too many assumptions, without fully understand the science behind it.[/quote'] Perhaps, I am well read on this as well as bowling a lot, but I guess I will not be able to match someone with scientific knowledge like yours. May I ask if you have scientific qualifications or work in a science based job?

For example' date=' you saying that the ball landing with backspin on the pitch makes it behave differently to the one which doesnt have backspin in it seems hugely on weak grounds to me. Could you, if possible, elaborate on the science of your conclusion ?[/quote'] There was no experiment here by me, but more scientific logic. The ball which counter rotates will kiss the pitch as part of the rotation. Atmospheric drag forces will cause the ball to reach a flatter trajectory before hitting the pitch too, also causing this effect.