bowling beamers - fao sriram

[Ram]

Why the hell am I going to allow a cricket ball to tonk me in the head:hysterical: My point is that it wont ever hit my head as the ball will hit my bat instead!

And my whole bloody point, which I have been trying to make for the last 20 mins is that, you must be equally wary of a beamer at 125 kmph, as you are for a beamer at 140 kmph. Coz both of 'em can cause some equally serious damage.

[f.b.m]

And my whole bloody point' date=' which I have been trying to make for the last 20 mins is that, you must be equally wary of a beamer at 125 kmph, as you are for a beamer at 140 kmph. Coz both of 'em can cause some equally serious damage.[/quote'] Thats right. My 2 cents: Having faced a beamer (target: head) at around 125-130 kph (which is what the wicketkeeper and the bowler say it was), I'd say its not very hard to face at these speeds. As long as you watch the ball all the way through, its fine. I remember after watching the ball out of the hand, I thought that it was a slower ball, the ball didnt dip and instinctively, I ducked under the ball. The ball itself didnt hit me, but I was shaken for the next 10 minutes or so.

[sachin_fan]

Huh ? Why have you interpreted my comparison totally out of context ? I never claimed " I cant bowl a beamer deliberately' date=' so nither can Lee". All I said was " At a pace of around 122-125 kmph, I find it hard to even land the ball where I wanted to, I can only imagine that at Lee's pace, it will almost impossible to correctly aim a beamer". [/quote'] My whole point was to try to explain to you that your skill levels are different from lee's and what might be absolutely impossible to you might not be the case for lee. Bare in mind, you are talking about a bowler who is able to send down yorkers when he wants to and hit a spot outside the off stump. And please, when you "personally vouch for something", i don't think i am wrong is saying that your abilities are not something to take as an yardstick.

And what I said was just basic common sense. Just so that I make things much simpler, you can try this experiment yourself. Stand at a chosen spot, select a target on the floor about 14-15 yards from you and try to hit it with a ball. You may not be successful all the time, but you will be close most times. Now, stand at the same spot and chose a spot on the wall which is about 20 yards away from you and try to hit the spot on the wall, at about eye level. You will see that you will not only miss frequently, but you will miss by yards. Bear in mind, this is just standing and throwing. Imagine a fast bowler, running in at 20-25 kmph, trying to do what you are doing, its next to impossible. Its not hard to bowl a neck high full toss for sure, but its VERY hard to direct it to where you want to.

Sriram, are you trying to say, that arguably the best fast bowler in the world today, in the form of his life, will not be able to do the feat that you suggest above. He has bowled a lot of un playable stuff over the entire series, and i this ball, to me, is another one.

Lets cut to the chase, we have played hours and hours of cricket with each other, that too VERY competitive and I know how much you hate losing. Have you ever tried to knock my head off, when you were bowling ? Being ultra-competitive is one thing, but to want to physically harm someone is an entirely another matter.

Do you know jeff thompson once said he wants to see the english blood on the field. There was a nice article in cricinfo talking about how an english batsmen, hit by a brutal thompson bouncer, was murmuring , half in a state of shock, that thomo was actually trying to kill him! Dont you think that well directed bouncers and in swinging toe crushers physically harm a batsmen. Was all the uproar with respect to the "bodyline" series just because the english players were bowling bouncers. People can get very pumped up with all the adrenaline rushing through their vines. Sanity is all but lost and when a battle gets as fierce as it did in that match, anything could have happened. Are you suggesting that there isnt even a remote possibility that the ball could have been intentional but not directed at the neck. Also, though i enjoyed our battles (underarm in your terrace :D) our levels of cricket and competition are no where near what these guys are doing. Here is a bowler, bowling his heart out and extracting tremendous pace and he sees his compatriot being lifted over the keeper with such elegance. He knows when a batsmen is in flow, and he is desperate to do something about it. Rattle him probably and bouncers dont work. So what do you do next.

Nonsense. You are innocent till you are proven guilty. You cant presume, based on subjective interpretations from the past, that Lee was deliberately trying to hit Lee.

Well technically you are right about this, lee is innocent as his harbajan with his maaki statement and with his comments on gilly not being a saint. If you go by the book, lee is innocent. But pray tell me, why shouldnt track records ever be considered. The act involved is one which is always subjective. Only a fool will bowl a beamer every match. As such, the benefit would always go to the bowler. So why can i not presume, based on previous incidents, that lee orchestrated this act.

[CSK Fan]

Thats right. My 2 cents: Having faced a beamer (target: head) at around 125-130 kph (which is what the wicketkeeper and the bowler say it was), I'd say its not very hard to face at these speeds. As long as you watch the ball all the way through, its fine. I remember after watching the ball out of the hand, I thought that it was a slower ball, the ball didnt dip and instinctively, I ducked under the ball. The ball itself didnt hit me, but I was shaken for the next 10 minutes or so.

I will say you were extremely lucky that you were able to pick the ball. At international level batsmen have only a fraction of a second to play the ball. They follow the ball from the bowler's hand, down to the pitch so instinctively they look downwards. So if the ball is a beamer, it goes above the batsmen's field of vision and at those pace its impossible to track it in time to take evasive action. 99.99 of times, you will lose the ball completely. try this at home. Ask a friend to ball and just as he is delivering look away and look back. You will never hit the ball or avoid it. If only beamers were as easy to play as you claim. There is a reason beamers are outlawed!

[CSK Fan]

You bowl a 122 kmph beamer at me' date=' the ball is going out of the park![/quote'] Do you know why even slow beamers are disallowed while even fast bouncers are not? No batsman in the world is fast enough to confidently say that he can hit ALL 120kph beamers bowled at him. Problem with beamers is not the pace,but that it goes above the vision of the batsman who will be looking down at the pitch. Once you lose the ball even for a fraction of a second, you will not be fast enough to adjust and hit it or avoid it! It will be pretty easy to play a beamer if you KNOW its gonna be one but accidental beamers are almost impossible to pick.

[f.b.m]

I will say you were extremely lucky that you were able to pick the ball. At international level batsmen have only a fraction of a second to play the ball. They follow the ball from the bowler's hand, down to the pitch so instinctively they look downwards. So if the ball is a beamer, it goes above the batsmen's field of vision and at those pace its impossible to track it in time to take evasive action. 99.99 of times, you will lose the ball completely. try this at home. Ask a friend to ball and just as he is delivering look away and look back. You will never hit the ball or avoid it. If only beamers were as easy to play as you claim. There is a reason beamers are outlawed!

I wasnt actually very lucky. The guy who was bowling was pretty quick, but had NO control at all. He bowled a beamer before that but it was way down legside and about 3 metres high when it "passed" me. That was taken as a dead ball for some reason. I later got smacked on the head by a bouncer and was yorked..... ... on the second bounce. That was one funny club inning. So there wasnt any field of vision to worry about. (;

[f.b.m]

That was a rugby player trying his hand at bowling in the first game, btw

[CSK Fan]

I wasnt actually very lucky. The guy who was bowling was pretty quick, but had NO control at all. He bowled a beamer before that but it was way down legside and about 3 metres high when it "passed" me. That was taken as a dead ball for some reason. I later got smacked on the head by a bouncer and was yorked..... ... on the second bounce. That was one funny club inning. So there wasnt any field of vision to worry about. (;

Ha ha. Then you must have been mentally prepared for what came next. But still, an accidental beamer is almost impossible to read.

[King Tendulkar]

At gangulys pace a beamer is just cannon fodder for a batsman. Its a full toss that is going the distance

[Ram]

My whole point was to try to explain to you that your skill levels are different from lee's and what might be absolutely impossible to you might not be the case for lee. Bare in mind' date=' you are talking about a bowler who is able to send down yorkers when he wants to and hit a spot outside the off stump. And please, when you "personally vouch for something", i don't think i am wrong is saying that your abilities are not something to take as an yardstick.[/quote'] Again, its not a question of ' My abilities Vs Lee'. I think you have interpreted the analogy way out of context. As I have said, its not possible for anyone, running in at 25 kmph and releasing the ball at 140 kmph, to say he can hit an eye-level target 22 yards away. Its beyond the bio-mechanics of the human body to do that.

Sriram' date=' are you trying to say, that arguably the best fast bowler in the world today, in the form of his life, will not be able to do the feat that you suggest above. He has bowled a lot of un playable stuff over the entire series, and i this ball, to me, is another one. [/quote'] Unplayable what ? Those are proper balls, delivered within the laws of the game. If you dont believe me, why dont you get a cricket ball in your hand, mark a spot at eye-level 22 yards away and try to hit with a proper run-up. You will see its almost next to impossible. Sure, you can release the ball that reach at the spot at around the same required height, but it will be WAY off the mark

Do you know jeff thompson once said he wants to see the english blood on the field. There was a nice article in cricinfo talking about how an english batsmen' date=' hit by a brutal thompson bouncer, was murmuring , half in a state of shock, that thomo was actually trying to kill him! Dont you think that well directed bouncers and in swinging toe crushers physically harm a batsmen. Was all the uproar with respect to the "bodyline" series just because the english players were bowling bouncers. People can get very pumped up with all the adrenaline rushing through their vines. Sanity is all but lost and when a battle gets as fierce as it did in that match, anything could have happened. Are you suggesting that there isnt even a remote possibility that the ball could have been intentional but not directed at the neck. [/quote'] There's is a quantum difference of mentality which you are obviously conveniently forgetting. Its one thing to say ' I shall bowl bouncers at 90 mph directed at the batsman face', but an entirely different thing to decide " Ok, Am gonna hit the batsman on the full, on his helmet". In fact, the answer to your question lies in your post itself. Even at his most murderous self, Thommo was only bowling bouncers. Was there ever an instance of him bowling repeated beamers to hurt the batsman ?

Also' date=' though i enjoyed our battles (underarm in your terrace :D) our levels of cricket and competition are no where near what these guys are doing. Here is a bowler, bowling his heart out and extracting tremendous pace and he sees his compatriot being lifted over the keeper with such elegance. He knows when a batsmen is in flow, and he is desperate to do something about it. Rattle him probably and bouncers dont work. So what do you do next.[/quote'] Nonsense. Lee's not a psycho, to attempt something so devious.

[Lurker]

Do you know jeff thompson once said he wants to see the english blood on the field. There was a nice article in cricinfo talking about how an english batsmen, hit by a brutal thompson bouncer, was murmuring , half in a state of shock, that thomo was actually trying to kill him! Dont you think that well directed bouncers and in swinging toe crushers physically harm a batsmen.

Fast bowler hitting(and bloodying) batsmen is no new news. I am surprised that you quote Jeff Thomson and not someone like say Charlie Grifith who opened the skull of Indian Nari Contractor right at the pitch(for the trivia lovers West Indies skipper Frank Worrell donated Nari blood and perhaps saved his life). However the point of bowling bouncer(or swinging toe crusher) is to surprise the batsman and often to make him play a loose shot. You will see a bowler bowl 10 inswinging yorkers and get 1 wicket off them, maybe bowl half a dozen bouncers and see none hit the batsmen. Now how many beamers do you see being bowled? If you see a bowler bowl say half a dozen then yes there is a method to the madness else he deserves the benefit of the doubt. In fact you touched upon it yourself but didnt perhaps grasp it.

Was all the uproar with respect to the "bodyline" series just because the english players were bowling bouncers. People can get very pumped up with all the adrenaline rushing through their vines.

Has Bodyline become part of history because Larwood bowled leg-theory once every 10 overs? NO. He bowled to leg-side(often with 3 or more leg slips) ad-nauseum. Every ball was bowled on middle and leg and aimed at batsman's body. It wa deliberate and obvious. Lee's beamer to Sachin was one for the entire summer. Is there any remote comparison at all? xxx

[Ram]

Good points there Lurks. :two_thumbs_up:

[Holysmoke]

Doesnt matter mate. 125 kmph is 34.72 m/s and 140 kmph is 38.88 m/s. Now, calculating the momentum ( mass*velocity) values for both those deliveries, the first ball will hit you with a force of 5.52 Nm while the second one will pound into you at 6.228 Nm. A difference of a mere .7 Nm. Both will hurt equally, trust me.

Thank you. This means I'm not the only one who has calculated this earlier. :two_thumbs_up:

[OriginalCopy]

Nobody can be sure Lee did not bowl it intentionally ... and vice versa ... Lee has a history of bowling beamers; is it a result of trying too much when the batsmen are well set??? Does it slip off his fingers? Does it, really? Nobody can say for sure. I will not be passing my judgement on this since it is not clear. Nobody has read Lee's mind, only he knows the truth. But the fact is that he's bowled more beamers than anyone in recent memory.

[The Outsider]

If you see a bowler bowl say half a dozen then yes there is a method to the madness else he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

A bowler is not allowed more than one beamer in an innings. What kind of a rubbish argument is the above.