Why is the full front page criticising our batsman?

[maniac]

3 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Seam movement is due to the pitch,not because of him. His strength was bowling short of length, getting extra bounce and beating batsmen for bounce. Movement of the pitch is added advantage here. Even in 2003 WC final, McGrath had beaten Tendulkar for extra bounce.

Have you heard about exploiting cracks in the pitch?  You are confusing swing and seam. 
 

Mcgrath picks his spot on the pitch and hits the seam and nagging lengths and the spot in the pitch gives natural variation. That’s not a Mcgrath thing, every bowler does that however what separates a guy like Mcgrath and other mediocre bowlers is the ability to hit the spot with accuracy and consistency.

[nitinbwj]

McGrath was a freaking bowling machine ..ball after ball after ball at the same length and awkward height. Only way to counter him was running down the pitch and slogging. Tendu did that on quite a few occasions. Not that it had any substantial effect. Glad that he has retired...

[rkt.india]

4 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

NO!!!

 

He beat Tendulkar because of his immaculate length coupled with line and added it with bounce! That length and line actually did not always need too much bounce either. Reason why Mcgrath was successful in India too. Check his stats in India. It will put the best of the best to shame. 

Getting a batsman out is called being aggressive. And Mcgrath was a champion at that. Srinath was quicker, used to bowl more bouncers, vary lines more than him. Guess who was called the aggressor! 

 

It is very clear RKT, you havent seen much of cricket from 90's and early 2000. 

I am watching cricket since 93. There is a basic difference between defensive and agressive bowling. Brett Lee was agressive. McGrath wasn't and that was his strength. He played on the patience of batsmen. He wouldn't give you a half volley while an aggressive bowler would give you a half volley to buy your wicket. McGrath would bowl outside off stump, short of length and that extra bounce made him very difficult to hit from that length. Batsmen neither could drive him as it wasn't full nor could pull him as ball wasn't too short to pull. 

 

I can give you example of spinner. Any spinner who bowls flat, quick through the air is a defensive spinner. A spinner who gives air invite batsmen to hit him out of the park, make him drive to buy his wicket is an aggressive spinner. What does aggressive mean? First people need to understand that. In batting terms, agress means taking risk to score quickly, trying to hit the bowlers out of the park. You can't be aggressive unless take risk. Sehwag took risk so he was an aggressive batsman. Dravid played safe usually, so, was a defensive batsman. Same way, in bowling, you are not aggressive until you are taking risk of getting hit to buy a wicket. By this definition, I consider McGrath a defensive bowler. He always believed in strangling and dry up the runs and make batsman commit mistakes rather than trying to buy his wicket by bowling risky lengths where he could either get a wicket or concede runs if batsman connect well. Like when a leg spinner flights the ball, he is at risk to get hit, inviting batsman to hit him out of the park but he is taking that risk to get his wicket. Batsman might hit him but there is also a chance he could get him stumped, mistime the ball or get an edge to the slip.  This is the reason wrist spinners are called aggressive options. Same with fast bowlers. Any fast bowler who is ready to get hit to buy a wicket is an aggressive bowler either by bowling full in search of swing and getting driven or getting pulled trying to bounce out the batsman. So aggressive means risk, risk of getting out for batsmen, risk of getting hit for bowlers.

 

McGrath was your quintessential defensive bowler, one of the greatest at it. Wasim Akram was someone who did both things as he had the skills depending on the conditions. If there was swing Akram wouldn't hesitate to bowl half volleys trying to swing the ball and get the edges. On flatter Surface, he would try to bowl containing length. McGrath almost always bowled containing length.

Edited December 1, 2020 by rkt.india

[rkt.india]

16 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 

In the video, McGrath is mostly bowling good length and not back of a length. And only a few balls have bounced extra. See how many times the batsmen have played on the front foot. It would not have been possible if he was bowling back of a length.

 

Attacking length means the batsman comes on the front foot but is actually not able to drive the ball. If he can drive then in most cases the ball is a poor half volley. ( unless the batsman drives on the up )

 

 

Thats the point, not a single delivery for batsman to drive. How can I consider. Him an aggressively bowler when he isn't hitting aggressive length. He is defensive. He is asking batsman to attack him instead. In any battle, when you defend, you expect opposition to attack you, make mistakes and there you can grab him. McGrath did the same.

[rkt.india]

Hopefully, reading my above two posts, people will understand what agressive bowling is. What is the difference between aggressive and defensive. People here usual mix up two different terms defensive bowling and negative bowling. Both are two different terms. 

[Rightarmfast]

10 hours ago, rkt.india said:

I am watching cricket since 93. There is a basic difference between defensive and agressive bowling. Brett Lee was agressive. McGrath wasn't and that was his strength. He played on the patience of batsmen. He wouldn't give you a half volley while an aggressive bowler would give you a half volley to buy your wicket. McGrath would bowl outside off stump, short of length and that extra bounce made him very difficult to hit from that length. Batsmen neither could drive him as it wasn't full nor could pull him as ball wasn't too short to pull. 

 

I can give you example of spinner. Any spinner who bowls flat, quick through the air is a defensive spinner. A spinner who gives air invite batsmen to hit him out of the park, make him drive to buy his wicket is an aggressive spinner. What does aggressive mean? First people need to understand that. In batting terms, agress means taking risk to score quickly, trying to hit the bowlers out of the park. You can't be aggressive unless take risk. Sehwag took risk so he was an aggressive batsman. Dravid played safe usually, so, was a defensive batsman. Same way, in bowling, you are not aggressive until you are taking risk of getting hit to buy a wicket. By this definition, I consider McGrath a defensive bowler. He always believed in strangling and dry up the runs and make batsman commit mistakes rather than trying to buy his wicket by bowling risky lengths where he could either get a wicket or concede runs if batsman connect well. Like when a leg spinner flights the ball, he is at risk to get hit, inviting batsman to hit him out of the park but he is taking that risk to get his wicket. Batsman might hit him but there is also a chance he could get him stumped, mistime the ball or get an edge to the slip.  This is the reason wrist spinners are called aggressive options. Same with fast bowlers. Any fast bowler who is ready to get hit to buy a wicket is an aggressive bowler either by bowling full in search of swing and getting driven or getting pulled trying to bounce out the batsman. So aggressive means risk, risk of getting out for batsmen, risk of getting hit for bowlers.

 

McGrath was your quintessential defensive bowler, one of the greatest at it. Wasim Akram was someone who did both things as he had the skills depending on the conditions. If there was swing Akram wouldn't hesitate to bowl half volleys trying to swing the ball and get the edges. On flatter Surface, he would try to bowl containing length. McGrath almost always bowled containing length.

If we start calling 'Sun' as 'Moon' tomorrow, it will not change the fact that sun will remain sun, Too much googling can keep you off facts.

[Cricketics]

3 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Hopefully, reading my above two posts, people will understand what agressive bowling is. What is the difference between aggressive and defensive. People here usual mix up two different terms defensive bowling and negative bowling. Both are two different terms. 

No. The difference you are trying to project between aggressive and defensive bowling by saying that you have been watching since 1993  doesn’t make sense. Your definition for aggressive might be correct but you keep calling Mcgrath’s line defensive in most threads is what makes the whole thing weird. Now you will say calling someone defensive is not an insult. Well you are not insulting anyone, you are just not using the right words.

 

 

It’s one of those agree to disagree moments I think. 

[Rightarmfast]

6 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Hopefully, reading my above two posts, people will understand what agressive bowling is. What is the difference between aggressive and defensive. People here usual mix up two different terms defensive bowling and negative bowling. Both are two different terms. 

Why do you think people need to learn from you? People are already aware.  

[rkt.india]

5 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

No. The difference you are trying to project between aggressive and defensive bowling by saying that you have been watching since 1993  doesn’t make sense. Your definition for aggressive might be correct but you keep calling Mcgrath’s line defensive in most threads is what makes the whole thing weird. Now you will say calling someone defensive is not an insult. Well you are not insulting anyone, you are just not using the right words.

 

 

It’s one of those agree to disagree moments I think. 

All bowlers at time bowls defensive and aggressive but McGrath's modus operandi makes him defensive bowler. And I am not trying to tell the difference between defensive and aggressive beci am watching from 93. I said I am watching from 93 is because the poster said I hadn't watched cricket in 90s. 

 

I am using absolutely right words and it's not insulting to anyone. Defensive isn't an insult. It's just a method of bowling. If I was a bowler, I too would hate to concede runs and would like to bowl to prevent batsmen to take risk and hit me instead of me giving them a chance to hit me. This will be defensive bowling. I want most Indian bowlers to bowl defensive like McGrath in ODIs.

[Stan AF]

Bump. How about now?

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Why do you think people need to learn from you? People are already aware.  

Because there are a lot of misconceptions like you don't know what is a hip dominant fast bowler.

Edited December 2, 2020 by rkt.india

[express bowling]

2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Thats the point, not a single delivery for batsman to drive. How can I consider. Him an aggressively bowler when he isn't hitting aggressive length. He is defensive. He is asking batsman to attack him instead. In any battle, when you defend, you expect opposition to attack you, make mistakes and there you can grab him. McGrath did the same.

 

 

If a batsman can drive then it is not aggressive length. It is poor length.

 

When the batsman is confused regarding whether to come on the front foot or back foot ... but usually ends up playing on the front foot ... that is good length ... that is attacking length. 

 

When the batsman is confused regarding whether to play the ball or leave the ball ... but usually ends up playing it ... this is a good line or channel line.

 

It is this duel confusion in the minds of batsmen which produces wickets. And this is the attacking line and length combo.

 

And McGrath used to do this regularly.

 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by express bowling

[rkt.india]

2 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

If a batsman can drive then it is not aggressive length. It is poor length.

 

When the batsman is confused regarding whether to come on the front foot or back foot ... but usually ends up playing on the front foot ... that is good length ... that is attacking length. 

 

When the batsman is confused regarding whether to play the ball or leave the ball ... but usually ends up playing it ... this is a good line or channel line.

 

It is this duel confusion in the minds of batsmen which produced wickets. And this is why wickets are picked up. And this is the attacking line and length combo.

 

And McGrath used to do this regularly.

 

 

 

You would hardly see batsman getting out driving against McGrath. As I said aggressive means risk, risk of getting hit for bowlers, risk of getting out for batsmen. McGrath hates getting hit, so he hardly bowled that length where batsman could hit him. Aggressive bowling means making batsmen try to hit you to get his wicket. If you are bowling a length where batsman just defending you then that is a defensive bowling. Most talk about defensive bowling in LOIs, hitting that hard length. McGrath did it all his career. 

[Rightarmfast]

“As far as fast bowler is concerned, Glenn McGrath was the toughest I have faced, I have played him at the peak of his career and he was truly a great bowler. When he was bowling well it was very difficult to judge your off stump.”

“He kept challenging you, kept testing you just around that off stump. He was a very aggressive bowler irrespective of whether he was bowling his first or second over or the 25th over, he was always at you, probing and asking questions.”

 

I dont know why Rahul Dravid said this!

[express bowling]

31 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

You would hardly see batsman getting out driving against McGrath. As I said aggressive means risk, risk of getting hit for bowlers, risk of getting out for batsmen. McGrath hates getting hit, so he hardly bowled that length where batsman could hit him. Aggressive bowling means making batsmen try to hit you to get his wicket. If you are bowling a length where batsman just defending you then that is a defensive bowling. Most talk about defensive bowling in LOIs, hitting that hard length. McGrath did it all his career. 

 

 

Risk of getting hit is NOT attacking bowling.

 

Creating twin CONFUSIONS in the minds of batters regarding whether to play on the front foot or back foot + whether to play or leave the ball ... is attacking bowling.

 

 

 

 

[New guy]

IND - 948 VS AUS (2020)

 

This is the second highest total runs made by a touring team, in a 3 match series, against ANY country in the history of cricket

 

Our batting did really well

Edited December 2, 2020 by New guy

[nevada]

14 hours ago, nitinbwj said:

McGrath was a freaking bowling machine ..ball after ball after ball at the same length and awkward height. Only way to counter him was running down the pitch and slogging. Tendu did that on quite a few occasions. Not that it had any substantial effect. Glad that he has retired...

KP tried running down the pitch against McGrath and got hit in the ribs - quite badly!