Jump to content

IPL ... Speeds and Performances of Pacers and Spinners ....

express bowling

By express bowling
in IPL Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

MediumPacer Grand Master

MediumPacer

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

 

Hawkeye is used to determine how much pace has been lost off the pitch .

 

There is plenty of evidence of batsmen doing better on quicker pitches. 

 

"Easy paced" is a casual term that is thrown to define a pitch that is good for batting 

 

It does not say anything about the actual slowness or lack thereof of a particular pitch. 

 

What tweaks to HawkEye?

 

I've already given you the examples of Chinnaswamy in the World Cup. 

 

The fastest pitch (assuming minimal lateral movement and uneven bounce) is usually the best batting pitch. 

 

The pitches which look "visually" quick are the ones with extra bounce if at all .

 

And the Wanderers even at its slowest is quicker than most 95 % of the pitches in the world. 

 

 

Hawkeye is often wrong, Stokes complained about it in the recent series.They don't talk about it as lot of money is involved.

 

Easy paced batting surfaces aren't overtly quick nor too slow, that's why batsmen succeed on it.

 

 

Pitches aren't always the same,Chinnaaswami pitch has been different in the last 2 matches,one was bare but the other had green grass.

 

Nikhil_cric Grand Master

Nikhil_cric

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, MediumPacer said:

Hawkeye is often wrong, Stokes complained about it in the recent series.They don't talk about it as lot of money is involved.

 

Easy paced batting surfaces aren't overtly quick nor too slow, that's why batsmen succeed on it.

 

 

Pitches aren't always the same,Chinnaaswami pitch has been different in the last 2 matches,one was bare but the other had green grass.

 

Hawkeye was not wrong. You need to understand the argument that Stokes was trying to make.

 

There have been errors with respect to the tracking on certain deliveries.

 

But when you average out data for 18 years of ball tracking , thete is 99.99 % certainty about the nature of pitches etc. 

 

Do you even know what the argument about Hawkeye was? 

 

I was talking specifically about the pitches used in the World Cup where the Chinnaswamy pitches were consistently faster than the rest of the pitches used. 

 

 

Mesky99 Mentor

Mesky99

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, tapandrun said:

Mavi is out of IPL 2024 any replacements for him...???

Limbani, gaurav yadav, himanshu, prithviraj yarra, mohammad saif, babasafi pathan from baroda.

MediumPacer Grand Master

MediumPacer

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Hawkeye was not wrong. You need to understand the argument that Stokes was trying to make.

 

There have been errors with respect to the tracking on certain deliveries.

 

But when you average out data for 18 years of ball tracking , thete is 99.99 % certainty about the nature of pitches etc. 

 

Do you even know what the argument about Hawkeye was? 

 

I was talking specifically about the pitches used in the World Cup where the Chinnaswamy pitches were consistently faster than the rest of the pitches used. 

 

 

In general terms ,you don't even need Hawkeye tracking or speedometer,it can be guessed even by naked eye.

 

Me sitting here can guess fairly well over a large number of deliveries,it might not be an exact match but will be close enough. Back when they had Hawkeye on cricinfo they used to have a discrepancy of 5-10 k on speeds shown on cricinfo's Hawkeye and the one on tv.

 

Nevertheless they are in charge ,so they always get to be right.If the errors were so negligible then why did Stokes bother.

 

So in you world there are only fast and slow pitches,and nothing in between.Chinnaswamy was failry flat during world cup,if they had left more grass it might have done something.

Nikhil_cric Grand Master

Nikhil_cric

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, MediumPacer said:

In general terms ,you don't even need Hawkeye tracking or speedometer,it can be guessed even by naked eye.

 

Me sitting here can guess fairly well over a large number of deliveries,it might not be an exact match but will be close enough. Back when they had Hawkeye on cricinfo they used to have a discrepancy of 5-10 k on speeds shown on cricinfo's Hawkeye and the one on tv.

 

Nevertheless they are in charge ,so they always get to be right.If the errors were so negligible then why did Stokes bother.

 

So in you world there are only fast and slow pitches,and nothing in between.Chinnaswamy was failry flat during world cup,if they had left more grass it might have done something.

Your arguments are barely coherent at this point. 

 

Stokes simply does not understand what a projection means. How is that HawkEye's fault?

 

How did Stokes become the final authority on anything related to technology in cricket.

 

There are plenty of people who have argued that HawkEye was right. 

 

The discrepancy was from the speed gun used at various venues. 

 

HawkEye has standardised it to a large extent. And many broadcasters use HawkEye speeds only now.

 

Where did I make a claim that said there are only fast or slow pitches?

 

My only point was, controlling for other variables like bounce , lateral movement and unevenness of surfaces,  pace in the pitch actually aids faster scoring .

 

You've been the one conflating unrelated things and making inane arguments 

 

 

MediumPacer Grand Master

MediumPacer

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Your arguments are barely coherent at this point. 

 

Stokes simply does not understand what a projection means. How is that HawkEye's fault?

 

How did Stokes become the final authority on anything related to technology in cricket.

 

There are plenty of people who have argued that HawkEye was right. 

 

The discrepancy was from the speed gun used at various venues. 

 

HawkEye has standardised it to a large extent. And many broadcasters use HawkEye speeds only now.

 

Where did I make a claim that said there are only fast or slow pitches?

 

My only point was, controlling for other variables like bounce , lateral movement and unevenness of surfaces,  pace in the pitch actually aids faster scoring .

 

You've been the one conflating unrelated things and making inane arguments 

 

 

You are one calling high scoring pitches like the 400 Jo'burg as among the quickest ,and implying as if pitches remain static.Even during the course of matches pitches can change,and then take the Hawkeye as gospel when better placed people have questioned it.

 

There is not much to expect from the likes of you.

Nikhil_cric Grand Master

Nikhil_cric

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, MediumPacer said:

You are one calling high scoring pitches like the 400 Jo'burg as among the quickest ,and implying as if pitches remain static.Even during the course of matches pitches can change,and then take the Hawkeye as gospel when better placed people have questioned it.

 

There is not much to expect from the likes of you.

 

Yeah brother. Pitches do change over the course of the match. 

 

You don't know the first thing about what arguments had about Hawkeye and still you keep repeating it like a parrot. 

.

Hawkeye data is wrong but your subjective judgement is so much superior.

 

The same judgement which keeps telling everyone here that medium pacers are the best for Indian pitches etc. etc. 

 

 

 

 

MediumPacer Grand Master

MediumPacer

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Nikhil_cric said:

 

Yeah brother. Pitches do change over the course of the match. 

 

You don't know the first thing about what arguments had about Hawkeye and still you keep repeating it like a parrot. 

.

Hawkeye data is wrong but your subjective judgement is so much superior.

 

The same judgement which keeps telling everyone here that medium pacers are the best for Indian pitches etc. etc. 

 

 

 

 

Speedometer can be wrong as can be the predicted path for lbw,these aren't controversial views but accepted by them as well.

 

Hasnt imran clocked 157 on these guns but he doesn't look that quick.Then starc clocked 160k in aus.

rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, MediumPacer said:

Speedometer can be wrong as can be the predicted path for lbw,these aren't controversial views but accepted by them as well.

 

Hasnt imran clocked 157 on these guns but he doesn't look that quick.Then starc clocked 160k in aus.

That 157 was certainly. He was putting everything in that season. But because that was a half volley it for a boundary. Length matters as well. Like short ball or bouncers usually record low readings on speedometer and fuller length higher. Green wicket yesterday. That looked more 156 than 146.

MK55 Grand Master

MK55

Posted
Posted

What do u guys think makes Mayank's deliveries difficult to negotiate?
I think besides his pace, it's gotta be the wrist snap at the end. His bowling arm is straight at the shoulder level and also when he delivers the ball which is good. But just prior to delivering, there's this huge wrist snap which Varun Aaron also pointed out. That gives that zip of the wicket and batters are late in playing those length balls. 

Vijy Grand Master

Vijy

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Nikhil_cric said:

 

A 5th pacer then .  India should not make the mistake of picking a 3rd spinner yet again.   

 

Should take a batting all-rounder who can bowl spin. 

have kuldeep + one spin AR + 4 pacers (of which 1 can bat to an extent)

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...