Should BCCI place a soft ban on 'fast' bowlers bowling slower than 125 - 128 kph average in our domestics ?

[vvvslaxman]

We cannot make selection based on speeds. Some bowlers increase speed over time. Some bowler lose pace after some time. What will we do then if they lose? Should we drop them? You have to check the basics and how they evolve as a bowler. Fast bowling is the most thankless job in cricket. So many ways you can pick up injuries.  Incentivize genuine pacers by  selecting them for special camp not punishing those couldn't get to that level.

[vishalvirsingh]

On 12/23/2021 at 4:58 PM, deepdynamo said:

I believe 135 is a cut off speed for International fast bowlers. Anything less that that and the bowler become condition specific.

 

- Philander was mediocre outside green mambas.

VVS-> most accurate trundler to play cricket. he could swing and was a phenomenal success on Green wickets but he was a big failure on Indian wickets.   even the best of trundlers may fail on patta's for test cricket...i guess that is proved- QED.

- Pollock was 150 to begin with and ended at around 132. On an average he was around 135 which was good enough. 

VVS-> pollock bowled 145K at start and had a great line n length. he generated good bounce. probably a good fast bowling coach now.

- Asif was a magician because he made the ball talk at 135 and not 130.

Yes Asif was a tricky trundler but his bag of tricks were too many.
- Kyle Jamison was menacing at 135 in NZ but harmless at 130 in India ( esp second test)...

 

VVS_> the way jamieson failed in India , i realised that he is only good in english,nz and aussie pitches. probably i rated him better.
- Mohammad Abbas started with bang in test cricket bowling at around 133-35 but as soon as he become a trundler at 125, he was toothless.

VVS-> i always new , abbas wont suceed for long as he was Slow. he was too accurate initially and later his novelty factor was gone..every batsman knew he is an accurate trundler.

 

So, Yes skills are absolute crucial but lack of pace will not compliment the skill and will limit the bowler. Ofcourse there will be exception like Vaas who had a long career but that has to do with lack of quality options in SL cricket.
 

 

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

30 minutes ago, vishalvirsingh said:

 

 

Jamieson still did better than Brett Lee in India. He averaged 61 in India. 93 in Bangladesh. He was faster than any of the pacers we have playing currently. We have an example for everything. Medium pacers doing well, Raw pacers doing well. Medium pacers doing badly. Raw pacers doing badly. Donald/ Steyn are outstanding in swinging conditions. They can run through a side like nobody's business. MOment there is no outswing on offer Steyn looks like any other ordinary bowler. We are trying over-simplify fast bowling by using "clock speed" as measure. Siraj can bowl quick. But what i like about him is when in rhythm his balls just kiss the surface and zips off meaning less loss of pace after pitching. That is a biggest problem for Ishant. He probably loses more pace after pitching than others.

[Vijy]

while speed is not everything, there is generally a min threshold speed that most (but not all) bowlers have in int'l cricket. Furthermore, people like Pollock who became medium-fast or fast-medium toward the end of their careers started out being quite brisk, even though not express pace. What we should do is to focus on the general trend - not statistical anomalies - and the trend is that successful pacers in int'l cricket in the beginning of their career bowled at least 133-136 kph on avg, and often more.

 

whereas in VHT, most pacers are trundling at 120-122 kph, failing to get bounce, and not even showing that much mastery over swing, seam, subtle variations, etc. exceptions like yash dayal and mavi (still not at his best) have been few and far in between.

[Jay]

35 minutes ago, Vijy said:

while speed is not everything, there is generally a min threshold speed that most (but not all) bowlers have in int'l cricket. Furthermore, people like Pollock who became medium-fast or fast-medium toward the end of their careers started out being quite brisk, even though not express pace. What we should do is to focus on the general trend - not statistical anomalies - and the trend is that successful pacers in int'l cricket in the beginning of their career bowled at least 133-136 kph on avg, and often more.

 

whereas in VHT, most pacers are trundling at 120-122 kph, failing to get bounce, and not even showing that much mastery over swing, seam, subtle variations, etc. exceptions like yash dayal and mavi (still not at his best) have been few and far in between.

If you don't have good bounce along with seam variations then ensure you bowl above 133 at the very least. 133 should be bare minimum. 133-138. 

130 is a tad too low. Yes the extra 3 ks make a huge difference. 

[Dery]

In our domestics most of Pacers bowl 120-125 mph & keep getting picked cuz experience, nepotism, corruption. State teams keep developing pitches where they can dominate. They don't develop coaches who encourage bowling fast. Bowlers who can fast keep getting ignored.

We do not develop Pollocks or McGraths

[Vijy]

Indian domestic cricket is not looking that rosy based on VHT. Paucity of exciting batsmen in middle order (top order is fine for LOIs), paucity of wicket-taking spinners, and paucity of pacers who are willing to bend their backs and crank it up to 135+ while retaining consistency.

[Dery]

U 19 players also look mediocre 

[Vijy]

42 minutes ago, Dery said:

U 19 players also look mediocre 

yes, perhaps we are seeing the dawn of a new era: back to the "good ol days" of mediocrity.

[Lone Wolf]

I think plenty of corruption is going on across cricket administration in India.  There's been a while no outright genuine talent is coming through. 

We need more people like Irfan Pathan & Parthiv Patel to do some scouting at a bigger level.  Not impressed with current level in domestic cricket as well.  IPl is head n shoulders above Ranji trophy right now I think.  When someone like Kishan is comfortably out scoring domestic bullies on A tours you know IPl product >> Ranji trophy. 

[R!TTER]

10 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Jamieson still did better than Brett Lee in India. He averaged 61 in India. 93 in Bangladesh. He was faster than any of the pacers we have playing currently. We have an example for everything. Medium pacers doing well, Raw pacers doing well. Medium pacers doing badly. Raw pacers doing badly. Donald/ Steyn are outstanding in swinging conditions. They can run through a side like nobody's business. MOment there is no outswing on offer Steyn looks like any other ordinary bowler. We are trying over-simplify fast bowling by using "clock speed" as measure. Siraj can bowl quick. But what i like about him is when in rhythm his balls just kiss the surface and zips off meaning less loss of pace after pitching. That is a biggest problem for Ishant. He probably loses more pace after pitching than others.

Jamieson didn't bowl on the flat roads that Lee did, against much better batsmen than the t*** we have right now! It's like you totally forget how cricket has changed in 15 years?

 

Says who? You think the guy with best S/R post Marshall & 400 wickets did it all with just outswing 

 

KJ is good but he's hardly earth shattering like some of you are making him out to be, if he was he'd picked at least one wicket at Mumbai. There was a fair amount of assistance for pacers in the first session at Kanpur & our batting was much weaker than normal.

Edited December 25, 2021 by R!TTER

[vvvslaxman]

Just now, R!TTER said:

Jamieson didn't bowl on the flat roads that Lee did, against much better batsmen than the t*** we have right now! It's like you totally forget how cricket has changed in 15 years?

 

Says who? You think the guy with best best S/R post & 400 wickets did it all with just outswing 

 

Bangladesh was a much better team back then? Didn't know. 2 tests Lee averaged 93 there.

[R!TTER]

Bangladesh nearly beat Oz in 2006 in a test at home, not sure if it was the first test or second but they weren't exactly sh!t against S.E.N.A. teams even back then.

 

If they'd have pulled that off it'd arguably be the biggest shock defeat this century, maybe with DRS they could've pulled it off - you know the biggest change in cricket post WW2 

Edited December 25, 2021 by R!TTER

[Adamant]

Comparing spraygun Lee with Jamieson in test cricket. 

Good lord. 

[R!TTER]

 

Great numbers these, I wonder who they belong to 

home	2020-2021	6	226	51*	56.50	0	36	6/48	13.27	4	2	0	43.22
away	2021-2021	3	54	23	10.80	0	9	3/40	32.77	0	2	0	-21.97
neutral	2021-2021	1	21	21	21.00	0	7	5/31	8.71	1	0	0	12.28

Edited December 25, 2021 by R!TTER

[Suhaan]

2 hours ago, Adamant said:

Comparing spraygun Lee with Jamieson in test cricket. 

Good lord. 

Its too early to judge a 10 test old Jamieson,

Lee played 76 tests averaging 30,not earth shattering accepted but how do one can predict future for Jamieson that too so early,a face palm for those posters

[Adamant]

20 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 

In the 4 matches Rishi Dhawan played for India, he bowled around 123 k to 133 k.  

 

And he has 308 wickets from 79 FC matches averaging 26.9. Just because he can bat does not mean he is not a frontline bowler for his state team.

Rishi Dhawan never bowled 130+, will happily take this back if you show me a video where he cranked up more than 130 kph, he was always a low 120s and high 110s bowler. 

[Adamant]

54 minutes ago, Suhaan said:

Its too early to judge a 10 test old Jamieson,

Lee played 76 tests averaging 30,not earth shattering accepted but how do one can predict future for Jamieson that too so early,a face palm for those posters

I can predict one thing for sure, Jamieson will retire as a way better test bowler than Brett lee.

And I have zero doubt about that, Lee was mediocre. Jamieson's height means that he will always be effective in SENA and can be a stock bowler in Asia. 

[Suhaan]

38 minutes ago, Adamant said:

I can predict one thing for sure, Jamieson will retire as a way better test bowler than Brett lee.

And I have zero doubt about that, Lee was mediocre. Jamieson's height means that he will always be effective in SENA and can be a stock bowler in Asia. 

Having bowling avg of 30 after 76 tests isnt mediocre

Jamieson is new young,by the time he ages he will surely loose pace and that will decide how does he ends up

So hold your horses now

[Adamant]

2 hours ago, Suhaan said:

 

So hold your horses now

I don't need to hold any horse, all my horses run berserk. 

 

I have an eye for talent. 

Jamieson will retire as a better bowler than Lee.