What's the secret behind Sam Curran's Success?

[vvvslaxman]

7 minutes ago, Nikola said:

Every trundler in every corner of world looks at bhuvi as source of inspiration & maybe he doesn't do that so that's the secret behind his success.

 

Curran was always a trundler who can swing the ball.  There is no heavy ball. None of his deliveries are going to whiz past your nose. His bowling works due to guys like Adil Rashid.

[Laaloo]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

If @Laaloo makes one more negative post about Lord Sam, banish him from ICF. 

Forgive me Lord Curran for I have sinned  

[Tattieboy]

The secret of his success is his late father who was a warrior , one of the hardest , determined cricketers I ever saw and he has passed some of that to his son . Not physically because his brother is the same build as dad  but mentally same as dad 

[vvvslaxman]

Caught parts of the match in full.  If india's bowling is trundling English bowling is uber trundling. They totally relied on change ups even at the MCG. They didn't get movement as much as Arshdeep or Bhuvi.  One wonder Harshal would have been aided by these pitches instead of Suxar.  Majority of Stokes/Curran deliveries were 127 kph.  Pakistan batsmen were beaten for bounce/pace of those deliveries. Couldn't line up.  I know Stokes can extract bounce even from docile pitches. But generally at lower pace.  On paper this is such an average bowling attack except Adil Rashid. That is where India also could have tried Chahal.  They didn't have any 150 kph bowlers. Pakistan had 2 atleast.  All of them could bowl at 145kph. 

 

One wonder if Indian bowlers  even strategically are behind England?

[Vijy]

5 hours ago, Tattieboy said:

The secret of his success is his late father who was a warrior , one of the hardest , determined cricketers I ever saw and he has passed some of that to his son . Not physically because his brother is the same build as dad  but mentally same as dad 

kevin curran was very bloody minded. a jolly good AR, who never got his due. could have been an elite ODI AR if he played for another team

[zen]

smart (knows how to use conditions) and resilient 

 

I would rather have someone like him playing in Ind's top order (#1-3) than a Rohit or a Kohli or a KL! 

[Vijy]

16 minutes ago, zen said:

smart (knows how to use conditions) and resilient 

 

I would rather have someone like him playing in Ind's top order (#1-3) than a Rohit or a Kohli or a KL! 

I was expecting to see curran and ali come up the order. one or both could have finished match much earlier. he is a devastating hitter when he gets going.

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Vijy said:

I was expecting to see curran and ali come up the order. one or both could have finished match much earlier. he is a devastating hitter when he gets going.

 

Eng actually rotated some of the batsmen well as Malan was either injured or used as a floater ... I recall Moeen, Stokes, Salt, etc. all bat at #3 at some point 

[Vijy]

Just now, zen said:

 

Eng actually rotated some of the batsmen well as Malan was either injured or used as a floater ... I recall Moeen, Stokes, Salt, etc. all bat at #3 at some point 

should have sent curran in place of brook IMO. curran can handle quick pace and scores at a good clip too

[rollingstoned]

5 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

Caught parts of the match in full.  If india's bowling is trundling English bowling is uber trundling. They totally relied on change ups even at the MCG. They didn't get movement as much as Arshdeep or Bhuvi.  One wonder Harshal would have been aided by these pitches instead of Suxar.  Majority of Stokes/Curran deliveries were 127 kph.  Pakistan batsmen were beaten for bounce/pace of those deliveries. Couldn't line up.  I know Stokes can extract bounce even from docile pitches. But generally at lower pace.  On paper this is such an average bowling attack except Adil Rashid. That is where India also could have tried Chahal.  They didn't have any 150 kph bowlers. Pakistan had 2 atleast.  All of them could bowl at 145kph. 

 

One wonder if Indian bowlers  even strategically are behind England?

Good tactics makes your bowling look better than it is. Says something that an attack which is slower than ours and got less swing than us looked just as Potent if not more than us. We are not using even the resources we have well, forget complaining about what we don't have. 

[vvvslaxman]

3 minutes ago, rollingstoned said:

Good tactics makes your bowling look better than it is. Says something that an attack which is slower than ours and got less swing than us looked just as Potent if not more than us. We are not using even the resources we have well, forget complaining about what we don't have. 

 

Their field setting and their line was immaculate. They used the dimensions well. They made it as uncomfortable as possible. India also did okay upto a point at the MCG reducing them to 120/7.  Then we started bowling filth. From 120/7 Pakistan reached 159. Against England they went from 121/4 to 137/8.  All they did was bowling change ups mixing with sharp short balls. Good field sets.

[rollingstoned]

1 minute ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Their field setting and their line was immaculate. They used the dimensions well. They made it as uncomfortable as possible. India also did okay upto a point at the MCG reducing them to 120/7.  Then we started bowling filth. From 120/7 Pakistan reached 159. Against England they went from 121/4 to 137/8.  All they did was bowling change ups mixing with sharp short balls. Good field sets.

Even during the Bangladesh game I felt we did not adapt well to the ground dimensions and pitch conditions. Every ground is distinctly different with its challenges in Australia. 

[vvvslaxman]

1 minute ago, rollingstoned said:

Even during the Bangladesh game I felt we did not adapt well to the ground dimensions and pitch conditions. Every ground is distinctly different with its challenges in Australia. 

 

I can say Netherlands had better strategy than India.

[Suhaan]

He did exactly what our jholadharis expected from Boobie to do here

Edited November 14, 2022 by Suhaan

[Vijy]

44 minutes ago, Suhaan said:

He did exactly what our jholadharis expected from Boobie to do here

he is a rich man's boobi.

[Mesky99]

Quick arm deceptive action, hits the pitch well, not skiddy hence hard to line him up, he's small but strong shouldered unlike our trundlers who are all skiddy and float it up, Yash dayal ain't express but bounced out Russel at dy Patil this new year during ipl, vaas was the toughest bowler to face even during the middle overs when no swing was on offer, hitting the pitch hard is a skill, it still requires a lot of effort even at 130-134kph, never seen a Indian seamer do it bar bumrah, Srinath and Zak at times. Watch the second dismissal here, ganguly had no clue. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bC0wp2GGu8o

[the don]

Reminds me of Irfan Pathan.Same skillset and variations. 

[Mesky99]

16 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Curran was always a trundler who can swing the ball.  There is no heavy ball. None of his deliveries are going to whiz past your nose. His bowling works due to guys like Adil Rashid.

Wrong he has a good bumper, bowls a good Yorker, quick arm action and slightly low arm, he is deceptive.

[singhvivek141]

4 hours ago, Mesky99 said:

Quick arm deceptive action, hits the pitch well, not skiddy hence hard to line him up, he's small but strong shouldered unlike our trundlers who are all skiddy and float it up, Yash dayal ain't express but bounced out Russel at dy Patil this new year during ipl, vaas was the toughest bowler to face even during the middle overs when no swing was on offer, hitting the pitch hard is a skill, it still requires a lot of effort even at 130-134kph, never seen a Indian seamer do it bar bumrah, Srinath and Zak at times. Watch the second dismissal here, ganguly had no clue. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bC0wp2GGu8o

Neil Wagner is prime example...pace wise he's a trundler but hardest to face even by the best batters due to his relentless accuracy and hitting the pitch with consistency.
 

[Vilander]

15 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

Caught parts of the match in full.  If india's bowling is trundling English bowling is uber trundling. They totally relied on change ups even at the MCG. They didn't get movement as much as Arshdeep or Bhuvi.  One wonder Harshal would have been aided by these pitches instead of Suxar.  Majority of Stokes/Curran deliveries were 127 kph.  Pakistan batsmen were beaten for bounce/pace of those deliveries. Couldn't line up.  I know Stokes can extract bounce even from docile pitches. But generally at lower pace.  On paper this is such an average bowling attack except Adil Rashid. That is where India also could have tried Chahal.  They didn't have any 150 kph bowlers. Pakistan had 2 atleast.  All of them could bowl at 145kph. 

 

One wonder if Indian bowlers  even strategically are behind England?

Eng game was lost on Batting.