Is there a reason why Sreesanth should be picked again?

[vvvslaxman]

We should pick Sreesanth just to keep Ishant on his toes. :--D

[Lurker]

After all that stuff' date=' Fontaine, you write "The problem is NOT genetics." Even if you didn't read a line of what I wrote, how do you explain the fact that in 60+ years of playing cricket, we have never had a genuine fast bowler except for Kaps & Srinath for very brief periods? [b']How can you rule out genetics so confidently? Where do you get that confidence?

Fairly easy to rule out Genetic Dhondy. Why has New Zealand failed to produce a quality off-spinner in its cricketing history(unless you count John Bracewell as an all time great). Is there a genetics for off spinners too? Why has Australia failed to produce a left arm spinner(with due apologies to Ray Bright & Alan Border)? Why has England never produced a leg spin googly bowler? Yada yada. This is a very slippery slope and one can easily counter every country deficient in some areas and thus alluding that their genetic make-up has to be the reason. By the by a very interesting, and perhaps missed out, phenomenon happening these days is the Indian pacers/seamers obtaining reverse swing. To the point that even Aussies and English are absolutely respectful of what Zaheer and others have achieved. Was it not the popular thought only a few years back that Pakistani fast bowlers were able to reverse swing simply because they had bowlers who could bowl at 90 mph plus? Did Imran not go about yapping how reverse swing happens only at extreme pace? Pray what do these experts think at zaheer obtainig reverse swing at 80mph. Moral of the story - Nothing succeeds like success. The day we produce a fast bowler every argument would be put to rest by itself. xxx

[Ram]

Doc, while surveying the inter-wide web for study material related to the influence of genetics in other sporting disciplines, I came across this journal in the Cambridge website titled 'Genetic influence on East African running success'. Obviously, I dont have full access to their site, but the abstract of that research paper was extremely revealing. Here it is, for your ref;

East African athletes now dominate international distance running events from the 800 m to the marathon. Explanations for their phenomenal success have included optimal environmental conditions for developing distance running performance, psychological advantage and advantageous physiological characteristics. It is well established that genetics plays a role in determining inter-individual differences in exercise performance and adaptation to training stimuli. It is not known, however, to what extent inter-population differences (i.e. between ‘races’ and/or ethnic groups) in exercise performance can be attributed to genetics. There have been considerations that ‘black’ athletes are genetically adapted towards performance, given the concurrent success of athletes of West African ancestry in sprint events. However, the current notion of ‘race’ is not universally accepted, and genetic differences within and between populations are not clearly delineated by geographical or ethnic categorizations. Recent findings from mitochondrial DNA show that the populations from which Ethiopian athletes are drawn have not been isolated populations and are not genetically distinct from other Ethiopians. Y-chromosome analysis of the same population shows concurrent results, although some differences are present between athletes and the general Ethiopian population, suggesting an influence of the Y chromosome on athlete status in Ethiopia. It is concluded that there may be a role for genetics in the success of East African athletes; however, any genetic component to their success is unlikely to be limited to East Africans and is more likely to be found in other populations. At present it is unjustified to implicate a role for genetics in the success of East African runners when no genes have been identified as being important to their performance.

I think these findings are very similar to the thoughts you have posted in the thread so far. It seems to suggest as though 'Genetics may play a role, but it almost impossible to prove it' Ref;http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=7A6AE12CF94BA3C84253744B0BF78EDD.tomcat1?fromPage=online&aid=793784

[Dhondy]

That's very useful, Sriram, many thanks. It does confirm the impression I had. There is in fact something called the HapMap project (www.hapmap.org) which is trying to define conserved haplotype (one half of a genome) blocks across different ethnic groups. The Americans are there, the Japanese are there...Blocks are statistical patterns, not individual genes. The study has shown up some fascinating insights such as that for a given segment of chromosomes (usually 2-8 chromosomes), all humans have only 4-6 ancestors! This doesn't mean we are all descended from 4-6 prehistoric men, as the next chromosomal segment will be derived from 4-6 different ancestors. It does show however, on the whole, how well conserved the human genome is. Ultimately, we are all related.

[Ram]

That's very useful, Sriram, many thanks. It does confirm the impression I had. There is in fact something called the HapMap project (www.hapmap.org) which is trying to define conserved haplotype (one half of a genome) blocks across different ethnic groups. The Americans are there, the Japanese are there...Blocks are statistical patterns, not individual genes. The study has shown up some fascinating insights such as that for a given segment of chromosomes (usually 2-8 chromosomes), all humans have only 4-6 ancestors! This doesn't mean we are all descended from 4-6 prehistoric men, as the next chromosomal segment will be derived from 4-6 different ancestors. It does show however, on the whole, how well conserved the human genome is. Ultimately, we are all related.

Yep, that has something that struck me too. While reading up some stuff related to genomes, I expected to find some significant differences in the genes of different ethnic groups, but it it far from the case. Btw, I found another source. It claims to be the 'International SportsMed Journal', but I cannot personally vouch for the pedigree of the work there, unlike the previous Cambridge work. But, it has a lot more information for open reading. I found this particular passage most interesting, mainly because it indicates to the influence of geographic distribution of population, apart from the genetic differences due to ethnic differences, that might impact individuals' performance in endurance sports like running.

Potential genetic determinants of East African running success The capacity of Homo sapiens for endurance running (defined as the ability to sustain running for extended periods of time using primarily aerobic metabolism), although not comparable to other mammalian endurance specialists, is unique among the primates. This has led to the belief that endurance capabilities have been central to the recent evolutionary history of modern humans 30. The unique endurance capacity of humans relative to the other primatesis purported to be due to a number of traceable adaptations beneficial to endurance running in the Homo genus 30. Although anatomically modern humans are young in evolutionary terms (~150,000 years) relative to the age of the Homo genus (~2 million years), human populations began to diverge into new environments outside Africa ~70,000 years ago 31. It is possible, therefore, that divergent human populations (in different continents for a significant portion of the age of the species) have accrued varying degrees of these adaptations due to different selection pressures, further specialising them for an endurance phenotype or otherwise. The varying adaptation to hypobaric hypoxia by geographically isolated populations represents a well-studied example of this and may relate to endurance performance. Andean highlanders display higher levels of haemoglobin and saturation than Tibetans at similar altitude, while Ethiopian highlanders maintain oxygen delivery despite having haemoglobin levels and saturation typical of sea level ranges 32. There has been much conjecture surrounding such adaptations to altitude and their role in the evolution of human physiological responses 33,34. Given the origin of modern humans in East Africa: a higher, drier and cooler environment than more distant ancestors may have inhabited, the ancestral form of modern humans would have been well adapted for altitude tolerance and presumably, endurance performance, as the phenotypes are similar 34. If the ancestral form developed in the highlands of East Africa was indeed an altitude/endurance phenotype, East Africans may have further developed an up-regulated, high capacity version through having remained in the same environment 34, thus favouring them further for endurance performance. Other populations may have ‘diluted’ the ancestral phenotype, or developed down-regulated, low-capacity versions through selection for other phenotypes on migration to new environments (e.g. Andean and Tibetan populations) 34. Some insight was offered into this intriguing hypothesis in the first genetic studies of elite East African runners, using uni-parentally inherited genetic markers to investigate the ancestral origins of many of the world’s best middle- and long-distance runners.

Here's the link to the full paper - http://www.fims.org/default.asp?pageID=782860264

[Fontaine]

After all that stuff, Fontaine, you write "The problem is NOT genetics." Even if you didn't read a line of what I wrote, how do you explain the fact that in 60+ years of playing cricket, we have never had a genuine fast bowler except for Kaps & Srinath for very brief periods? How can you rule out genetics so confidently? Where do you get that confidence?

Dude, my comment there was in a specific context of the two bowlers Sreesanth and Pathan as it's framed in my post. In retrospect I should have written "Their problem is NOT genetics." Cool?

[Fontaine]

Fairly easy to rule out Genetic Dhondy. Why has New Zealand failed to produce a quality off-spinner in its cricketing history(unless you count John Bracewell as an all time great). Is there a genetics for off spinners too? Why has Australia failed to produce a left arm spinner(with due apologies to Ray Bright & Alan Border)? Why has England never produced a leg spin googly bowler? Yada yada. This is a very slippery slope and one can easily counter every country deficient in some areas and thus alluding that their genetic make-up has to be the reason. By the by a very interesting, and perhaps missed out, phenomenon happening these days is the Indian pacers/seamers obtaining reverse swing. To the point that even Aussies and English are absolutely respectful of what Zaheer and others have achieved. Was it not the popular thought only a few years back that Pakistani fast bowlers were able to reverse swing simply because they had bowlers who could bowl at 90 mph plus? Did Imran not go about yapping how reverse swing happens only at extreme pace? Pray what do these experts think at zaheer obtainig reverse swing at 80mph. Moral of the story - Nothing succeeds like success. The day we produce a fast bowler every argument would be put to rest by itself. xxx

Good point.

[Dhondy]

Fairly easy to rule out Genetic Dhondy. Why has New Zealand failed to produce a quality off-spinner in its cricketing history(unless you count John Bracewell as an all time great). Is there a genetics for off spinners too? Why has Australia failed to produce a left arm spinner(with due apologies to Ray Bright & Alan Border)? Why has England never produced a leg spin googly bowler? Yada yada. This is a very slippery slope and one can easily counter every country deficient in some areas and thus alluding that their genetic make-up has to be the reason. xxx

How does that rule out a genetic contribution to fast bowling? Science doesn't subscribe to political correctness because a few people don't like being told that their lack of fast bowling prowess might be just as easily inherited as due to environmental variables. Those considerations are best kept for the politics section.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

Science doesn't subscribe to political correctness because a few people don't like being told that their lack of fast bowling prowess might be just as easily inherited as due to environmental variables. Those considerations are best kept for the politics section.

Using the term "political correctness" in every second sentence is lame. If you want to retain the gravitas of those two words I suggest you use it with caution, not merely when you run out of ideas.

How does that rule out a genetic contribution to fast bowling?

Why not? It clearly shows that if any other type of bowling(leg spin, off spin, left arm) is not dependent on genes why would fast bowling be? Lets take that argument further and wonder why Pakistanis absolutely suck at fielding or running between wickets? Genes at work again? Lets also discuss why Sri Lanka has never produced a quality all-rounder. Lacking in genes? Why has there been a sudden burst in left arm pacers in India in last 10 years when there was none in first 50? Sudden change of genes? Why does Hyderabad produce all the batting artists while Mumbai produce khadoos cricketers? Gene changes in 200 miles?? xxx

[Sooda]

^As Boss points out though genetics has a say on how you develop physically- size etc, which in turn has a major say on how fast you can bowl and how long you can sustain it for. And things like spin bowling and batting are not affected much by size. What you point out Lurker maybe is all to do with 'environs' alone.

[Dhondy]

Lurker, with all due respect, I suggest that you read up the interplay of environment and genes that I have posted a few lines above. I have never suggested genes explain everything, so your efforts to transform this into an "all or nothing" argument will not succeed.

[thevortex]

Spin bowling is not a physically demanding activity ... unlike superfast bowling sense>

Only in comparison to fast bowling, Bossbhai :). As otherwise, spin too takes a heavy toll on fingers and wrist and shoulder. In many ways, without the aid of momentum, the spinner tends to a lot of his work through wrist and shoulder. And yes it does induce a lot of strain on the body. Just not as much as fast bowling though. ________ Live sex

[thevortex]

With all due respect we can continue to discuss esoteric aspects of genetics and medicine. But the matter at hand is one of the Indian pacers dropping their pace after a season of playing at the highest level. That, to me, is nothing related to genetics. At least on the face of it. Seems like nobody here wants to discuss that aspect of Indian cricket? ________ Headshop

[CG]

Off the top of my head, I remember Sreesanth being dropped from the ODIs against England on our last tour there. If I cared enough to look I'm pretty sure he's been dropped other times as well. Funnily enough, that was what three years ago? And at that time he again lost his rhythym, bowled a beamer, lost all control of his bowling and action all in one test. Three years later and the same is still happening. The guy is either a stone cold retard or is missing several genes in the least. So now how many other excuses do you have? Try again, your head is still stuck in your azz.

,we are talking about test cricket,you do not k now what are you talking about so what can i say. Bowling averages Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10 Tests 17 33 3385 1921 60 5/40 8/99 32.01 3.40 56.4 4 2 0 the guy has best stats,talent pace among our bowlers in test cricket. so do yourself a favour and stop posting crap.

[CG]

Look the plain and simple fact is that Indian bowlers participating in domestic cricket bowl within themselves on purpose. It's documented in interviews where the bowlers themselves have said that they cut down on pace in order to focus on accuracy because what's the point in bowling over 140kph on a flat pitch? The ball will simple come onto the bat much better to be hit on a pitch where there is almost no margin for error. Leaving genetics aside we know that there have been plenty of Indian bowlers who have in past bowled around and above 140kph. But in order for these guys to get selected they have to do well in domestic cricket, get wickets and keep their economy down and on flat pitches that's not going to happen by bowling sheer pace all the time and not focusing on accuracy. Again, there's a simple way to fix all of this. Make the pitches more competitive in domestic structure and focus more on bowling fitness and nutrition. Some steps have been made for this but until it's done system wide we're not going to see better results. The perfect example of this is RP Singh. At his best he was bowling around 136-138 with swinging deliveries in the first T20 world cup in South Africa on good bowling pitches in helpful conditions. But in the subcontinent without that kind of pitch and conditions he becomes a Sami. A guy who will cut down his pace on focus on accuracy but still get hit for boundaries. He's a classic example of a wasted talent, not because of his genetics, but because of the environment around him. Same with Pathan and to a certain extent Sreesanth. The problem IS NOT genetics. We already have talented bowlers. What we don't have is the infrastructure, coaching, and discipline on fitness and conditions that promote fast bowling. When was the last time we saw a domestic competition or test series at home where we could say yeah, look at the bounce and pace on that pitch. Look at the grass cover? When the conditions aren't there to help bowlers then naturally the bowler isn't going to break his back bowling long spells of effort deliveries when the rewards aren't going to be there?

juts look at video and shut up -

-

-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLS0ovEwWBQ indians fans have got a mental block about speeds,have you seen english fans ask why broad, anderson,onions were bowling at 130-140 in southafrica where as in england they are clocked at 140-150km/h.speed guns are crap in subcontinent the guy aamer who is bowling at 150 in australia was bowling at 125-135 in srilanka recently and will be bowling at same speed in dubai versus england,just get over the speed thing ,and wait till your bowlers are clocked at australia or england and check there speeds.

[Sachinism]

^^ Do you just randomly press the Enter/Return key? And chill out with the personal abuse, just because you don't agree with the view of someone else, it does not give you the right to go and abuse them

[CG]

^^ Do you just randomly press the Enter/Return key? And chill out with the personal abuse, just because you don't agree with the view of someone else, it does not give you the right to go and abuse them

sorry just got a bit irritated.

[Fontaine]

With all due respect we can continue to discuss esoteric aspects of genetics and medicine. But the matter at hand is one of the Indian pacers dropping their pace after a season of playing at the highest level. That, to me, is nothing related to genetics. At least on the face of it. Seems like nobody here wants to discuss that aspect of Indian cricket?

I've mentioned it a few times and made a post about it on page three.

[Ram]

The problem with Sree is that he never seems to have 2 good matches in a row. There's the isolated good performance (like the one against Sri Lanka in the 2nd test at home), generally followed by sequence of lackluster performances. If Sreesanth wants to justify the faith reposed in him by fans, he must perform better, more consistently.