Jump to content

Umesh yadav-pretty impressive.

Blue Panther

By Blue Panther
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

asterix Mentor

asterix

Posted
Posted
dhoni used yadav well' date=' using him after power play when the pressure is less on bowler was great move.[/quote'] But he gave the first over in Batting PP to Umesh..I liked that... I can't find anything Dhoni did wrong yesterday. His field placings, use of bowlers, batting order etc. was fantastic. I can see the strategic field placings (definitely Duncan Fletcher's hand in it) for individual batsmen. Very happy to see an improved fielding performance by the team..
Pagalpanti Newbie

Pagalpanti

Posted
Posted
But he gave the first over in Batting PP to Umesh..I liked that... I can't find anything Dhoni did wrong yesterday. His field placings, use of bowlers, batting order etc. was fantastic. I can see the strategic field placings (definitely Duncan Fletcher's hand in it) for individual batsmen. Very happy to see an improved fielding performance by the team..
Exactly also the fact that he used Yadav in short-bursts. So that he was able to continue bowling quick.
msb1991 Apprentice

msb1991

Posted
Posted
Vinay is suited to shorter formats because he has variations' date=' not suited to longer formats. Yadav is more suited to tests.[/quote'] Vinay's variations are terrible. His strength is line and length and a hint of movement which is what works in Tests but fails in ODIs.
bajrang Newbie

bajrang

Posted
Posted
But he gave the first over in Batting PP to Umesh..I liked that..
yeah good move, shows faith in bowler and raises the moral of the bowler. i hope he keep him using in short spells . and VK and PK are anyday better then anything england has got on indian pitches. with their extra pace and no seem movement they are just sitting ducks for Indian batsmen. 2 new balls takes reverse significantly out of the question too. it a good time to be 80 mile swing bowler in india.
msb1991 Apprentice

msb1991

Posted
Posted
are you saying vinay kumar is test material ?
I think he's saying he's the kind of bowler who normally prosper in Tests. Not the same as saying he's Test class.
Yes. I am saying he is the kind of bowler who can prosper in Tests. Whether he can be a success at Test level? I'm leaning slightly toward 'no' but I definitely think he should be given a go.
Vijay.Sharma Newbie

Vijay.Sharma

Posted
Posted
The guys you names were quick, but not anything like 155K. Frank Tyson was supposed to be very quick, but others were below Tyson in terms of pace. Former legends like Benaud who has seen Tyson and Thommo both, had compared Tyson to Thommo, but other than that no one says Gilchrist, Larwood, Holding, Griffith were as quick as Thommo or Akhtar. Most of the past or present cricketers have regarded Shoaib Akhtar the fastest bowler ever to have played cricket.
I think Gilchrist was as quick as Tyson. And he was even more dangerous coz he was a little sunky fellow...would bowl beamers. From wiki, "Gilchrist is considered to be one of only four bowlers ever, to have actually hit the sightscreen after first bounce on the pitch, on the full" Dunno who the other three were
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
but this is exactly the problem how do u know if tyson and the others were 155 or 160 with out a speedo meter ' date=' all one can do is read articles or watch some grainy videos to make up ur mind[/quote'] You need to believe former cricketers have played more than one generation, like Richie Benaud and others who saw both of them Tyson and Thommo as well as Holding and other West Indians.
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
I think u missed dennis lillie. Jeff thompson was the fastest ever to play the game without any doubt.
No Lillie was quick but more of Steyn, Morkal, Johnson, Roach kind of pace and Holding was similar too.
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
Vinay's variations are terrible. His strength is line and length and a hint of movement which is what works in Tests but fails in ODIs.
but he is not exactly accurate enough. He does not move the ball much too. You said PK is good, yes, PK Is good because he can swing the ball both ways while VK does not have anything in his armery. Line and length alone does not get you wickets. His pace will be very dibbly dobbly without swing and movement. You are expecting too much from him, IMO.
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
I think Gilchrist was as quick as Tyson. And he was even more dangerous coz he was a little sunky fellow...would bowl beamers. From wiki, "Gilchrist is considered to be one of only four bowlers ever, to have actually hit the sightscreen after first bounce on the pitch, on the full" Dunno who the other three were
He too had suspect action and that too without any hyperextension. Other two maybe Tyson and Thommo.
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
Just as absurd as Sreesanth in Test matches after his first year or two.
but sreesanth was most successful only in his first year or two in WI and SA tour.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...