Simplifying fast bowling and fast bowlers(in my views)

[rkt.india]

In one thread, I had a discussion with MSB about Umesh Yadav and ishant's style of bowling and their differences. MSB said I am simplifying it, but in my view it is always simple and I do not see it a very complicated things. There are a few points that you always need to consider when you see a fast bowler or pick a potential fast bowler. Regarding simplifying as how I see it it, I am saying as I see it. It is not a very complicated thing. You need to keep the basics in mind. Basics about fast bowling that we need to understand what kind of bowlers and what kind of bowling can trouble a batsman the most in test cricket. I am sure we can find fast bowlers who can bowl consistent out swing deliveries have been more successful than the bowlers who are predominantly inswing bowlers. Another basic is finding the right ingredient in a bowler so that he can succeed at the highest level like pace, swing, seam, and accuracy. I simplified fast bowling and in conclusion, IMO, a fast bowler must have these essential ingredient to be successful in most conditions and become a strike bowler. I point out those. 1. A fast bowler must bowl closer to the stumps rather than too much wide of the crease, though a bowler can always use the crease, but he should prominently be bowling closer to the stumps so that he can bring as many options of taking wickets in the play and as many variation as he can bowl. Normally, any fast bowler who bowls wide of the crease struggle to go close to the stumps, but a bowler who normally bowls closer to the stumps can easily go wide of the crease to create a variation. Bowling closer to stumps normally forces a batsman too play most of the deliveries and does not give a batsman any real angle to work the ball by using pace and angle. 2. A fast bowler should have the ability to bowl good out swing and seam it. Out swing and seam is the hardest delivery to face and it is the delivery which is most likely to provide wickets to a bowler on most pitches with the new ball or even old ball. A bowler may not bowl the best inswing or in cutter, but if he had that outswing going then he can be handy anywhere. Out swing more often than not is more successful than inswing. 3. Physique, optimum pace, and height. There have been a lot of talk how Indian team needs genuine fast bowlers. IMO, yes pace is needed, but you rarely find extreme pacers like Akhtar, Lee, Tait, Bond, or Thomson sustaining their bodies with that pace and having a long career. Though a bowler who has brain and skills can be successful even if he bowls medium pace, but that kind of examples are rare, and even that bowler becoming a strike bowler is unseen. I believe if a fast bowler is tall then if he can bowl even around 130-135k, he can be successful if he is consistent and has the first two ingredients mentioned above, but if a fast bowler is short less than 6 feet or so then to become a strike bowler, he should have pace at least over 135-140K on average along with first 2 ingredients mentioned above. I have these 3 simplified ingredients that I want to see in a right arm fast bowler and people can see most of the fast bowling greats had all these three ingredients and we should select our pacers based on these three ingredients. Simple.

[Sooda]

Is that true re: Outswing then? I am not a keen enough observer to know that. Srinath- diod he have a good outswinger? He predominant wicket taking delivery was the inswinger right? Or at least he was a natural inswing bowler. He kay be an exception.

[rkt.india]

Is that true re: Outswing then? I am not a keen enough observer to know that. Srinath- diod he have a good outswinger? He predominant wicket taking delivery was the inswinger right? Or at least he was a natural inswing bowler. He kay be an exception.

Yes. Srinath was a natural inswing hit the deck bowler, but Srinath is not an exception. He has a very average record overall as a fast bowler if you compare him to other great bowlers. Srintah is can Indian great because we do not have any other.

[JeffThommo_fan]

The most important was the 3rd point. Coz for me, a fast bowler must be fast at least when he is young then he can learn various tricks to deceive batsman later on e.g. Zaheer Khan and Glenn McGrath who used to bowl around 140k when they were young and then with 5-6 yrs of experience they were still brutal with lower pace

[JeffThommo_fan]

One more thing as you are talking about swing, out swing bowler with pace is actually like a leg spinner which is rare. Coz in-swing comes naturally to right arm fast bowler just like off spin comes naturally to right arm spinners. But out swing bowling is more skillful just like leg-spin bowling. Thats y out swing bowlers are preferred over in-swing bowlers.

[panther]

yes the out swinger is the most important delivery like this s93XgGOIyUQ goiing into the legs of the batsman than moves way killer ball if you can swing the ball like that then you dont need much pace like mohammad asif

[The Dark Horse]

Sreesanth has all your ingredients, but why isn't he a powerpuff girl ? :D

[vvvslaxman]

Imran khan consistent went wide off the crease to create an angle in 1982/83 series against India. He picked 40 wickets in 6 tests and destroyed us.

[IKnowU]

Fitness/Physique is the most important for me. Then come the skills. All day everyday.

[msb1991]

I would like to open up by saying that I admire your commitment and interest in fast bowling. However, I think that your definition of 'simple' is wrong. You combine a number of highly difficult to specify factors. I would merely take performance at a low level as a necessary, but not sufficient condition for performance at a higher level. Only then can skill analyses come into play. Moreover, I will comment on your skill analyses.

1. A fast bowler must bowl closer to the stumps rather than too much wide of the crease' date=' though a bowler can always use the crease, but he should prominently be bowling closer to the stumps so that he can bring as many options of taking wickets in the play and as many variation as he can bowl. Normally, any fast bowler who bowls wide of the crease struggle to go close to the stumps, but a bowler who normally bowls closer to the stumps can easily go wide of the crease to create a variation. Bowling closer to stumps normally forces a batsman too play most of the deliveries and does not give a batsman any real angle to work the ball by using pace and angle.[/quote'] This is true. However, 'must' is an overly strong term. Ntini was a good bowler and he bowled wide of the crease. Colin Croft was another. Bowling close to the stumps brings most chance of success but you can be successful if you are predominantly wide of the crease.

[Trichromatic]

One can add that fast bowling works as a unit mostly. Spinners can succeed alone, but having a good partner affects fast bowlers a lot. For ex In last match, Hussey was on backfoot because of bouncy deliveries from Morkel and when Steyn bowled a swinging delivery, he was not on front foot. Kasprowizch was very accurate and all Australian pacers worked as supplement for each other. During Australia tour of India in 2004, they planned to bowl Dravid on off and middle. That needed lot of accuracy and margin of error was very less. Dravid is very good on his legs and he used to leave a lot outside off. During that series, Kaspro bowled according to the plan and troubled Dravid.

[rkt.india]

Imran khan consistent went wide off the crease to create an angle in 1982/83 series against India. He picked 40 wickets in 6 tests and destroyed us.

He was genuine 90 mph first, then Indian batting bar a few was not that great on those days, and there can be exceptions as well.

[rkt.india]

This is true. However, 'must' is an overly strong term. Ntini was a good bowler and he bowled wide of the crease. Colin Croft was another. Bowling close to the stumps brings most chance of success but you can be successful if you are predominantly wide of the crease.

I had said to be successful everywhere, Ntitni bowled mostly in seaming conditions in SA where most bowlers can take wickets. These things matter most in flatter conditions and Nitni used to be pretty fast in his bright days. Bowlers who bowl wide of the crease can be successful, I do not deny it, but the best thing is to stay closer and most greatest fast bowlers has bowled like that and Ntini is not a greatest of them at all.

Good point. However, you are slightly too strong with your assessment. Kasprowicz bowled from a very low point at around 125-130kph and he was a good Test bowler. There have not been many short medium pacers who have bowled well at Test level because there have not been many to have played test cricket because it is uncommon to see them do well at domestic level for the reasons you said. If they have done well though, then they can be considered for a Test spot.

What are you saying. Kasprowich is 6 feet 3-4 inches tall and had pretty high arm action and was petty quick too. He was still bowling in mid 130s when he retired from FC cricket. He was certainly not 125K bowler. He has hit even 140s and was mainly in 130-140K bracket. Still if I take your words, Kasprowich has a very mediocre test record. I am talking about bowlers who are level ahead others and Kasper is not one of them. He had some skills like fast off cutter and reverse swing which helped but he neither has a good average nor SR. Look at Brett Lee, his average is a bit high in comparison to many other top bowlers, but he has very good strike rate as good as many other top bowlers and good SR means a lot. Kasper was quick enough. watch this first ball.