msb1991 Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 hardly matters.I wont mind them bowling 130ks if they take wickets Spot on!
yadhav500 Posted December 25, 2011 Author Posted December 25, 2011 hardly matters.I wont mind them bowling 130ks if they take wickets Spot on! Haha that trundler mindset that had been a setback for us for decades :winky:
indiaregulator Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 I love the prospects India currently have and we're definetely the best in the subcontinent. But we've still got a way to go to match up with the quickies of SA and England. SA: Steyn Morkel Phillander Kallis England: Anderson Broad Bresnan Tremlett Finn
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 Haha that trundler mindset that had been a setback for us for decades :winky: trundler mindset?where did I say that I dont like speed?I just said wicket taking is the key?whats the point of having phaasstt bowlers if tey cant take wickets n leak runs obsession of some guys with speed is pathetic
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 trundler mindset?where did I say that I dont like speed?I just said wicket taking is the key?whats the point of having phaasstt bowlers if tey cant take wickets n leak runs obsession of some guys with speed is pathetic That's like saying we should even play 4 spinners, if they are capable of picking up wkts .... True but missing the point .... Such duhism should be kept out of threads
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 That's like saying we should even play 4 spinners' date=' if they are capable of picking up wkts .... True but missing the point .... Such duhism should be kept out of threads[/quote'] 4 good spinners at a spin friendly tracks,why not?n capable of taking wickets is not equal to consistently taking wickets.even Sreesanth is capable of taking wicket.hardly does:cantstop:
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 Haha that trundler mindset that had been a setback for us for decades :winky: +1 If this continues, even the likes of ganguly will be opening the bowling in tests. Why because they can bowl more overs like spinners, keep the runs down, and swing the ball .... Quicks are bad because they work hard to bowl fast, because they work hard, they get tired, because the focus on picking up wkts, they go for runs .... Which is all bad
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 4 good spinners at a spin friendly tracks' date='why not?n capable of taking wickets is not equal to consistently taking wickets.even Sreesanth is capable of taking wicket.hardly does:cantstop:[/quote'] Thanks for another duhism ^ Do u even realize that ind doesn't hv an attack that can consistently pick up wkts? In order to "built" that a few changes to our mindset needs to be made :winky:
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 Thanks for another duhism ^ Do u even realize that ind doesn't hv an attack that can consistently pick up wkts? In order to "built" that a few changes to our mindset needs to be made :winky: really?I thought we were on top of rankings a while back?whos been taking wickets all this while? n again,I dont detest speed,but some guys focus only on that.I'm more concerned about how a bowler's figures are at the end of the game,rather than what speeds he bowls.its a matter of celebration if a bowler takes a wicket,not if he bowls a certain speed. in order to 'bulid' a wicket taking attack,we need wicket taking bowlers,not useless speed demons.its fairly simple
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 really?I thought we were on top of rankings a while back?whos been taking wickets all this while? n again,I dont detest speed,but some guys focus only on that.I'm more concerned about how a bowler's figures are at the end of the game,rather than what speeds he bowls.its a matter of celebration if a bowler takes a wicket,not if he bowls a certain speed. in order to 'bulid' a wicket taking attack,we need wicket taking bowlers,not useless speed demons.its fairly simple No trundler has won us a test match against quality teams in the period that we were #1. By trundler I mean a bowler who even in his prime struggles to go beyond 135 kmph. And not experiences bowlers who are in their 30s and thus lost pace due to age and were once quick bowlers It has been either the spinners in helpful conditions or guys like Zak and Sree (against SL and SA) putting on a good performance with reverse going, along with RP (in eng 2007) and Ishant (in Aus 2008) when they were bowling quickish One of the reasons why Ind is no longer at the top is because those who could bowl quick have gone down as they were not managed or did not manage themselves properly When talking abt quicks, a wkt taking bowler by definition is one who can bounce a batsman, reverse swing, etc and to do that you have to bowl quickish .... a trundler bowling less than 130kmph is not going to be able to do that. Yes, he can bowl a lot more overs like a spinner would do or bowl economically (hardly a point) but that's not very useful in tests as can be seen by the fact that no trundler has won us a test match against quality teams in the period we were #1 or shaping up to become one So speed is not useless. The argument that I would rather have 'this' than a quick is pointless as most quicks can do 'this' too .... If you do not have speed, you have to be a very high quality bowler to be successful. And such bowlers are exceptions. Exceptions do not make a rule. Even the great Kapil Dev, who had a bag of tricks up his sleeves, struggled when he lost speed. See the case of Donald too ....
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 No trundler has won us a test match against quality teams in the period that we were #1. By trundler I mean a bowler who even in his prime struggles to go beyond 135 kmph. And not experiences bowlers who are in their 30s and thus lost pace due to age and were once quick bowlers It has been either the spinners in helpful conditions or guys like Zak and Sree (against SL and SA) putting on a good performance with reverse going, along with RP (in eng 2007) and Ishant (in Aus 2008) when they were bowling quickish One of the reasons why Ind is no longer at the top is because those who could bowl quick have gone down as they were not managed or did not manage themselves properly When talking abt quicks, a wkt taking bowler by definition is one who can bounce a batsman, reverse swing, etc and to do that you have to bowl quickish .... a trundler bowling less than 130kmph is not going to be able to do that. Yes, he can bowl a lot more overs like a spinner would do or bowl economically (hardly a point) but that's not very useful in tests as can be seen by the fact that no trundler has won us a test match against quality teams in the period we were #1 or shaping up to become one So speed is not useless. The argument that I would rather have 'this' than a quick is pointless as most quicks can do 'this' too .... If you do not have speed, you have to be a very high quality bowler to be successful. And such bowlers are exceptions. Exceptions do not make a rule. Even the great Kapil Dev, who had a bag of tricks up his sleeves, struggled when he lost speed. See the case of Donald too .... speed is not useless i know.but alone speed is.take Eng tour.Ishant bowled faster but Praveen was more sucessful.test batsmen dont get beaten by pace.u still need to bowl in right areas,with swing or reverse swing to get wickets.140+ deliveries wide outside off wont harm anyone.once u do that,even 130ish deliveries will cause problems.so focus on speed alone is not right imo
jf1gp_1 Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 Haha that trundler mindset that had been a setback for us for decades :winky: i would rather have a mcgrath bowling in 120s yet getting wickets then akhtar bowling over 150 but getting hit got 6s
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 speed is not useless i know.but alone speed is.take Eng tour.Ishant bowled faster but Praveen was more sucessful.test batsmen dont get beaten by pace.u still need to bowl in right areas' date='with swing or reverse swing to get wickets.140+ deliveries wide outside off wont harm anyone.once u do that,even 130ish deliveries will cause problems.so focus on speed alone is not right imo[/quote'] PK was aided by the 'conditions', and he cannot reverse or bounce a batsman out. Despite being at his best, he had figs like 5/150, .... on the other hand, if a quick bowler gets going he can win you a game on his own like sree in SA, against SL, etc Since we want to change our bowling culture, it makes even more sense to pick quicks for long term benefits. how many will get inspired to work hard to bowl quick, and risk injuries when you see a trundler getting the new ball. encouraging guys who bowl quick and setting such standards would motivate ppl to be the next srinath than a prasad. not sayng prasad was bad but srinath was better :--D
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 i would rather have a mcgrath bowling in 120s yet getting wickets then akhtar bowling over 150 but getting hit got 6s now poor mcgrath is being turned into a trundler :haha:
Tiger80 Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 i would rather have a mcgrath bowling in 120s yet getting wickets then akhtar bowling over 150 but getting hit got 6s :facepalm: All trundler supporters just give example of Mcgrath
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 PK was aided by the 'conditions', and he cannot reverse or bounce a batsman out. Despite being at his best, he had figs like 5/150, .... on the other hand, if a quick bowler gets going he can win you a game on his own like sree in SA, against SL, etc Since we want to change our bowling culture, it makes even more sense to pick quicks for long term benefits. how many will get inspired to work hard to bowl quick, and risk injuries when you see a trundler getting the new ball. encouraging guys who bowl quick and setting such standards would motivate ppl to be the next srinath than a prasad. not sayng prasad was bad but srinath was better :--D why couldnt same conditions aid Sree or Ishant,they had pace,they should have been even more successful.how many times has Sree repeated SA or SL performances.thats what I mean.consistency is more important ability.PK may not bounce a batsman,but would be at him all the time,no freebies.n reverse swing is handy at 130ish.Zak is an example of that. about changing culture,we can only work with we have.Srinath is as inspiring as it can get.but he wasnt just about speed alone.wicket taking is all that should matter.if a trundler is taking the new ball n getting wickets n has a great career,he should have done something right too.thats also inspiring
zen Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 why couldnt same conditions aid Sree or Ishant,they had pace,they should have been even more successful.how many times has Sree repeated SA or SL performances.thats what I mean.consistency is more important ability.PK may not bounce a batsman,but would be at him all the time,no freebies.n reverse swing is handy at 130ish.Zak is an example of that. about changing culture,we can only work with we have.Srinath is as inspiring as it can get.but he wasnt just about speed alone.wicket taking is all that should matter.if a trundler is taking the new ball n getting wickets n has a great career,he should have done something right too.thats also inspiring Because these two were not at their best and Ishant did bowl a good spell in one of the tests. we should hv blooded Yadav and Aaron sooner. I remember on the tour to SA despite having Yadav, we went with Udainkat (spelling?) because of 'pace is not everything' mentality .... Why not open with the likes of Ganguly, Mark Elham, etc too if doing well in Eng conditions counts. Even Amarnath and Binny were successful in the WC in Eng :dontknow: So far we have been working with what we 'have', the problem is that has only produced a handful of quality opening bowlers for Ind over the years and almost not many of ATG quality. The question to ask is do we need to continue with this trend? And satisfy our selves with a PK opening because Sree and Ishant happened to not do well and take that as some kind of a benchmark If not, then what do we do? How do we encourage bowlers to bowl quick? and so on .and this is what the change in culture is being referred to. I want the likes of PKs and VKs of Ind to think that they need work hard to bowl quick. (rather than folks thinking let me slow down as I don't need to bowl fast at test level, slowing down also makes me bowl more overs and cuts down on injury risks). Just trundling is not good enough to earn a test cap in the name of 'pace is not everything' (something that is responsible for poor standards of quicks in Ind). Imagine, if these guys did bowl quick, they would be much better bowlers. Inspiring guys like this to bowl quick is why we should focus on picking quick bowlers.
Lord Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 Because these two were not at their best and Ishant did bowl a good spell in one of the tests. we should hv blooded Yadav and Aaron sooner. I remember on the tour to SA despite having Yadav, we went with Udainkat (spelling?) because of 'pace is not everything' mentality .... Why not open with the likes of Ganguly, Mark Elham, etc too if doing well in Eng conditions counts. Even Amarnath and Binny were successful in the WC in Eng :dontknow: So far we have been working with what we 'have', the problem is that has only produced a handful of quality opening bowlers for Ind over the years and almost not many of ATG quality. The question to ask is do we need to continue with this trend? And satisfy our selves with a PK opening because Sree and Ishant happened to not do well and take that as some kind of a benchmark If not, then what do we do? How do we encourage bowlers to bowl quick? and so on .and this is what the change in culture is being referred to. I want the likes of PKs and VKs of Ind to think that they need work hard to bowl quick. (rather than folks thinking let me slow down as I don't need to bowl fast at test level, slowing down also makes me bowl more overs and cuts down on injury risks). Just trundling is not good enough to earn a test cap in the name of 'pace is not everything' (something that is responsible for poor standards of quicks in Ind). Imagine, if these guys did bowl quick, they would be much better bowlers. Inspiring guys like this to bowl quick is why we should focus on picking quick bowlers. n I want the Ishants n Sreesanth to think that only pace is not good enuff.they need to get wickets n be consistent. why do I need to imagine that?we already have Ishant n Sreesanths who have not had great careers so far.Ideally we'd all like to have someone bowling 150+,in the right areas,swing it both ways.but isnt that too much to ask given our flat decks?what do we do?have speedsters who dont bother a batsmen except 1-2 spells every 2-3 yrs or some one bowling slower but being consistent n taking wickets?I'll prefer the latter
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now