saket123 Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Dude heavy or muscular body does not make one a genuine fast bowler. One needs to have fast twitch fibers for that. Most of the genuine fast bowlers when they first came have been thing and lean. Watch Brett Lee' date=' Actor, and Bond, etc. when they first came they were as lean and thin as him. Another guy I tell you was Mohammad Zahid, he was as thin as 18 year old Ishant and was fiercely quick.[/quote'] who said anything about being heavy? Muscular does not mean stocky and heavy. From an athelete's point of view muscular means lean and toned. The guy looks starved. sorry to say. Pace bowling demands exceptional muscular tone and strength.. especially when playing tests. I am just saying, he doesn't look physically that strong yet to be a genuine fast bowler for long periods of time. That is not to say he cannot develop physically in the future.
rkt.india Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 who said anything about being heavy? Muscular does not mean stocky and heavy. From an athelete's point of view muscular means lean and toned. The guy looks starved. sorry to say. Pace bowling demands exceptional muscular tone and strength.. especially when playing tests. I am just saying, he doesn't look physically that strong yet to be a genuine fast bowler for long periods of time. That is not to say he cannot develop physically in the future. So did you see brett lee in 1999, Zahid in 1996, Akhtar in 1997, Ishant in 2008, Mohammad Aamir, Ajit Agarkar in 1998, Srinath in 1992? What muscles they had? nothing, they were skinny but they were still bowling quick?
Vijay.Sharma Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 You have jumped into a discussion with me on the basis of certain assumptions that are a persistent feature of your thought processes. To pick just one' date=' I'd go with your propensity for reacting emotionally whenever genetics is mentioned. You took that as your cue for launching into one of your tirades that concern your hangup about "southie physique vs. northie build". So much so, that you start your post intending to school me on genetics then instead speak about how vegetarian diet does not prevent you from bowling fast??? And how a 'Jhat' who ate meat could not match him in speed??? Genetics to diet while pretending to talk coherently?[/quote']I'll let this go because both your response and my earlier response were based on pre-conceived notions which seem to be false. Just to make it clear, the thing about diet and southie-northie stuff were neither aimed at you nor were they even meant to be a decent argument. They were said in the same spirit as the paki logic, "if u eat beef you can bowl fast". Scratched out stuff ain't what I am saying. Otherwise, fair point. But if fast-twitch muscles are genetically acquired (and I guess I am wrong in asserting they may not be, as you say) then how do some sprinters, martial arts experts, fast bowlers, etc seem to develop them? Are you saying they can be developed even if you haven't acquired them genetically? (if that is what you are saying then you would figure that my reference to 'epigenetics' is implying such a development of those fibers).
Vijay.Sharma Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 I guess some misinterpretations need to be ironed out and since they do not belong to the main discussion I did not want to include it in the previous response. Nevertheless they need to be clarified... You have jumped into a discussion with me on the basis of certain assumptions that are a persistent feature of your thought processes.I did exactly what you had demonstrated. You mentioned "What we do know is that Vijay is willing to stretch things as far as needed in order to rule out genetics playing any part in developing fast bowlers." Where did that come from? If anything I advanced the fact that epigenetics (I am sure you are aware of what it is) has considerable effect on twitch fibers. About the bolded part, now that is an ad hominem fallacy and may even resemble a personal attack. I give you the benefit of doubt though. To pick just one' date=' I'd go with your propensity for reacting emotionally whenever genetics is mentioned.[/quote']Please provide one more example since it is a 'propensity'. Of all you know you may have misunderstood me even in those previous discussions regarding genetics. But let us wait for you to present other instance(s). The 'tirade' part I will not argue because that is your personal opinion about me and you have a right to your opinion. Please feel free to dislike me, call me trash, hate me, wish the worst for me. The southie-northie part - now that can be verified with facts. Please provide some facts to back that claim of yours. And remember those examples must also provide reasonable evidence that I have a "hangup" on whatever it is that you alleged.
Vijay.Sharma Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 ^ it's Jaat not Jhat. :giggle: .I get your point but on a pedantic note you are doing a transliteration from Hindi script to English script (actually Deonagari to Latin). Now unless there is a standard for it, you have no claim for it being right. I do know there is a standard they use in Language to Language dictionaries. So, all you need to do to prove that you are right is to show that as per the standard, my transliteration is wrong :winky: (also I'll learn better)
MCcricket Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 Major Faux Pas , did we read the title of this thread lol.:icflove::icflove::banghead:
Dravid_TheWall Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 do We really need more fast bowlers? We need bowlers who can take test wickets, apart from an old ZK and also Sree, we have no one.
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