The Outsider Posted June 25, 2012 Author Posted June 25, 2012 Let me tell you the reference. Haynes was talking about today's bowlers in that reference. He was asked how quick Roberts used to bowl. He said like this when I see Brett Lee' date=' Akhtar clocking 100 mph, then Roberts must be bowling over 100 mph.[/quote'] And why is that surprising? Roberts was a quick bowler, if not 100 he would have done 95 on quite a few occasions. Now can I have one example of a ball turning a mile?
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 And why is that surprising? Roberts was a quick bowler, if not 100 he would have done 95 on quite a few occasions. Now can I have one example of a ball turning a mile? It is still 95 not over 100. Ball turning a mile is used as a phrase, while commentators rarely use bowling over 100 miles as a phrase. They most use 90 miles an hour for bowlers, not 100. and Similarly like Gavaskar said things about Underwood, Tendulkar also said many times that Abdul Razzaq is one of the toughest bowlers he has faced and even he said similar things about Hansie Cronje.
Crookbond Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Regarding your first point, did you see what were the conditions in 1940s, I think no. Second point. Uncovered pitches are those pitches which will help bowlers more than usual. To be successful on pattas, bowlers need special skills, but dustbowls, uncovered pitches, or too much seaming tracks narrows that gap and even substandard bowler looks world class on such tracks. On such pitches, bowlers do not need to do much, pitch itself does do enough. Which means batting should be very difficult, no?
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Which means batting should be very difficult' date=' no?[/quote'] only if bowling is good enough to trouble the batsmen.
Crookbond Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 It is still 95 not over 100. Ball turning a mile is used as a phrase, while commentators rarely use bowling over 100 miles as a phrase. They most use 90 miles an hour for bowlers, not 100. and Similarly like Gavaskar said things about Underwood, Tendulkar also said many times that Abdul Razzaq is one of the toughest bowlers he has faced and even he said similar things about Hansie Cronje. Did Tendulkar ever say Cronje was the "best" bowler he faced? :dontknow: Unfortunately, you're doing a Reduction Ad Absurdum here.
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Did Tendulkar ever say Cronje was the "best" bowler he faced? :dontknow: Unfortunately, you're doing a Reduction Ad Absurdum here. Reductio Ad Absurdum But would you agree Hansie Cronjie was one of the toughest bowler Sachin has faced?
Crookbond Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 only if bowling is good enough to trouble the batsmen. Read your previous posts and check your inferences. You say it would be so easy to bowl on uncovered pitches that the pitch would do everything. You don't need no one. Which means even an average bowler shoud trouble a batsman making batting difficult for most if not all the time.
The Outsider Posted June 25, 2012 Author Posted June 25, 2012 It is still 95 not over 100. Ball turning a mile is used as a phrase, while commentators rarely use bowling over 100 miles as a phrase. They most use 90 miles an hour for bowlers, not 100. 100 mph is a phrase as well to be bowling really fast - didn't Ishant say he wants to bowl as 100 mph. Knowing Ishant do you really think he can touch 100 mph? No. All he means is he wants to bowl quick. and Similarly like Gavaskar said things about Underwood, Tendulkar also said many times that Abdul Razzaq is one of the toughest bowlers he has faced and even he said similar things about Hansie Cronje. Tendulkar got dismissed by Cronje and Razzaq quite often, I agree - can you give me actual quotes from him saying Cronje and Razzaq were among the most difficult bowlers he faced which are not tongue in cheek?
Crookbond Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Reductio Ad Absurdum But would you agree Hansie Cronjie was one of the toughest bowler Sachin has faced? Yes, if Sachin says so. Now, apart from Sachin how successful was Cronje or how many other cricketers praises Cronje for his bowling? Damn You Auto Correct! :beee:
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Read your previous posts and check your inferences. You say it would be so easy to bowl on uncovered pitches that the pitch would do everything. You don't need no one. Which means even an average bowler shoud trouble a batsman making batting difficult for most if not all the time. Yes that is why likes of Lohman has such stats and another thing is there were most bowlers were not even average, below average to crap if you look at those old videos.
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 100 mph is a phrase as well to be bowling really fast - didn't Ishant say he wants to bowl as 100 mph. Knowing Ishant do you really think he can touch 100 mph? No. All he means is he wants to bowl quick. Tendulkar got dismissed by Cronje and Razzaq quite often, I agree - can you give me actual quotes from him saying Cronje and Razzaq were among the most difficult bowlers he faced which are not tongue in cheek? 100 mph is a term, not a phrase. Ishant did talk about 100 mph and he was particular about touching 100 mph mark. He was already bowling fast at that time so why would he mean the same. And I do not have those quotes, but if Sachin can say tongue-in-cheek than why not others.
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Yes, if Sachin says so. Now, apart from Sachin how successful was Cronje or how many other cricketers praises Cronje for his bowling? Damn You Auto Correct! :beee: But I wont. Close discussion.
The Outsider Posted June 25, 2012 Author Posted June 25, 2012 100 mph is a term, not a phrase. Ishant did talk about 100 mph and he was particular about touching 100 mph mark. He was already bowling fast at that time so why would he mean the same. And I do not have those quotes, but if Sachin can say tongue-in-cheek than why not others. Chalo tongue in cheek hi suna do quote where Tendulkar says Cronje and Razzaq are the best bowlers he has faced? It was not only Gavaskar, but a lot of top batsmen round the world who found facing Underwood difficult and it's reflected in his Warne like bowling average - what's Cronje's test bowling average?
rkt.india Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Chalo tongue in cheek hi suna do quote where Tendulkar says Cronje and Razzaq are the best bowlers he has faced? It was not only Gavaskar, but a lot of top batsmen round the world who found facing Underwood difficult and it's reflected in his Warne like bowling average - what's Cronje's test bowling average? Ab maine koi quotes ki library to nahi bana rakhi ke vha se dhoondh lu.:winky: I understand what you are saying. Possibly, he was good on those days, but I just said that based on the the video I saw. Maybe, that was not his day. I think all form their opinion based on what they see and I did the same.
Lurker Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 This is the spot on which I dither a lot in making an all time XI choice - Gilchrist was a very good keeper, but definitely not the best. As a batsman though it's needless to say that any wicket keeper has been as good as him, even Flower. He along with Warne and McGrath was the main force behind the great Australian side. Knott is the best wicket keeper though - he kept wonderfully to the spin of Underwood as well. Sometimes I pick Gilchrist in my all time XI and some times Knott - on this occasion I've gone with Knott. Bari was also a superb keeper - I find it surprising that his keeping skills don't often find a mention very often in discussions. lol...I do that all the time. Thats the fun of being an avid, and possibly unbiased, cricket fan. Why should there be just 1 All time XI combination? Clearly there are so many fantastic cricketers we are spoiled for choice, unless you have someone like Bradman who is always a certainty. There could be times when I would go with both Keith Miller and Kapil as middle order batting/bowling all-rounders and then when only Sobers makes the cut. Or when Sobers makes the cut and Hadlee or Imran show up as bowling all-rounders. It is all about mindset, why limit yourself to one? Back to keepers, Dujon, Marsh and Knott have started to fade a bit. Dujon was awesome to pacers, and a very stylish batsman (he started his career as a batsman), Marsh was brilliant to pacers and also stood up to spinners (Mallett etc) and was a great fighter, pound for pound the fiercest perhaps. Ian Chappell always picks him ahead of anyone else in his team. Knott was the concummate pro. Great for any time of bowling, a very steady batsman. Just like 80s had all-rounders battling, mid 70s to mid 80s had wicket keepers battling for top props. And Knott was best of them.
Marut Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 I am not rigid with the World XI selections either. Some times I may opt for Richards in place of Lara, Hobbs in place of Gavaskar, Ponting for Tendilya, Knott/Healy for Gilchrist, Imran for Hadlee and many other permutations also. There is no single ideal World XI really, any of several teams that we can choose would probably give any other selection a run for its money. The Australian team of the 90s-2000s would be a top World XI team by itself and any other World XI will not find it easy to beat that Australian team. Same thing goes for the WI team of the 80s.
maniac Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Voted for Gilchrist hands down but MSD should have made the list...jeez Ian Smith and Dujon over him is grossly unfair....Not a fan of MS but he will walk into any side in the last 2 decades except may be Australia or Zim due to the presence of Andy Flower. Rate him above Boucher
maniac Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Also Dujon never kept to ay worldclass spinners...Roger Harper really???
Lurker Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 Voted for Gilchrist hands down but MSD should have made the list...jeez Ian Smith and Dujon over him is grossly unfair....Not a fan of MS but he will walk into any side in the last 2 decades except may be Australia or Zim due to the presence of Andy Flower. Rate him above Boucher MSD over Jeff Dujon..:whack::whack:
maniac Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 MSD over Jeff Dujon..:whack::whack: Ofcourse....Just because he was part of an incincible squad doesn't automatically make him an awesome keeper.Yes he was a good keeper but he was never the game changer in the team.Also he never kept to a good spinner. Assuming we are not taking about ODI's bcoz ofcourse MS will wipe the floor with Dujon but here are the test records.....Don't forget Dhoni is also the captain of the side. Dujon Tests 81 115 11 3322 139 31.94 5 16 11 267 5 ODIs 169 120 36 1945 82* 23.15 2881 67.51 0 6 183 21 Dhoni Tests 67 106 12 3509 148 37.32 5852 59.96 5 24 378 61 192 28 ODIs 206 184 53 6773 183* 51.70 7680 88.19 7 45 517 137 193 65 More runs and almost catching up on dismissals playing 14 less tests.
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