ICF All Time XI : Fast Bowlers

[rkt.india]

I know -hence my attack- left and right arm pacy swing in Akram and Hadlee..Marshall skiddyish pace and Thompsons out and out pace and bounce and finally Barnes medium pace cut and swing

You should rather have Shoaib if you want an out and out pacer who can also take wickets. Shoiab was certainly better than Thompson in terms of his radar and also has better record. Thompson was like Tait now, though a bit less wayward, due to the kind of bowling action he had. If Clark was that good, he would have made his own place in WI side like Marshall and Ambrose did, but he wasn't that good that is why he could not play as many tests as others.

[Sooda]

He didnt because there were the likes of Marhsall and Ambrose in his way. it was like Goel and Shivalkar in the golden age of Indian spin, would have played test cricket in any other era.

[Crookbond]

Mcenly bhai. I hope you have played cricket too as well seen it a lot. Look at the bowling action of Sylvestor Clark. How the hell he will bowl fast with this crap bowling action? He bowls with one hand, not using his non-bowling hand at while delivering and you will believe what Benaud said in the commentary rather than what you are seeing. We will request Roblinda to put more videos of Clark and then we will see. Great cricketers and writers all exaggerate things to a new level which you will wonder when you actually see them. Ek ka doodh ka doodh paani ka pani to Roblinda ke ek video ne pehle hi kar diya hai which has made me believe that you cannot take them word by word just read and be happy with the imaginative nostalgia they produce.

Lets not generalize RKT. There's exaggeration but it's more in awe than meaning. Also, it doesn't matter what action he had. If he bowled fast, he did. There's no First Order Logic. What I further can't understand is why Benaud on live commentary would "exaggerate" or be "nostalgic".

[Lurker]

Mcenly bhai. I hope you have played cricket too as well seen it a lot. Look at the bowling action of Sylvestor Clark. How the hell he will bowl fast with this crap bowling action? He bowls with one hand, not using his non-bowling hand at while delivering and you will believe what Benaud said in the commentary rather than what you are seeing. We will request Roblinda to put more videos of Clark and then we will see. Great cricketers and writers all exaggerate things to a new level which you will wonder when you actually see them. Ek ka doodh ka doodh paani ka pani to Roblinda ke ek video ne pehle hi kar diya hai which has made me believe that you cannot take them word by word just read and be happy with the imaginative nostalgia they produce.

The word that sums you u up is dheet. Ek fata raag diye jaa rahe ho? Lets see. a) Clarke clearly is a big lad with a smooth run up and delivers at brisk pace, even though commentators suggest he is not at his sharpest. b) At the time of the video his spells reads as 7-4-7-0. In every sense better than his counterparts that read holding, croft and garner. c) His career average of under 28 would beat any Indian fast bowler's career stats hands down. The issue that I have is how fans like you increasingly lose their cricketing marbles and use videos to extend their own agenda rather shamelessly. The owner of the video - Rob who happens to visit this website by the way - has clearly created this for the likes of those who didnt see these players and/or enjoy watching them. Even Clarke rambling in to bowl is well appreciate by them, like me. You on the other hand look for a 10 second flying stumps video. Fair enough. But dont make yourself look stupid to caste judgement on whether Clarke was a fast bowler or like a Madan Lal...everyone, aside from certain Indians like you, will most likely laugh at you. Aage tum khud samajhdhaar ho barkhurdaar...:winky:

[Lurker]

Helmets were widely prevalent at the time of Clarke. Just that some batsmen did not use them. He was an unusually well built man and weighed like 100 kg, and had unusually poiwerful shoulders and chest. You can make up your mind based on a 3 minute video, or take the view of his colleagues or the batsmen who actually faced him. The Guardian had this - http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/1999/dec/07/guardianobituaries

Oh but thats a 10,000 words long winded articles written by biased English poets. Give me a 15 seconds video that runs at 8 frames/second on britishpathe.com plz :--D:--D

[Marut]

yaar even Jacob Oram' date=' Nuwan Zoysa, Pankaj Singh, John Hastings have strong shoulders and are big man but it does not mean they are fast bowlers. Body size, big shoulders dont make a bowler fast. It is bowlers' bowling action as well as the fast twitch fibers which in combination make them fast. Even bowlers who have fast twitch fibers but poor bowling action cannot bowl fast due to their poor basics.[/quote'] Physique is one of the factors, not every thing. You cannot make a skeleton bowl at 90mph, even with good action. Sylvester was widely reported to be very fast ( even by the fast standards of WI bowlers) and also known to generate fearsome pace using a short run up. WI side was so good that he could not make his place there. Imagine the compeitition in the WI for the pace bowlers slot. He undertook a rebel tour in 1983 and was permanently banned from playing for WI. Otherwiise there was always the chance that he would have played more for WI. If you want to argue with anything more than that 3 minute video ( a day on which he was obviously out of his groove, in the commentrators own words) then do so. Else I have nothing more to add.

[Lurker]

WI side was so good that he could not make his place there. Imagine the compeitition in the WI for the pace bowlers slot. He undertook a rebel tour in 1983 and was permanently banned from playing for WI. Otherwiise there was always the chance that he would have played more for WI.

No he can't. He, and likes of him, are not quite qualified to do so. Yes I am a bit harsh on the chap but cricketing ignorance is no reason for stupidity when talking about great players. Lets take Andy Roberts, for example. Easily one of the greatest fast bowlers of his time and candidate for one of the all time greats too. Still played less than 50 Tests (by the way there is a good chance a few younger chaps look at his stats, wonder why he didnt take 250 wickets instead of 202 and dismiss him as a decent pacer) and had to retire early. What gets completely lost is that he lost his place to Malcom Marshall who within a couple of years became the greatest fast bowler in the world, even history. Was it Roberts fault or Marshall's greatness? I remember reading this in Marshall's autobiograpghy on how Roberts had become distraught and insecure in his couple of series knowing his speed was coming down a bit and that Marshall was breathing down his neck. Marshall wrote how he felt sorry for Roberts but there was nothing he loved more when he was finally given the red cherry and deemed the spearhead of West Indies pace bowlers. But yes lets question why Sylvester Clarke didnt displace Marshall instead :beee::beee::beee::beee:

[The Outsider]

looks like your reading and comprehension skills are still non existant ... because I never said that and logic too .... so how does one pick Holding , Garner etc ... ohh wait you think they don't even deserve a nomination ... but Hero Hawaldar does deserve B-> Again where did I say or imply this ? Once you have gotten over the seething rage go read my post again ... it clearly says except for one or two :facepalm: heres how you solve it Einstien : You figure out all the top bowlers (spin and pace) it will be around ~ 25 - 30 entries .. then put up 3 polls in 3 diff threads with 8 or 9 entries and you post these threads simultaneously. But even before that you need to tell where this series is going to be played so the janta can decide and pick bowlers accordingly. but yeah that would mean no place for the "Rapidex" man :nervous:

Why not 8-9 threads with 80-90 entries to pick bowlers? Because, surely if I include Anderson in the options people will want Srinath and Zaheer too. And if I include Srinath and Zaheer, Caddick fans will get offended. :hysterical: People were given an option to go with a bowling all rounder combination or a only bowlers combination. For those who want a solid lower order batsman at number 8, they can choose from the former. Why don't you start a thread based on your suggestion and see how many votes Holding and Garner get? Let's see if they even come close to topping the top 4 of this poll.

[Marut]

Is BossBhai for or against Kapil Dev? I thought I saw him describing Kapil Dev as one of the Indian players best ever ( sorry if I got this wrong) but he seemed to have drastically changed his opinion recently??

[The Outsider]

Is BossBhai for or against Kapil Dev? I thought I saw him describing Kapil Dev as one of the Indian players best ever ( sorry if I got this wrong) but he seemed to have drastically changed his opinion recently??

Here is how it works - Lurker and Outsider don't rate Tendulkar as being the best batsman ever ahead of Bradman. It also happens to be the case that Lurker and Outsider have often taken the mickey out of BB's "logic" to prove Tendulkar is better than Bradman. Lurker and Outsider are both huge fans of Kapil Dev. So, what way better in BB's mind to supposedly get back at Lurker and Outsider than to trash Kapil at every available opportunity.

[Lurker]

Is BossBhai for or against Kapil Dev? I thought I saw him describing Kapil Dev as one of the Indian players best ever ( sorry if I got this wrong) but he seemed to have drastically changed his opinion recently??

He is cricket's version of Reverend Bobby Jindal.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

Or make just one thread ... Automatically select Bradman ... list all your 10 heroes ...ignore those whoyou consider crap or what contributes most to childish trolling and be done ... :nice: Nope people were given a "option" of whatever you thought was fit .... now that I have showed you the flaws you haven gotten bent out of shape and started your usual nautanki with the help of your ever willing cheer leaders . Nothing new here. this be like how the country considers the latest IPL hero as a great kirkuter ? :hysterical:

Look - you are free to start your own polls if you don't like the way I've done mine.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

I have no intentions of forming imaginary XI's ... all I wanted to do was shine some light on your agenda .... you can continue selling that snake oil .... plenty of Bhaktagan willing to part with real money for your bakwas :nice:

Is your Tehelka expose complete on my "agenda" or is there more to come? :hysterical:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

ohh please .. don't let anything I say stop you from producing some more ludicrous material ...

On the contrary, I always look forward to your efforts on exposing my agenda and raping my online existence. :two_thumbs_up:

[pensionplan]

I do not understand the obsession with Akram. So many votes.... Would love to have seen Hadlee make the list in place of someone in that 10. Perhaps in place of Akram, Donald or even Lillee.

[rkt.india]

Physique is one of the factors, not every thing. You cannot make a skeleton bowl at 90mph, even with good action. Sylvester was widely reported to be very fast ( even by the fast standards of WI bowlers) and also known to generate fearsome pace using a short run up. WI side was so good that he could not make his place there. Imagine the compeitition in the WI for the pace bowlers slot. He undertook a rebel tour in 1983 and was permanently banned from playing for WI. Otherwiise there was always the chance that he would have played more for WI. If you want to argue with anything more than that 3 minute video ( a day on which he was obviously out of his groove, in the commentrators own words) then do so. Else I have nothing more to add.

Have you ever heard of Mohammad Zahid. He was not more than a skeleton when he first came and was/is one of the fastest bowler ever. Have you seen Mohammad Aamir, how thin he was when first came. Have you seen Ajit Agarkar. have you seen Tino Best and Fidel Edwards. All these were short or thinner than your usual fast bowlers but all could bowl fast.

[rkt.india]

Lets not generalize RKT. There's exaggeration but it's more in awe than meaning. Also' date=' it doesn't matter what action he had. If he bowled fast, he did. There's no First Order Logic. What I further can't understand is why Benaud on live commentary would "exaggerate" or be "nostalgic".[/quote'] If you understand fast bowling. A bowler cannot bowl fast unless he has a decent bowling action as well as the fast twitch. Both things in combination make a bowler fast. While Sylvester Clark's bowling action is seriously flawed.