thongale Posted July 2, 2012 Posted July 2, 2012 Some say that Garner was the bowler who hit the bat the hardest, when on song. Garner must have had a lot of reserve in him, because he opted to bowl back of length at consistent brisk fast medium pace (may be around 135-140k range). When needed he stepped it up in no time.
ChanaLal Posted July 2, 2012 Posted July 2, 2012 When I talk about Holding and Bishop the fastest of them' date=' I take their bowling actions into consideration as well. They all were fast no doubt, but likes Roberts, Marshall etc. were in 88-90 mph bracket while I could say looking at the videos that Holding and Bishop were in 90-95 mph bracket. This I say because of their bowling actions and Holding and Bishop had the best bowling actions to bowl fast.[/quote'] I have read that Brett Lee has the best action to bowl fast bio-mechanically. This is why he has been relatively injury-free and still bowling 150 kph (93mph) at 35. I think you are confusing what looks smooth and easy on the eye, with what is 100% efficient
India-KXIP fan Posted July 2, 2012 Posted July 2, 2012 No Sreesanth! This is absurd, he is of a different breed, let alone being good enough for India, he could walk into any test team in any era. He is that talented. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmUqv83JyCI]Jacques Kallis vs Sreesanth | Best ball of Sreesanth | India vs South Africa 3rd Test - YouTube[/ame]
rkt.india Posted July 2, 2012 Posted July 2, 2012 I have read that Brett Lee has the best action to bowl fast bio-mechanically. This is why he has been relatively injury-free and still bowling 150 kph (93mph) at 35. I think you are confusing what looks smooth and easy on the eye' date=' with what is 100% efficient[/quote'] Before Brett Lee, It was Alan Donald who had super run up and action.
vayuu1 Posted July 4, 2012 Posted July 4, 2012 Interesting line-up. did you pick Lloyd for being the captain first, and then a batsman (and he was pretty decent batsman to boot). Or did you pick him as a batsman and then made him the skipper?? Just curious. I picked him for being a very clever captain,that guy was responsible for the dominance w.I had during 70's and 80's.after the beating his team got in oz .he asked for a pace oriented attack.he may be iffy as a batsman but he undoubtedly is one of the greatest captain in history,one key reason I picked this line up coz the guys like warne,akram,Marshall are decent batsman as well and with sobers he can bowl fast medium and spin .
Dravid_TheWall Posted July 4, 2012 Posted July 4, 2012 Not happy with choices. We should have one based on talent.
vayuu1 Posted July 4, 2012 Posted July 4, 2012 Not happy with choices. We should have one based on talent. Talent is nothing without consistency.
Dravid_TheWall Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 No Sreesanth! This is absurd, he is of a different breed, let alone being good enough for India, he could walk into any test team in any era. He is that talented. Jacques Kallis vs Sreesanth | Best ball of Sreesanth | India vs South Africa 3rd Test - YouTube
ChanaLal Posted July 8, 2012 Posted July 8, 2012 Talent is nothing without consistency. Talent is simply unfulfilled skill. Someone talented might not yet be skilful. I think you confusing two different things. Skill is nothing without consistency, makes more sense?
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