Ishant Sharma The Fast Bowler Watch Thread

[bharat297]

u need to watch cricket if ur saying there is nothing like good ball then this is the stupidest thing i have heard on this forum in long long time!

I didn't say that. You said he doesn't bowl "wicket taking" balls ... and bowls at the 5th stump line.

[Old guy]

I didn't say that. You said he doesn't bowl "wicket taking" balls ... and bowls at the 5th stump line.

yeah..he bowls at 130k without any movement short of length...way out side of stump u dont get international batsmen out with those balls and his stats prove that.

[bharat297]

Kid ... I've been watching cricket for over 25 years. I've seen them all from Walsh, Akram, Hadlee, Ambrose, Donald, Waqar, Bishop, Pollock, De Villiers, Lee, Steyn, Anderson and many others. Swing bowlers and out and out quicks tend to beat the bat more because of the lateral movement or pace they get. Ishant is not a swing bowler. He's a hit the deck bowler. Pollock, McGrath, Gillespie, Ambrose, etc. were all hit the deck bowler. Most of them didn't actually beat the bat that often in comparison to the guys like Akram, Steyn or Waqar. Ambrose was more of the exception because of the steep bounce that he got. Bowlers like Ishant are the type of bowlers that are meant to bowl the 5th stump line and play a game of patience with the batsmen, and get the batsmen poking at deliveries that they should be leaving. In fact most line and length bowlers actually aim for the 5th stump line. It's called the 'corridor of uncertainty' so that shows how little you actually know about cricket. You mentioned the game yesterday. You do realise that is an ODI and bowlers in ODIs bowl differently? Ishant is not an ODI bowler. You're not meant to bowl that 5th stump line outside off in ODIs because there isn't much uncertainty, especially during the power-plays where batsmen are just looking for length balls to hit. You need different types of bowlers in ODIs compared to Tests. Ishant's problems arise when he tries too many things and tries to swing the ball and throws it up too far and bowls half-volleys. So I'm not saying he's a brilliant Test bowler or even a good one. I'm saying over the past 18 months in Tests he's been doing that more than he used to. Unfortunately Cricinfo doesn't show pitch-maps for innings or have any "proof" of that so it's just my view against yours kid, so you'll have to live with that instead of demanding that I answer your question, like a petulant child. There's a concept called 'getting another bowlers wicket' in cricket that a lot of bowlers talk about. Warne and McGrath have frequently mentioned how they got a lot of wickets due to Jason Gillespie. Our ideal pace attack would be to have Ishant holding down one end (He has done a decent job of this over the past 18 months), giving Yadav the freedom to throw the ball up there looking for pace & swing. Add to that a genuine swing bowler, capable of manipulating reverse swing and you've got a potent pace attack.

[Old guy]

so u have learnt nothing after 25 years

[bharat297]

so u have learnt nothing after 25 years

[vishalvirsingh]

so when you are the worst bowler of ur team can u really blame the rest of bowling line up not supporting u ? :hmmm: even with no support i find it impossible that any one cant even get 1 wicket per innings..there is ust no excuse to call it improvement i dont even know what u were thinking specially if u consider he even lost pace after that series

when is Umesh yadav returning

[MCcricket]

I would have Shami, Pandey, Pankaj anyday before these jokers, Ishant, VK, PK, tested failures

[maniac]

ok dude.. explain to me in australia how come yadav and zaheer khan both got wickets but ishant averaged surpassed even bradman there ?in england how come on his own prraveen kumar got wickets but again gr8 lambu did not ? and no i know how wickets are taken u cant use weak bowling line up as excuse cos after good work was done (even in last game ) this guy is always the one who gives up all pressure and since u cant prove by stats or even by his bowling that jsut means he has not improved one bit ! one can easily tell weather bowler or batsman has improved or not its not rocket science its sports.. do u even know how much he averaged in last few series ? just search about it ...a part timer could have done better!

Even Aussies have said that most wickets Umesh got was due to Ishant building up pressure on one end. Let us not go too deep into this statement for now but you can't compare Steyn to any Indian bowler....Steyn has a stream of support bowlers who never let the pressure off the batsman.Look at Pollock and Ntini's careers...during Pollocks days it was Donald and in Ntini's days it was Pollock who used to build pressure from one end. Now I am not saying Ishant is as good as some of the names I have mentioned but the disappointment with Ishant has been that he didn't turn out to be kind of strike bowler we all wanted him to be but as a support bowler,he is still the best we got. Play a team of BK,PK and Zak just becaue they can be wicket takers and that will be a recipe for disaster. Umar Gul is another example...very good support bowler but not the same when you making him the strike bowler...there are many other examples. Ishant has done really well tying one end up and I still think if he gets his pace back,he could be our frontline LOI bowler and a good 3rd/4th seamer(if we ever go there again) for tests.

[panther]

Another example irfan bowled really well but didn't get many wickets. but he had a strike bowler in junaid to back him up along with a world class spinner. As a unit it worked, individually it won't.

[CG]

one which gets wicket see steyn bowling and then ishant steyn will beat bat atleast twice over ishant once a spell thats the difference!

In cricket Its mostly batsman making mistake which leads to wicket than bowler bowling a gem.Steyn does bowl some unplayable balls but its because he is consistent with line and length and gets movement he is very good. Building pressure is very important from one end.Ishant had done that in wi,eng in some spells and aus too. But we want ishant to be a strike bowler like he was till 2009.Bowl full length and swing the ball at 140ks.I Can say with utmost confidence the channel he bowled with the bowl swinging in and odd ball holding its line ,He was extremly good to top class right hand batsman.Some of his spells to kallis,Jayawardene,Ponting on dead tracks were as good as any. zitu2dC7aeo&feature=player_embedded But currently he has lost his action,Its not about getting hammered in odis.But technical problems which will not go away in tests.

[CG]

yeah..he bowls at 130k without any movement short of length...way out side of stump u dont get international batsmen out with those balls and his stats prove that.

He can bowl outside offstump when he used to insiwng it ,Batsman had to play it as they though it would swing back in.

[bharat297]

He gets natural movement in to the right-hander or away from the left. In the last Test against England he was able to get the ball in the right areas a fair bit and he was able to put a fair bit of pressure on the English batsmen with that. He troubled them a bit with that.

[Old guy]

He can bowl outside offstump when he used to insiwng it ' date='Batsman had to play it as they though it would swing back in.[/quote'] Agree Btw who r saying ishant created ressure and cos of it wickets came My advice is to see aeries and then comment :finger:

[Stan AF]

Good post.

Kid ... I've been watching cricket for over 25 years. I've seen them all from Walsh, Akram, Hadlee, Ambrose, Donald, Waqar, Bishop, Pollock, De Villiers, Lee, Steyn, Anderson and many others. Swing bowlers and out and out quicks tend to beat the bat more because of the lateral movement or pace they get. Ishant is not a swing bowler. He's a hit the deck bowler. Pollock, McGrath, Gillespie, Ambrose, etc. were all hit the deck bowler. Most of them didn't actually beat the bat that often in comparison to the guys like Akram, Steyn or Waqar. Ambrose was more of the exception because of the steep bounce that he got. Bowlers like Ishant are the type of bowlers that are meant to bowl the 5th stump line and play a game of patience with the batsmen, and get the batsmen poking at deliveries that they should be leaving. In fact most line and length bowlers actually aim for the 5th stump line. It's called the 'corridor of uncertainty' so that shows how little you actually know about cricket. You mentioned the game yesterday. You do realise that is an ODI and bowlers in ODIs bowl differently? Ishant is not an ODI bowler. You're not meant to bowl that 5th stump line outside off in ODIs because there isn't much uncertainty, especially during the power-plays where batsmen are just looking for length balls to hit. You need different types of bowlers in ODIs compared to Tests. Ishant's problems arise when he tries too many things and tries to swing the ball and throws it up too far and bowls half-volleys. So I'm not saying he's a brilliant Test bowler or even a good one. I'm saying over the past 18 months in Tests he's been doing that more than he used to. Unfortunately Cricinfo doesn't show pitch-maps for innings or have any "proof" of that so it's just my view against yours kid, so you'll have to live with that instead of demanding that I answer your question, like a petulant child. There's a concept called 'getting another bowlers wicket' in cricket that a lot of bowlers talk about. Warne and McGrath have frequently mentioned how they got a lot of wickets due to Jason Gillespie. Our ideal pace attack would be to have Ishant holding down one end (He has done a decent job of this over the past 18 months), giving Yadav the freedom to throw the ball up there looking for pace & swing. Add to that a genuine swing bowler, capable of manipulating reverse swing and you've got a potent pace attack.

[bharat297]

Agree Btw who r saying ishant created ressure and cos of it wickets came My advice is to see aeries and then comment :finger:

Michael Hussey said that. He also said that Ishant regularly touched 150 and beat the bat on numerous occasions. Lol so basically pretty much everything you said Ishant doesn't do, people that actually face him said he does. maybe you should ask Hussey to use statsguru and find "proof"

[Old guy]

Michael Hussey said that. He also said that Ishant regularly touched 150 and beat the bat on numerous occasions. Lol so basically pretty much everything you said Ishant doesn't do, people that actually face him said he does. maybe you should ask Hussey to use statsguru and find "proof"

umesh's fifer in perth what did ishant do there? i remember him getting smacked for six'es yadav on his own bowled a great spell and got 5 wickets yes ishant did bowled some good spells but to attribute other bowlers success to him is just stupid . ishant was much better then other bowlers in game 2 but yadav did not picked wickets there he did in perth as he found good rhythm nothing ese as a rookie he was in consistent bowled with brilliance on one day was plain crap next he did well in first game got quick wickets in both innings from wht i remember (talking about yadav ) and ishant apart from some good spells was his usual crap giving easy runs dont care what any one says if ur unlucky at max u will average 30 like morkel did when ur crap u will average 100.. there is no way u can spin of his utterly useless performance in england and australia as good ones.. no way on hell in england he was good in 2 spells thats it ..wih praveen kumar doing well had he stepped up we could have fought much better in australia with zack and yadav doing well many times he just needed to be average and just not plainly suck for us to compete but that never happened..

[Old guy]

in short what i jsut said it he mght hae bowled some tight spells but u cant use them and say its cos of him other guys got wickets i gave example about perth where yadav got wickets.. no one is saying he did not bowled some good spells by his standards ( ) i honestly believe for most bowlers good spell is a spell with atleast 1 wicket but in ishant case if he does not goees for runs and beats bat once its considered very good :P

[vayuu1]

He has really become canon fodder these days ,sprays it around , bowl short,seam is wobbly,position of hand all over the place.

[bharat297]

in short what i jsut said it he mght hae bowled some tight spells but u cant use them and say its cos of him other guys got wickets i gave example about perth where yadav got wickets.. no one is saying he did not bowled some good spells by his standards ( ) i honestly believe for most bowlers good spell is a spell with atleast 1 wicket but in ishant case if he does not goees for runs and beats bat once its considered very good :P

Lol you're a funny kid aren't you. I'm not attributing all of Yadav's wickets to Ishant. I'm merely saying that Ishant is a bowler who can build pressure from one end and that he's been able to do that a fair bit over the past year or so. where you and I differ is what you just defined as a good spell. You said they must take at least one wicket for it to be a good spell. I disagree. Wickets are just the end result and unlike you I don't believe wickets just occur in a vacuum of the bowler that took the wicket and his own skill. Wickets occur as a result of a number of factors ... Bowlers skill, Batsmans skill, pressure from the other end, field placements, Batsmans shot selection, the pitch, the delivery itself, score pressure, match situation, etc. thus unlike you I don't just look at the wickets column before deciding if a bowler is bowling well. The best bowling attacks bowl in partnerships. The funniest part is how you call it spin when I directly quote a player who actually faced Ishant But I'm sure you know more about cricket than Hussey too right?

[Old guy]

Lol you're a funny kid aren't you. I'm not attributing all of Yadav's wickets to Ishant. I'm merely saying that Ishant is a bowler who can build pressure from one end and that he's been able to do that a fair bit over the past year or so. where you and I differ is what you just defined as a good spell. You said they must take at least one wicket for it to be a good spell. I disagree. Wickets are just the end result and unlike you I don't believe wickets just occur in a vacuum of the bowler that took the wicket and his own skill. Wickets occur as a result of a number of factors ... Bowlers skill, Batsmans skill, pressure from the other end, field placements, Batsmans shot selection, the pitch, the delivery itself, score pressure, match situation, etc. thus unlike you I don't just look at the wickets column before deciding if a bowler is bowling well. The best bowling attacks bowl in partnerships. The funniest part is how you call it spin when I directly quote a player who actually faced Ishant But I'm sure you know more about cricket than Hussey too right?

i can tell u when hussey said that one spell where ishant clocked 150k several times it was 2nd inings i think that was rare good spell ok im gonna ask u simply to avoid confusion any more why do you think ishant does not get wickets? whats so special about his bowling that he bowls well and does not gets wicket? he bowls well right? right?!