Fastest ever bowler?

[panther]

This is one of the fastest balls ever bowled in a test match at 97.9mph muds5A1Vtrk

[panther]

aTp6Jqxupgg Another at 97.7mph

[Deleted_User_1]

aTp6Jqxupgg Another at 97.7mph

Yep another 97.7 mph bullet that got spanked to the boundary!!!! :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[panther]

Yep another 97.7 mph bullet that got spanked to the boundary!!!! :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

Did you watch the next ball :giggle:

[express bowling]

Oh BTW' date=' now the radar guns measure the speed from the point of release. In the 70s when they did these tests, it was after it pitched. Huge difference. Apparently the pitch can slow the ball by 8 - 15%. So Thommo could have bowled frequently at speeds of 100 mph or more....[/quote'] The ball slows down by 20% or more after pitching. Sometimes the speed of the ball from the point of release to the time it reaches the batsman is shown by the telecasters and the above mentioned fact becomes clear. If those 160 k deliveries were measured after pitching then the release speed would be 200 k. For a 150 k ball, the release speed would be 188 k. Is it possible that all the quicks bowled above 185 k ? :cantstop: Either the speeds of the greats wete release speeds or the speed measuring technique was not correct then.

[Muloghonto]

Fastest bowlers ever for me has gotto be Michael Holding. Whenever he was measured, he was only a kmph or two behind Jeff Thompson. But where Holding scores over Thommo, quite easily, i may add, is that he was by far the fastest bowler to bowl through a spell. Mikey Holding was a 95mph bowler, who bowled at blistering pace whether it was the first over or the seventh over of a spell. While Thommo, Akhtar and maybe even Waqar might've eeked out a faster ball than Holding here or there, there never has been a bowler who was faster than Holding on the basis of average speed throughout his career and spells.

[rkt.india]

Oh BTW' date=' now the radar guns measure the speed from the point of release. In the 70s when they did these tests, it was after it pitched. Huge difference. Apparently the pitch can slow the ball by 8 - 15%. So Thommo could have bowled frequently at speeds of 100 mph or more....[/quote'] No. They were not measured when they pitched but from the hand. Their measuring techniques can be faulty too as there were no speed guns at that time. Those were manual calculations.

[rkt.india]

he suffered a serious shoulder injury due to his tragic collision with greg chappel while taking a catch.... After that he lost his express pace and venomous bounce.. Most of the players who have ssen thommo still consider him the fastest of the lot including viv.. u cant deny the fact that he was clocked in only two matches and in both matches he clocked over 160.45 kph... No other bowler jas done that.... These days, spped guns check every single ball and still there's no other ball over 160 kph in a test match.... and i am not even considering his team mates' views; most of whom think that he might have touched 180 kph those days... U never really know about human limit... Once it was thought that no human would be able to break 10 second barrier for 100 m.... and now it stands at 9.5 sec..... It jst keep on getting better and better..

He was not clocked randomly. Those were fast bowling competitions organized to measure pace in 1975 and 1976 during test match and those were his fastest balls not average. Every bowler knew they are being measured and it will reveal who is the quickest bowler. So they were all encouraged to put their best efforts to clock high speeds. No bowler would do that in a normal match. Brett Lee and Akhtar too have done this several times. 160.45 Kph is around 100 mph.

[rkt.india]

Fastest bowlers ever for me has gotto be Michael Holding. Whenever he was measured, he was only a kmph or two behind Jeff Thompson. But where Holding scores over Thommo, quite easily, i may add, is that he was by far the fastest bowler to bowl through a spell. Mikey Holding was a 95mph bowler, who bowled at blistering pace whether it was the first over or the seventh over of a spell. While Thommo, Akhtar and maybe even Waqar might've eeked out a faster ball than Holding here or there, there never has been a bowler who was faster than Holding on the basis of average speed throughout his career and spells.

I defer. Yes, Holding was quick but to say that he was bowling every ball at 95 mph is ridiculous. No bowler can ever do that and neither holding did that. He will usually bowl within himself but could crank it up whenever he wanted. He was that kind of a bowler.

[rkt.india]

He had a debilitating shoulder injury and at that time, the methods of recovery were not as good as today. Just look at the footage from 1974 - 1976 and see how Marsh catches the ball. I do not recollect any of the other keepers exerting to catch the ball like that. His slinging action was purely from the shoulder and when it is gone, it is gone! Yes I think he was QUICK!!! When the 70-80s WI fast bowlers say he was quick, they know what they are talking about. Regarding Holding and Imran, yes they were fast but not express, maybe 85 - 90+ mph. A lot of bowlers have bowled at the same speed in the 90s and 2000s but they did not have the guile of these bowlers. Unless you are lighting fast like Thommo, you cannot have your way unless you mix it with seam and swing. But you have subtle movement with consistency, you do not even have to much speed. Ask Mcgrath, one of the best pace bowlers of all time. That 1979 video you are talking about is not the best way to judge a bowler's speed. They did not have that much time to warm up and it was hot as hell. You have to be pumped up and be in the rhythm of the game to bowl quick.

I am not denying he was not quick. He was, but saying he could bowl over 100 mph is ridiculous. 100 mph is 161K. He was clocked 160.45 in 1975 in fast bowling competition and too when he put his best effort to bowl quick.

[Subeshkumar]

akhtar bond lee tait steynn morkel

[Texan]

Hard to say if he was fastest ever, but definitely one of the top 5. Akhtar and Tait seem equally fast.

[Muloghonto]

I defer. Yes' date=' Holding was quick but to say that he was bowling every ball at 95 mph is ridiculous. No bowler can ever do that and neither holding did that. He will usually bowl within himself but could crank it up whenever he wanted. He was that kind of a bowler.[/quote'] No bowler could, but Holding could. he had an exceptionally well balanced run up, jump and action. He was also exceptionally athletic, being in the running for the Jamaican olympics 400m team as a youngester. People here do not discuss it, but if there ever was a 'perfect' action for fast bowling, it was Holding's. As such, i can see him being the exceptionally rare pace bowler who has such an economical and athletic action/build that he can crank out 95mph balls all day long. Its worth mentioning that Denis Amiss and Alan Knott batted against him for hours during his amazing lone-man 16-wicket effort against the English and they both said that the astonishing thing about Mikey holding was that he was just as fast bowling his 20th over on his 3rd spell as he was the very first opening over. This is one aspect of bowling that is hard to equate others with but you had to see it to believe it. Michael Holding and Malcolm Marshall (who was just as economical an action but a bit less classical with the more front-on approach) were by far, the most consistently fast bowlers day in and day out. Lillee, Imran,Waqar,Akhtar,Thommo, Croft,Roberts, Charlie Griffiths,Frank Tyson etc. were all blindingly fast and probably bowled a deliver or an over here or there faster than Holding or Marshall. But i garantee you, no bowler was as fast after bowling 3-4 overs on the trot as Holding and Marshall and no bowler bowled at such a blindingly consistent speed all through their careers.

[rkt.india]

No bowler could, but Holding could. he had an exceptionally well balanced run up, jump and action. He was also exceptionally athletic, being in the running for the Jamaican olympics 400m team as a youngester. People here do not discuss it, but if there ever was a 'perfect' action for fast bowling, it was Holding's. As such, i can see him being the exceptionally rare pace bowler who has such an economical and athletic action/build that he can crank out 95mph balls all day long. Its worth mentioning that Denis Amiss and Alan Knott batted against him for hours during his amazing lone-man 16-wicket effort against the English and they both said that the astonishing thing about Mikey holding was that he was just as fast bowling his 20th over on his 3rd spell as he was the very first opening over. This is one aspect of bowling that is hard to equate others with but you had to see it to believe it. Michael Holding and Malcolm Marshall (who was just as economical an action but a bit less classical with the more front-on approach) were by far, the most consistently fast bowlers day in and day out. Lillee, Imran,Waqar,Akhtar,Thommo, Croft,Roberts, Charlie Griffiths,Frank Tyson etc. were all blindingly fast and probably bowled a deliver or an over here or there faster than Holding or Marshall. But i garantee you, no bowler was as fast after bowling 3-4 overs on the trot as Holding and Marshall and no bowler bowled at such a blindingly consistent speed all through their careers.

Brett Lee had better action and runup than Holding. and I have seen a lot of his videos and they dont suggest he always bowled 95 mph especially in Tests because it is not possible to bowl 25 overs a day at 95 mph. Body will break down immediately if anyone will try to do that. Plenty of his bowling videos are available on youtube.

But i garantee you, no bowler was as fast after bowling 3-4 overs on the trot as Holding and Marshall and no bowler bowled at such a blindingly consistent speed all through their careers.

Regarding this part, Brett Lee and Akhtar bowled as quick as any throughout their careers. Even in mid 30s, these guys clocked 145-150K. BTW, how could you assess what speeds Marshall and Holding were bowling when there was no speed guns available. You cannot actually assess the exact pace by naked eyes. Even 135-140K is very quick by naked eyes. I once watched Vinay Kumar and NC Aiyappa in Ranji trophy in Mysore and I thought wow, they are bowling really quick but once they came under the speed radar, they barely clocked 135, that is how it works. Naked eyes are no parameter to measure how quick they bowled consistently. They were quick no doubt, but saying they bowled 20 overs at 95 mph a day in a test match is just utterly ridiculous. In a test match, a genuine bowler's average speed will always be 10K slower than his quickest ball in the match. Like if one bowled 150 his quickest then his average speed will mostly be around 140K and you will hardly find an exception to that. Holding could be quicker than Marshall. Marshall had greater skills than Holding.

[Crookbond]

Unfortunately, RKT speed guns aren't good parameters either - even in the current day settings.

[Muloghonto]

Brett Lee had better action and runup than Holding.

You are kidding, right ? Mikey Holding is *the* model for the perfect fast bowler's action, like Bishen Singh Bedi is *the* model for a finger spinner, as far as action goes. I have never heard anyone of note describing Lee's action as a model to follow, plenty of experts have rated Holding as the purest action in history of fast bowling. As for runup, lol. Mikey Holding was probably the only cricketer who could've won an olympics medal in running. he was a 400m candidate in highschool for team Jamaica and Jamaica happens to be a powerhouse in running. That alone should tell you how silly it is to think that there was ever a bowler with a more efficient runup than Holding.

and I have seen a lot of his videos and they dont suggest he always bowled 95 mph especially in Tests because it is not possible to bowl 25 overs a day at 95 mph. Body will break down immediately if anyone will try to do that. Plenty of his bowling videos are available on youtube.

Holding did not have a very long career. He was done by the time he was 33/34 because his knees got dodgy and WI had too much good talent to let Holding continue. As for bowling videos, lol. I have nothing to say to someone who bases their argument on the speed of bowlers based on watching videos. That is largely, impossible. There is too much variable in video angles, not to mention, you are talking a 2-d picture and trying to extrapolate a 3-d speed, which is not reliable scientifically. But anyways, yes, Holding & Marshall were the physical freak who could bowl at 99% top speed all day. I know its hard to believe but there have been physical freaks like that. One such freak, in Baseball, was Randy Johnson. A pitcher who pitched fastballs the entire innings without dropping below 93mph. Ever. No other pitcher has ever done it in baseball either but then again, Randy Johnson had a freakazoid physique and turns out to be just about the most economical shoulder action in pitching.

Regarding this part, Brett Lee and Akhtar bowled as quick as any throughout their careers. Even in mid 30s, these guys clocked 145-150K.

They clocked 145-150k for the first 10-15 balls. Then they bowled 91-92k through the rest of the spell. This is where Holding and Marshall were literally two of a kind. Again, ask the batsmen who've played against them: they simply were able to crank out speeds unheard of bowling an hour into their spell, on the 6th over.

BTW, how could you assess what speeds Marshall and Holding were bowling when there was no speed guns available. You cannot actually assess the exact pace by naked eyes. Even 135-140K is very quick by naked eyes.

Holding was assessed in WSC and he came out just fractionally short of Thommo. As for Marshall, i will go by what the batsmen who faced him said. besides, you cant really use speedometers as gospel. They ultimately measure speed at the point of release, not speed at the point of contact with batsman/bat. For skiddy bowlers like Marshall, that is fundamentally unfair.

I once watched Vinay Kumar and NC Aiyappa in Ranji trophy in Mysore and I thought wow, they are bowling really quick but once they came under the speed radar, they barely clocked 135, that is how it works. Naked eyes are no parameter to measure how quick they bowled consistently. They were quick no doubt, but saying they bowled 20 overs at 95 mph a day in a test match is just utterly ridiculous.

They were the fastest bowlers of their era- on that there is consensus amongst the batsmen they've faced. Only thommo got rated faster but more than one batsman has said that Holding was the fastest of his time bowling over after over and then Marshall assumed that mantle.

In a test match, a genuine bowler's average speed will always be 10K slower than his quickest ball in the match. Like if one bowled 150 his quickest then his average speed will mostly be around 140K and you will hardly find an exception to that. Holding could be quicker than Marshall. Marshall had greater skills than Holding.

Again, while i will not dispute that Mashall was a better bowler, its splitting hairs if you are going to say he was much more skilled than Holding. Holding is quite easily a top 5 alltime pace bowler. And yes, i will say that it is hard to believe how fast Holding was unless you've seen him bowl and factored in Holding bowling at 95% top speed for the entire day. I know that is a hard concept for most to swallow because it is supposed to be practically impossible. but there are once-in-a-lifetime bowlers/pitchers who are built just right and have the best possible action to bowl fast and efficiently. Holding was one, marshall was another. I doubt i will see one before i die. Randy johnson was one such in baseball that defies beleif in this regard, but it has happened and such bowlers can be hard to take out of the equation for the tag of fastest ever. Why ? Because the likes of Akhtar,Lee,Thommo- hell, everybody who bowls fast- bowl 100% speed for the first 2-3 overs and then at 90% as they get gassed. But when you have a bowler who is just a few kph slower but bowls at 95-100% of top speed through the whole day, it is extremely tough to discount them.

[rkt.india]

You are kidding, right ? Mikey Holding is *the* model for the perfect fast bowler's action, like Bishen Singh Bedi is *the* model for a finger spinner, as far as action goes. I have never heard anyone of note describing Lee's action as a model to follow, plenty of experts have rated Holding as the purest action in history of fast bowling.

I do not agree. Why you think those experts are the only thing you will take? Holding had a good action but there are others who have as good action and runups. Umesh Yadav has an action and runup though shorter but very similar to Holding. Brett Lee and Alan Donald had the action and runups which are bio-mechanics delight. Lee had one of the best runups you will ever see. it does not look like he is running but flying.

As for runup, lol. Mikey Holding was probably the only cricketer who could've won an olympics medal in running. he was a 400m candidate in highschool for team Jamaica and Jamaica happens to be a powerhouse in running. That alone should tell you how silly it is to think that there was ever a bowler with a more efficient runup than Holding.

Regarding this, a bowler's runup has little to do with how fast he can run in a 100 meter dash. I accept he had a good runup but saying he was all and be all is not right.

Holding did not have a very long career. He was done by the time he was 33/34 because his knees got dodgy and WI had too much good talent to let Holding continue. As for bowling videos, lol. I have nothing to say to someone who bases their argument on the speed of bowlers based on watching videos. That is largely, impossible. There is too much variable in video angles, not to mention, you are talking a 2-d picture and trying to extrapolate a 3-d speed, which is not reliable scientifically.

So you could measure his speed via naked eyes while watching a match.

But anyways, yes, Holding & Marshall were the physical freak who could bowl at 99% top speed all day. I know its hard to believe but there have been physical freaks like that. One such freak, in Baseball, was Randy Johnson. A pitcher who pitched fastballs the entire innings without dropping below 93mph. Ever. No other pitcher has ever done it in baseball either but then again, Randy Johnson had a freakazoid physique and turns out to be just about the most economical shoulder action in pitching. They clocked 145-150k for the first 10-15 balls. Then they bowled 91-92k through the rest of the spell. This is where Holding and Marshall were literally two of a kind. Again, ask the batsmen who've played against them: they simply were able to crank out speeds unheard of bowling an hour into their spell, on the 6th over.

Any bowler who could bowl 160 KPH is a physical freak in himself because that is a rarity and a few bowlers in the history of cricket have done that. I dont think you have seen Shoiab Akhtar enough to assess him. He could bowl 150-155K even at the end of the day in a test match, not just at the start. I have seen him do that. Same for Brett Lee. Holding and Marshall were not the only guy to do that. But I will still say no bowler in the history of cricket can or could bowl 20 overs in a day averaging 90-95 mph.

[Crookbond]

The reason why you can't rely on speed guns even in the modern age.

[rkt.india]

Unfortunately' date=' RKT speed guns aren't good parameters either - even in the current day settings.[/quote'] But technology has gotten better, you will agree and they are best parameter available right now. You must be talking about the inconsistencies but I will say that inconsistency is not because of radars but because of broadcasting or technical failures or may be human scoring failure.

[rkt.india]

The reason why you can't rely on speed guns even in the modern age.

What?