India and bowling

[CSK Fan]

I was reading with amusement some threads here on Indian bowlers. A dicey subject to say the least, but one which every Indian seems to have an opinion about. So let me tell you my opinion. From the Indian management to the captain to the fans, we are clueless about good bowling. We don't have an iota of knowledge about good bowling When it comes to bowling, particularly any type of bowling which is not spin, we are like the blind man who can only feel the elephant's tail and think an elephant is like a snake. We don't have a frame of reference or history to fall back on. None of our retired fast bowlers ever set the world on fire. Hence we are still groping in the dark and trying to figure out how to judge bowlers and bowling Just look at the latest trend, we check cricinfo speedgun or look at the TV and automatically judge a bowler by the speed gun readings. Really? While it is true that the most successful bowlers in the world, spinner excluded, are the ones with decent pace, it is also true that decent pace without any kind of skills is as much a waste as a scud missile without an in-built radar. Make no mistake, I am not advocating the need for trundlers nor am I decrying the importance of pace. But judging a bowler just by speedgun readings (and I have seen this many times, the bowler might bowl the same thrash ball, but if the speedgun reads 140 he is good, if it reads 130, he is useless) is very similar to how the Pakistanis judge their batsmen. Mostly from strike rates Look at the contrast with batting. In batting we know talent when we see one. We are not fooled by Yousuf Pathan's slogs no matter what his strike rates are, and we don't consider Pujara any lesser because he plays slow. We know he is a real talent. We have an eye for batting and so does our management and captain. From Yuvraj to Pujara, from Kohli to Sehwag, we have known and admired batting talent which are so different in scope and we correctly knew that each one was special. This is something the Pakistani fans can never do, for them the better the strike rate, the better the batsmen. On the other hand look at how other teams handle their bowling. Pakistan had space for Asif and knew he was special. South Africa with such bowlers like Steyn and Morkel, has a place for Philander. And the later, has proven his prowess on all wickets including UAE, with a speed of 125kph and is no 2 on the bowling list, just behind Steyn. Now confess, which Indian will even give a chance to Philander over the tall, fast Morkel? Will performance matter? To give an example closer to home, Bhuvaneshvar Kumar is a new exciting talent we have. He has performed unlike any new bowler and has earned wide praise from all over. Are we as excited about him as Umesh? Because of a difference in few kph in pace? We are quick to point out that he is a limited bowler based on very few data points and lack of chances. On the other hand look at the patience we showed with Ishant and made excuses for him. When he was dropped for Vinay, how many voices of protest were there? In the end, one has to face the facts. We would not recognize a skillful pace bowler even if he was right in front of us. All we know is to read speedguns and assume things. In such an atmosphere many talented bowlers might fall down the wayside because of lack of support. Coming to the management and captain, they suffer from similar myopia. Batting has always been the strength we have focused on. Bowlers have always been the supporting cast. When we defended low totals, we have done so by strangling the opposition instead of magic deliveries. Dhoni as a captain stands out in this regard. His use of bowling has always been defensive. Cut the runs, bowl to restricted fields and let the batsmen make mistakes. Even the spinners he prefers, from Jadeja to Raina are bowlers who bowl straight and let the batsmen make the mistake. He has turned Ashwin into an extremely defensive bowler. When he dropped Bhuveneswar for Vinay, his intent was clear, he would rather defend runs at the death than take wickets upfront. For India, batting is the star, bowling has to be limited and disciplined instead of mercurial. So young bowlers like Yadav and Bhuvenswar can be left out, because the promise of early wickets do not compensate for the fear of giving runs at the death. People like Vinay who can listen to the captain's advice will always be in the team. So for all those who are dreaming about the next big bowler from India, please don't. Our management, our atmosphere, our captain, none of them will provide the platform for a good bowler to emerge. And even if one does, we will be too busy looking at speedguns to notice him bowl. We don't get bowling, we never will.

[msb1991]

Not sure I agree with your assessment of spin in that I think Ashwin hasn't been turned into a defensive bowler any more than he has simply lost form and always been fairly defensive in limited overs cricket. Jadeja is a good bowler too, I don't think you can criticise his ODI bowling in any way, I think he is valuable whatever your strategy is and he certainly turns enough deliveries to be an attacking option. However, I think everything else is spot on and the general message is excellent and well put. Good post. I think a lot of people will benefit from reading what you've said and precisely how you've said it. A lot of people will read into the text things which aren't there but I think your message for the most part is on point exactly.

[CSK Fan]

Not sure I agree with your assessment of spin in that I think Ashwin hasn't been turned into a defensive bowler any more than he has simply lost form and always been fairly defensive in limited overs cricket. Jadeja is a good bowler too, I don't think you can criticise his ODI bowling in any way, I think he is valuable whatever your strategy is and he certainly turns enough deliveries to be an attacking option. However, I think everything else is spot on and the general message is excellent and well put. Good post. I think a lot of people will benefit from reading what you've said and precisely how you've said it. A lot of people will read into the text things which aren't there but I think your message for the most part is on point exactly.

I agree for a fair bit. And in general we have handled spin fairly decently. But it is also a concern that more and more of our good spin bowlers are just turning into darters. But the article was mostly about fast/medium bowling

[Crookbond]

Top post MTC, as usual - eloquently put. I will agree with msb that I don't think Ashwin's line is defensive - I think it's the nature of the format (changed rules, new balls etc.) which have led to that line. In some ways, I think it is more attacking than over the stumps as it brings the LBW in equation and makes the carrom ball more lethal.

[msb1991]

I agree for a fair bit. And in general we have handled spin fairly decently. But it is also a concern that more and more of our good spin bowlers are just turning into darters. But the article was mostly about fast/medium bowling

I'd agree with all that. I think your fast/medium bowling bit was spot on. Another thing that is worth mentioning is that the quickest bowlers (150kph+) seem to be more certain of success in ODI cricket than Test cricket. In Test cricket, a lot of express bowlers have struggled with injury (Bond, Akhtar) and more have struggled to bowl well enough in Test cricket (e.g. Mohammad Sami, Shaun Tait, Tino Best, Devon Malcolm) to have a good record. There are exceptions to this rule of course, but it is an interesting trend.

[Ibes]

I get what you are saying, since you said so much because you obviously care about the topic a lot. There is no need to place this on the fans imo Zak was supported as much as anyone, no one really cared about the speed guns with him. We also see batting weakness just as well and know what how a daunting pace bowler can do to a lot of SC batsmen. And we, as in I, just want one of those, for the tail especially. If we go back to 2003 World Cup, Indians naively thinking their bowling was good only to get their soul crushed when all of them wilted away because of pressure, same in 2007 when Mortaza was bowling at 145+ and killing us where Aggy and co. etc were getting shelled. This happens a lot. Although we will always recognize Dravid as an all time ODI great regardless of his strike rate we don't have a bowling version of him. We're not discarding Mcgrath for Tait more like discarding James Hopes because he blows.

[NareshK]

There are only some people here who are obsessed with pace. Most people are just tired of seeing medium pace bowlers who just amble up and bowl without any purpose or threat. The frustration is more at the mentality that's prevalent - that a few line and length bowlers who could stop runs are preferred over bowlers who are attacking and wicket takers. They look vulnerable especially because we play on flat tracks in India. B Kumar would do much better in conditions where there is some movement but ODIs are rarely played in conditions like that. Pace helps in conditions like India because it is speed through the air and you cut the reaction time of the batsman. Its effective irrespective of the conditions. A bowler like Mitchell Johnson will be a threat in ODIs anywhere. Also I feel, we would need pace bowlers in the next World Cup where pitches in Australia are hard, bouncy and good for batting. Medium pace bowlers will get dispatched easily unless there is swing which is rare. I would rather see Shami or Umesh or even someone like Rahul Shukla get more chances and improve by playing more. Even if they do poorly, what have we got to lose by losing a couple of ODIs to Australia or WI ? Its not like Vinay Kumar is winning us games anyway. A good, pace attack will make a world of difference to our side with our batting.

[express bowling]

@ My two cents I think you have been grossly unfair in your assessment of the so called fans of speed. Let me elaborate why 1) How many posters do you see opposing BK or Zaheer's inclusion in the team ? If pace was the only criterion being looked at then would you not see more opposition to these two ? 2) Lack of speed does not necessarily mean having skill. A bowler who lacks pace as well as skill is really the worst kind of seamer. Most of the opposition is towards these types of pacers of which we have plenty. 3) While picking pacers or for that matter any player, the composition of the team as a result of such selections needs to be of the highest priority. You have written about Philander and Asif. These countries have not filled their bowling attack with such pacers. For a Philander, there is also a Steyn and a Morkel. The bowling lineup as a whole must have one or two bowlers with some pace to be more effective. In our case that is mostly missing. That is why many of us clamour for the inclusion of a quick. Because that element is often missing. We often fill our team with slower pacers who mostly are low on skill as well. If we are taking low skilled pacers, it is better that they are quicker. 4) The ideal pacer is someone who has both skill and pace, like Steyn, Lillee, Wasim, Roberts, so many many more. That should be our target. We often tend to forget that as well. 5) Regarding pacers who have succeeded at lower pace, one feature that most of them have is height, bounce and seam movement. These aspects are often forgotten by us while analyzing the skill of a slower pacer. In our country we have many many short, slow pacers who just float thball and hope to get some swing. The problem with such an approach is that the ball does not swing under most conditions and then these bowlers become sitting ducks . Pacers like Philander, Asif or McKay are all tall pacers who get excellent seam movement as well as bounce. They can swing as well and are intelligent bowlers too. So, when accepting a slower pacer , these aspects need to be considered. When a slow pacer is being criticized, it is often because they lack the above mentioned qualities and only higher pace can make them decent. 6) You have written that we are discerning towards our batsmen. Not entirely true. We love batters who either score a lot of centuries and end up with big records OR those who are stroke makers. Batsmen who can play under tough situations and help our country win are not that popular unless they meet the above criteria. Also, we have include so many batsmen with flair in our test team, even though they had problems against the moving ball or the shirt ball. Raina, Yuvraj would be prime examples. So many people have supported their inclusion because 7) Just like we cannot fill our test team with 6 Dravids , even though he was very good, and need the Sehwags and Dhawans too, similarly we need Umesh also and cannot fill our team with only BK , although having two such skilled pacers among a group of 5 pacers would be great. 8) Although we never had great pacers, most of us here have seen world class pacers over the years a lot. We know how they are. They are not like VK for sure. 9) Ishant Sharma, who was the quickest pacer in our lineup for the first 3 ODIs, and is mostly above 135 k in his career, receives the strongest criticism. So, it is not like a bad but quicker bowler is supported.

[Gunner]

@ My two cents I think you have been grossly unfair in your assessment of the so called fans of speed. Let me elaborate why 1) How many posters do you see opposing BK or Zaheer's inclusion in the team ? If pace was the only criterion being looked at then would you not see more opposition to these two ? 2) Lack of speed does not necessarily mean having skill. A bowler who lacks pace as well as skill is really the worst kind of seamer. Most of the opposition is towards these types of pacers of which we have plenty. 3) While picking pacers or for that matter any player, the composition of the team as a result of such selections needs to be of the highest priority. You have written about Philander and Asif. These countries have not filled their bowling attack with such pacers. For a Philander, there is also a Steyn and a Morkel. The bowling lineup as a whole must have one or two bowlers with some pace to be more effective. In our case that is mostly missing. That is why many of us clamour for the inclusion of a quick. Because that element is often missing. We often fill our team with slower pacers who mostly are low on skill as well. If we are taking low skilled pacers, it is better that they are quicker. 4) The ideal pacer is someone who has both skill and pace, like Steyn, Lillee, Wasim, Roberts, so many many more. That should be our target. We often tend to forget that as well. 5) Regarding pacers who have succeeded at lower pace, one feature that most of them have is height, bounce and seam movement. These aspects are often forgotten by us while analyzing the skill of a slower pacer. In our country we have many many short, slow pacers who just float thball and hope to get some swing. The problem with such an approach is that the ball does not swing under most conditions and then these bowlers become sitting ducks . Pacers like Philander, Asif or McKay are all tall pacers who get excellent seam movement as well as bounce. They can swing as well and are intelligent bowlers too. So, when accepting a slower pacer , these aspects need to be considered. When a slow pacer is being criticized, it is often because they lack the above mentioned qualities and only higher pace can make them decent. 6) You have written that we are discerning towards our batsmen. Not entirely true. We love batters who either score a lot of centuries and end up with big records OR those who are stroke makers. Batsmen who can play under tough situations and help our country win are not that popular unless they meet the above criteria. Also, we have include so many batsmen with flair in our test team, even though they had problems against the moving ball or the shirt ball. Raina, Yuvraj would be prime examples. So many people have supported their inclusion because 7) Just like we cannot fill our test team with 6 Dravids , even though he was very good, and need the Sehwags and Dhawans too, similarly we need Umesh also and cannot fill our team with only BK , although having two such skilled pacers among a group of 5 pacers would be great. 8) Although we never had great pacers, most of us here have seen world class pacers over the years a lot. We know how they are. They are not like VK for sure. 9) Ishant Sharma, who was the quickest pacer in our lineup for the first 3 ODIs, and is mostly above 135 k in his career, receives the strongest criticism. So, it is not like a bad but quicker bowler is supported.

Excellent post.

[GolGappe]

Excellent title post. We can spin it any way but as far as I am concerned India has only produced one and a half quality fast bowlers, Kapil and Zaheer, in last few decades. Srinath bowled few brilliant spells here and there but was not even close to world class for most parts of his career. We still haven't learned how to nurture great talents, keep them fit, and ensure their skills don't regress when the money starts coming in.

[Ibes]

@ express bowling Top post, the fact that we lack variety is no news to anyone. We need compliments to BK and Umesh, maybe Shami will be it. I don't really know.

[rkt.india]

When he was dropped for Vinay, how many voices of protest were there?

This is wrong. Check the thread. There was not a single person who agreed to the decision. Everyone takes Bhuvneshwar ahead of Umesh in any match bar a test match in India.

[gattaca]

MTC But couple of fast bowlers performed really well in patches. Our bowlers lack sustainability. I can recall Nehra , RP singh, Sreeshant but they faded after injuries. I think we need to look at managing them> I think we have talent there but BCCI or the coaching staff doesnt manage them properly. Lot of fans complain about our bowlers loosing pace after injuries or over time. I think if you are bowler you know the shelf life of a bowler is small they try save themselves from getting injured. I think the bowlers are the first ones thrown under the bus if we loose a game because the conditions most of bowlers play are flat tracks. Their is a chance every one gets hit on a bad day. Assurance of place in the team is also a major problem for fast bowlers.

[rkt.india]

You also compared Morkel and Philander. Firstly, there are not many successful test bowlers like Philander. Secondly, both have their own strong formats. Morkel is their best bowler when it comes of ODIs. Because of his pace and bounce, he is ideal for that format. In tests, you need bowlers who can seam or swing the ball and bowl more fuller length than back of a length like Morkel.

[youngindia]

But judging a bowler just by speedgun readings (and I have seen this many times' date=' the bowler might bowl the same thrash ball, but if the speedgun reads 140 he is good, if it reads 130, he is useless) is very similar to how the Pakistanis judge their batsmen.[/quote'] you have to read in amusement more about how quixotic ppl talk about 120+ bowlers as if they are going to achieve great things. when history of test cricket and ODI has given ample evidence that more gifted bowlers are found in the above 130 or 132 range, there is a strong basis to give bowlers bowling above 130 opportunities. 120+ pacers are not going achieve great things ....they will struggle to average below 35 at test standard. more gifted bowlers find a way past 130.so give that "highly skilled 120 bowler" a rest. they don't exist. At best there are some 125 bowlers like irfan and Praveen who have some high talent in them. but not good enough to go further.they are like "nearly men" so its makes sense to look for bowlers who find it easier to average under 35. Even india's best pacers all bowled over 130 in their prime. so there is reason to feel that the likes of umesh or aaron will find it easier to go below 34 than the gentle pacers. what's rocket science about it? its about calculating the probabilities right. asif can bowl in the 130's easily. philander ,time will tell .he is not going to carry an attack on his own. if you expect 5 7 bowlers to swing it at 125 and expect them to average under 30(test standard),is it going to help?:giggle: bad bowlers are due to a rotten system starting from juniors. you need talented people who can think about their game.a system that can identify the right prospects and send them upstairs. example,when SL were crowing about Fernando, my feeling was he was rather mediocre in the thinking part. he was never going to succeed you need talent as well as the cricketing brain to assess the game. better pool of talent will sort that out and that is a grassroots issue. unfortunately I don't credit either bcci or any other indian sports body with too much vision.

[CG]

Look at the contrast with batting. In batting we know talent when we see one. We are not fooled by Yousuf Pathan's slogs no matter what his strike rates are, and we don't consider Pujara any lesser because he plays slow. We know he is a real talent. We have an eye for batting and so does our management and captain. From Yuvraj to Pujara, from Kohli to Sehwag, we have known and admired batting talent which are so different in scope and we correctly knew that each one was special. This is something the Pakistani fans can never do, for them the better the strike rate, the better the batsmen. On the other hand look at how other teams handle their bowling. Pakistan had space for Asif and knew he was special. South Africa with such bowlers like Steyn and Morkel, has a place for Philander. And the later, has proven his prowess on all wickets including UAE, with a speed of 125kph and is no 2 on the bowling list, just behind Steyn. Now confess, which Indian will even give a chance to Philander over the tall, fast Morkel? Will performance matter? To give an example closer to home, Bhuvaneshvar Kumar is a new exciting talent we have. He has performed unlike any new bowler and has earned wide praise from all over. Are we as excited about him as Umesh? Because of a difference in few kph in pace? We are quick to point out that he is a limited bowler based on very few data points and lack of chances. On the other hand look at the patience we showed with Ishant and made excuses for him. When he was dropped for Vinay, how many voices of protest were there? In the end, one has to face the facts. We would not recognize a skillful pace bowler even if he was right in front of us. All we know is to read speedguns and assume things. In such an atmosphere many talented bowlers might fall down the wayside because of lack of support. Coming to the management and captain, they suffer from similar myopia. Batting has always been the strength we have focused on. Bowlers have always been the supporting cast. When we defended low totals, we have done so by strangling the opposition instead of magic deliveries. Dhoni as a captain stands out in this regard. His use of bowling has always been defensive. Cut the runs, bowl to restricted fields and let the batsmen make mistakes. Even the spinners he prefers, from Jadeja to Raina are bowlers who bowl straight and let the batsmen make the mistake. He has turned Ashwin into an extremely defensive bowler. When he dropped Bhuveneswar for Vinay, his intent was clear, he would rather defend runs at the death than take wickets upfront. A Batsman skill is considered to be his technique,Repertoire of shots .Similarly for fast bowlers u have Pace,Control,Movement,technique as basic skills With added mental skills for both batsman and bowlers. Lets wait for more than 2 matches to judge vilander and against better batting lineup.He looks good as he bowling with steyn ,morkel .I had a laugh :hysterical: at suggestion we do not give chances to bowlers with pace of vilander .Most of our bowlers be it kapil dev or history of swing bowlers are more skill based than pace. Umesh Yadav has a test average of 30 which is rare for indian fast bowler and bhuvi has played far too less and shown no great performances. I think u should add in the op its for odi cricket lovers not test. Most of all cricket is a team game bowling attacks are build by having diff types of bowlers.We have likes of bhuvi so we need pace of yadav to compliment bhuvi.

[express bowling]

@ youngindia As you have correctly pointed out, High Probability of finding successful sportsmen , if we look for people with**certain qualties, like 130k+ or 135k+ or 140k+ pace along with consistency in a pacer, consistent and powerful ground strokes hitting ability in a singles tennis player, ability to play bounce, movement and spin for a test btsman. etc. etc. is ignored by many Indian sports administrators as well as many many fans alike. It is surprising because it would seem to be the easiest and most obvious way. We would somehow like to hunt for that elusive 125 k pacer to be a super successful test pacer , completely ignoring the fact that it has never happened before and logically it is very unlikely to happen in the future because international batsmen, who can negotiate swinging deliveries at 140 k are unlikely to be consistently troubled by such slow deliveries. Even if we manage to find one, because he is very intelligent or something, it would be far easier to find strike bowlers among those who combine pace as well as skill. Why not take the far easier path ?

[G_B_]

agree whole heartedly with expressbowling. I am not against trundlers per say. However you cant have a bowling attack with only trundlers. Which we seem to be doing. This is exactly why i have misgivings about playing Bhuvi and Pandey in the same bowling line up. you look at South Africa, Steyn is usually 92-88 Morkel is 85-88 with occasional ball in the 90s while Philander is 80-82. They operating in different ranges. Maybe what india need is Bhuvi 78-82 Zaheer 84-85 (left arm) and Umesh (88-92). That is variety. Too many times in India cricket we have bowlers operating in the same ranges. Even Australia in this series have a super fast Johnson and a McKay as a slower decoy to him. We have a case of slow and slower.

[CSK Fan]

@ youngindia As you have correctly pointed out, High Probability of finding successful sportsmen , if we look for people with**certain qualties, like 130k+ or 135k+ or 140k+ pace along with consistency in a pacer, consistent and powerful ground strokes hitting ability in a singles tennis player, ability to play bounce, movement and spin for a test btsman. etc. etc. is ignored by many Indian sports administrators as well as many many fans alike. It is surprising because it would seem to be the easiest and most obvious way. We would somehow like to hunt for that elusive 125 k pacer to be a super successful test pacer , completely ignoring the fact that it has never happened before and logically it is very unlikely to happen in the future because international batsmen, who can negotiate swinging deliveries at 140 k are unlikely to be consistently troubled by such slow deliveries. Even if we manage to find one, because he is very intelligent or something, it would be far easier to find strike bowlers among those who combine pace as well as skill. Why not take the far easier path ?

See, here again we are putting the cart before the horse and is a prime example of our cluelessness about bowling. You do not see the skills of a bowler by looking at the speedguns, it's plain and simple. You just look at how good he is. You can look at every bowler who bowls above 140 kph in India and still have as much chance of finding a great bowler as of winning the lottery If a bowler is good, has great rhythm and skills, he will automatically also have decent pace. Pace is a bi-product of an athletic, skillful bowler in rhythm. If you want to encourage blind pace culture, you might find a couple of bowlers who hit 140 kph with wrong and unsustainable actions and you will never be as close to finding a good bowler as you are now. And isn't this evident? Isn't this also why bowlers like Munaf and Ishant fade off? Because their pace was not natural and never sustainable. So to summarize, you thinking first looking at pace and then trying to find a good bowler will narrow down our margins of finding one. I say, never gonna happen, pace is a bi-product of good bowling not the other way around. It will be like looking at the amount of smoke coming out of a vehicle and trying to guess which has a more powerful engine. A very wasteful method

[CSK Fan]

agree whole heartedly with expressbowling. I am not against trundlers per say. However you cant have a bowling attack with only trundlers. Which we seem to be doing. This is exactly why i have misgivings about playing Bhuvi and Pandey in the same bowling line up. you look at South Africa, Steyn is usually 92-88 Morkel is 85-88 with occasional ball in the 90s while Philander is 80-82. They operating in different ranges. Maybe what india need is Bhuvi 78-82 Zaheer 84-85 (left arm) and Umesh (88-92). That is variety. Too many times in India cricket we have bowlers operating in the same ranges. Even Australia in this series have a super fast Johnson and a McKay as a slower decoy to him. We have a case of slow and slower.

When the alternative is Ishant Sharma, then the combination of Bhuvi and Pandey will automatically look better. Again, we are advocating blind use of speed guns. Steyn is a 90 mph Steyn, not a 90 mph Sami. And if the alternative was Sami or Ishant, I would have Pandey anyday and he will be more effective too. And this is exactly my point. We are of the opinion that a 90 mph Ishant and 90 mph Steyn are same values to their team. We are so blinded by this that we pick someone like Ishant over Pandey every tiime using this logic of variety in pace. But 9 out of 10 times Ishant is thrash and costs us. We have still not learnt our lesson. Umesh should be tried because he is a decent 90 mph bowler, not just a 90 mph bowler. And the most wonderful part of this is that people would pick an Ishant who bowls 90 over Pandey even if we can assure that Pandey gives 45 for 2 over Ishant's 60 for 1 just because of "pace" We are so blinded by this lure of pace that even when we see that a bowler is completely useless and will give more runs, we still look at speedguns and turn a blind eye. We are quick to call names like trundlers to slower bowler despite average performance while we don't thrash bowlers with a few kph more despite thrash performance Believe me, if a Steyn comes along in India, he will stand out from a mile apart. We won't need to look at any speed guns to know we have found a star. Till then we have to stop hyping very average bowlers by just looking at speed guns and ignore slightly ok bowlers and thrash them. Steyn stood out as a star in his set up. Here we are hoping that someone like Ishant will suddenly wake up and stun us. Pace or no pace, you can find out how useless a bowler is after few matches. He should then not be kept in the team in the name of "fast" bowling or death overs