Speeds and Performances of Pacers and Spinners

[sandeep]

24 minutes ago, Pollack said:

Srinath is way over rated on ICF. Outside ICF he is rightly rated or maybe only a slightly under rated. 

Pace and bounce and people salivate here. Agreed those are very vital for a pace bowler but if they still don't take much wickets compared to standards around the world at that time then there is no point elevating him too much.

I would say even Agarkar was better than Srinath. Srinath was one trick pony.Used to keep his length short always.No matter what.No sorry.No he won't. LOL.

He's rated because for those days, he was the rare Indian bowler who had the raw tools - serious pace, bounce, height - and to a reasonable degree, ability to stay fit.  Sure he was an under-achiever because he never developed as a bowler - and yes, he deserves flak for that. As posted earlier, a county stint for a young Srinath would have done wonders for him.  And in spite of his limitations, he did have his moments.  What people forget when bashing him and comparing him to the likes of Agarkar, is that he often had the likes of Ganguly opening the bowling in home test matches.  And we never had a 3rd seamer for him, heck we struggled to give him a proper 2nd seamer - best we could manage was Prasad.    All bowlers hunt in pairs, else batsmen just play out the 'good' bowler while the pressure is eased at the other end - This happened to Javagal all too often.  

 

 

[Pollack]

10 minutes ago, sandeep said:

He's rated because for those days, he was the rare Indian bowler who had the raw tools - serious pace, bounce, height - and to a reasonable degree, ability to stay fit.  Sure he was an under-achiever because he never developed as a bowler - and yes, he deserves flak for that. As posted earlier, a county stint for a young Srinath would have done wonders for him.  And in spite of his limitations, he did have his moments.  What people forget when bashing him and comparing him to the likes of Agarkar, is that he often had the likes of Ganguly opening the bowling in home test matches.  And we never had a 3rd seamer for him, heck we struggled to give him a proper 2nd seamer - best we could manage was Prasad.    All bowlers hunt in pairs, else batsmen just play out the 'good' bowler while the pressure is eased at the other end - This happened to Javagal all too often.  

 

 

Thats why I said he is overrated in ICF. He was fantastic prospect for India especially those times. The intention of that post was not to undermine what he could have been given his talent and raw pace and bounce he brought. He never evolved as a bowler. The same thing I see repeating for Ishant. Pace and bounce but never ever growing. People drooling over that great spells from Ishant every now and then which are still wicketless after every match.Giving pathetic excuses on his behalf like he kept it tight.Whatever that ever means.Lmao.Even spray gun Umesh has evolved a lot.

[Pollack]

Bowlers having Pace and bounce but no brains are a big flop. Would give backing to a bowler who has pace and bowls fuller/good lengths and can occasionally also make use of bounce.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Pollack

[sandeep]

4 minutes ago, Pollack said:

Thats why I said he is overrated in ICF. He was fantastic prospect for India especially those times. The intention of that post was not to undermine what he could have been given his talent and raw pace and bounce he brought. He never evolved as a bowler. The same thing I see repeating for Ishant. Pace and bounce but never ever growing. People drooling over that great spells from Ishant every now and then which are still wicketless after every match.Giving pathetic excuses on his behalf like he kept it tight.Whatever that ever means.Lmao.Even spray gun Umesh has evolved a lot.

Ouch.  Srinath for all his flaws, can't be compared the the giant of mediocrity that's Ishant.  Srinath was a lead pacer that instead of evolving, devolved or stagnated as a lone pacer.  Ishant is a 3rd seamer thrust into a team that didn't really have that lead pacer, flatlined and pretty much stayed there after a promising debut.   

 

Says much about Indian Cricket's failure to get these prospects evolved as much as it does about the players themselves.  Hopefully, things will turn out better for this generation.  

[philcric]

Srinath would have been awesome if he was playing now with our current bunch of pacers and the general focus and importance on fast bowling both within the team and the cricket fans.

 

He was the lone warrior when he played. There was no 3rd pacer to speak of, even the best 2nd pacer Venky was inferior to every pacer we have now (Shami, Umesh, Bhuvi, Ishant). He had to be both the striker and the workhorse, bowling some really long spells in almost every test match we played abroad.

[Pollack]

9 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Ouch.  Srinath for all his flaws, can't be compared the the giant of mediocrity that's Ishant.  Srinath was a lead pacer that instead of evolving, devolved or stagnated as a lone pacer.  Ishant is a 3rd seamer thrust into a team that didn't really have that lead pacer, flatlined and pretty much stayed there after a promising debut.   

 

Says much about Indian Cricket's failure to get these prospects evolved as much as it does about the players themselves.  Hopefully, things will turn out better for this generation.  

No not comparing them at all.Emphasi sing the futility of backing such bowlers for too long. How time and resources can better be utilised on other type of bowlers who bowl fuller or good length.Seam or swing is anyhow required for such bowlers to survive.Added benefit if they learn to develop good bouncers. Overall much more utility.

 

[speedheat]

 

Srinath is way over rated on ICF. Outside ICF he is rightly rated or maybe only a slightly under rated. 

 

Pace and bounce and people salivate here. Agreed those are very vital for a pace bowler but if they still don't take much wickets compared to standards around the world at that time then there is no point elevating him too much.

 

I would say even Agarkar was better than Srinath. Srinath was one trick pony.Used to keep his length short always.No matter what.No sorry.No he won't. LOL.

 

 

 

 

Dude srinath isn't overrated rather I would say is very underrated, Indian pacers often doesn't gets enough credit they deserve in spite of bowling their life out on slow sluggish dead subcontinent wickets,you can't compare ajju and srini both are very different , srini I would say is much reliable then ajju,as ajjus bowling would completely dependent on rhythm he is in.

 

 

[vishalvirsingh]

During kapil s last tests he was bowling at 125k.

I remember he took 3 tests to take the 432nd wicket and had he not taken this wicket he wud have been dropped.

He played for 3 years extra and finished the career of many pacers. 

Srinath should have also started 1 year earlier.

Srinath bowled 135 to 152k...

How could they play prabhakar and kapil ahead of him.

[prudent_kreeda]

1 hour ago, vishalvirsingh said:

During kapil s last tests he was bowling at 125k.

I remember he took 3 tests to take the 432nd wicket and had he not taken this wicket he wud have been dropped.

He played for 3 years extra and finished the career of many pacers. 

Srinath should have also started 1 year earlier.

Srinath bowled 135 to 152k...

How could they play prabhakar and kapil ahead of him.

     Bhai 

    Just speed more than kapil & Manoj  does not guarantee a place ahead of them .

   Just watch the difference in skill set between them if you can see some videos of 1992 in AUs .

   Srinath was a one -trick pony  just bowling short of lengh in swingers at that time . Looks good on TV 

  when ball passes chest high but won't get you wickets .

  Yes but by 1994-95 Srinath had become almost express pace .

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

[Autonomous]

Hassan Ali 147kph today

[speedheat]

Hassan Ali 147kph today

Brilliant massive improvement!!

[Pollack]

9 hours ago, Autonomous said:

Hassan Ali 147kph today

Average speed or an Odd ball?

[Rightarmfast]

9 hours ago, Autonomous said:

Hassan Ali 147kph today

That was just one ball. For the majority of match, he bowled around 130-135ish

[express bowling]

23 hours ago, Pollack said:

Srinath is way over rated on ICF. Outside ICF he is rightly rated or maybe only a slightly under rated. 

Pace and bounce and people salivate here. Agreed those are very vital for a pace bowler but if they still don't take much wickets compared to standards around the world at that time then there is no point elevating him too much.

I would say even Agarkar was better than Srinath. Srinath was one trick pony.Used to keep his length short always.No matter what.No sorry.No he won't. LOL.

• Srinath still has the 2nd best bowling average in the history of Indian test cricket among pacers, just marginally behind Kapil. 
• Pacers hunt in pairs with another good dependable pacer as the 3rd  seamer.  All good Indian pacers have suffered from lack of  support from the other end in test matches.  There was no pressure created from the other end. This factor had taken a toll on their bowling averages compared to the rest of the world.
• Srinath never benefited from the use of bottle caps etc. and his figures should not be compared to those bowlers who did so. 
• All Indian pacers suffered from the lack of fast bowling culture in our country, till the last 2 years or so.
• The main reason why Srinath is special is because he dared to bowl out-and-out fast in a country where everyone believed in that era that Indians could not bowl genuinely quick.  Every youth coach from that era ( at an age when the bowler actually develops )  would tell you that there is no point focusing on pace as Indians have to depend on their skills alone to take wickets. There was active encouragement to cut down pace.   Srinath acted as pioneer in this field in independent India and  gave belief to the future generation of Indian quicks that they too can bowl genuinely fast.  His value to Indian cricket  cannot be gauged by stats alone.

Edited April 3, 2017 by express bowling

[Rightarmfast]

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

• Srinath still has the 2nd best bowling average in the history of Indian cricket among pacers, just marginally behind Kapil. 
• Pacers hunt in pairs with another good dependable pacer as the 3rd  seamer.  All good Indian pacers have suffered from lack of  support from the other end in test matches.  There was no pressure created from the other end. This factor had taken a toll on their bowling averages compared to the rest of the world.
• "Srinath never benefited from the use of bottle caps etc. and his figures should not be compared to those bowlers who did so. "
• All Indian pacers suffered from the lack of fast bowling culture in our country, till the last 2 years or so.
• The main reason why Srinath is special is because he dared to bowl out-and-out fast in a country where everyone believed in that era that Indians could not bowl genuinely quick.  Every youth coach from that era ( at an age when the bowler actually develops )  would tell you that there is no point focusing on pace as Indians have to depend on their skills alone to take wickets. There was active encouragement to cut down pace.   Srinath acted as pioneer in this field in independent India and  gave belief to the future generation of Indian quicks that they too can bowl genuinely fast.  His value to Indian cricket  cannot be gauged by stats alone.

Very well put! Srinath never engaged in unfair means and has always been respected for his behaviour. Now its clear, after the admission of New Zealand players that all Pakistani pacers were using unfair means and hence have an inflated record. 

I think if we check the figures for Pakistani fast bowlers and Srinath, in the matches they played together, my guess is Srinath would be the leading bowler.

 

To put things in right perspective, please check the figures of Wasim Akram when his bowling partner wasnt Waqar Younis. You will see a significant dip. Same for Waqar. Srinath bowled his entire life as the lone strike bowler and the workhorse. The other legends may not have fared any better than Srinath if they were in his shoes. 

 

[speedheat]

• Srinath still has the 2nd best bowling average in the history of Indian cricket among pacers, just marginally behind Kapil. 
• Pacers hunt in pairs with another good dependable pacer as the 3rd  seamer.  All good Indian pacers have suffered from lack of  support from the other end in test matches.  There was no pressure created from the other end. This factor had taken a toll on their bowling averages compared to the rest of the world.
• Srinath never benefited from the use of bottle caps etc. and his figures should not be compared to those bowlers who did so. 
• All Indian pacers suffered from the lack of fast bowling culture in our country, till the last 2 years or so.
• The main reason why Srinath is special is because he dared to bowl out-and-out fast in a country where everyone believed in that era that Indians could not bowl genuinely quick.  Every youth coach from that era ( at an age when the bowler actually develops )  would tell you that there is no point focusing on pace as Indians have to depend on their skills alone to take wickets. There was active encouragement to cut down pace.   Srinath acted as pioneer in this field in independent India and  gave belief to the future generation of Indian quicks that they too can bowl genuinely fast.  His value to Indian cricket  cannot be gauged by stats alone.

 

Clap.. Clap.. Clap.. Clap.. Clap...Clap

an absolute gem of a post and the second point is gold, you mentioned lack of a support in it that's any thing then a reality of that era poor srinath had partners as who ?? Venky?? Kurville, tiny yohanan?? Lol

 

[CoverDrive]

We like to slag Prasad but he was a decent bowler. He could a good spell of fast bowling in helpful conditions. Also he won us some big matches '96/'99 WC vs. Pak 

[Rightarmfast]

24 minutes ago, CoverDrive said:

We like to slag Prasad but he was a decent bowler. He could a good spell of fast bowling in helpful conditions. Also he won us some big matches '96/'99 WC vs. Pak 

He was a decent bowler. But he wasn't a Zak or Umesh or Shami. 

[CoverDrive]

1 hour ago, Rightarmfast said:

He was a decent bowler. But he wasn't a Zak or Umesh or Shami. 

Zak definitely one of our top all time fast bowlers along with Kapil and Srinath. Lets Hope Umesh ans Shami reach that same level. 

[Pollack]

8 hours ago, express bowling said:

• Srinath still has the 2nd best bowling average in the history of Indian test cricket among pacers, just marginally behind Kapil. 
• Pacers hunt in pairs with another good dependable pacer as the 3rd  seamer.  All good Indian pacers have suffered from lack of  support from the other end in test matches.  There was no pressure created from the other end. This factor had taken a toll on their bowling averages compared to the rest of the world.
• Srinath never benefited from the use of bottle caps etc. and his figures should not be compared to those bowlers who did so. 
• All Indian pacers suffered from the lack of fast bowling culture in our country, till the last 2 years or so.
• The main reason why Srinath is special is because he dared to bowl out-and-out fast in a country where everyone believed in that era that Indians could not bowl genuinely quick.  Every youth coach from that era ( at an age when the bowler actually develops )  would tell you that there is no point focusing on pace as Indians have to depend on their skills alone to take wickets. There was active encouragement to cut down pace.   Srinath acted as pioneer in this field in independent India and  gave belief to the future generation of Indian quicks that they too can bowl genuinely fast.  His value to Indian cricket  cannot be gauged by stats alone.

You missed the entire point for which I was critical. Its not about not rating Srinath highly. Srinath is respected for the reasons you mentioned and he is criticised for the reasons I mentioned before. That is reason why I said he is over rated on ICF because the moment he being one trick pony is mentioned ICFers flock to his rescue with reasons on his behalf. That will make one believe he is ATG by world standards.Outside  ICF many experts talk highly of him and that's that. No over the top praise and also mention what went wrong with him.

 

There was also another aspect to my post which is of not backing bowlers who just have pace and bowl shorter over those who have pace and bowl fuller/good length. The former category does not appeal atleast to me.Maybe that's just my opinion.I don't believe in bowling good without wickets ; economical or expensive.Take wickets or gtfo. Hence favour the later category which in my opinion is more wicket taking.