A fast bowler India might have had

[Rightarmfast]

19 hours ago, the don said:

Reading through some of the named in this thread i have to say guys like Muhammad Akram and Rana Navid were not only quicker but miles superior . 

India really have no pace bowling tradition . This might possibily be the best time to be an Indian pace bowling fan . Even than the Indian captain plays the most defensive bowlers in the 11.

Can't recall but could you help me if they were involved in fixing and if their actions were correct? Since these were Pakistani bowlers, its given that they would have tampered the ball and cheated, no point asking you that!

[Vijy]

I wonder if we will have a fast bowler who can come close to 160 kmph. The 100 mph barrier is regarded by some scientists as being close to the upper bound on the speed achievable in baseball.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2428891/Thats-fastest-bowling-Scientists-say-baseball-pitchers-reached-speed-limit-throwing-ball-105-1mph.html

I'm not sure what the corresponding max value in cricket would be - perhaps similar.

[SUMO]

1 hour ago, Vijy said:

I wonder if we will have a fast bowler who can come close to 160 kmph. The 100 mph barrier is regarded by some scientists as being close to the upper bound on the speed achievable in baseball.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2428891/Thats-fastest-bowling-Scientists-say-baseball-pitchers-reached-speed-limit-throwing-ball-105-1mph.html

I'm not sure what the corresponding max value in cricket would be - perhaps similar.

Well scientists said that same thing about michael johnson but then came Usain bolt and even bolt didn't had the best of start in 100 m sprint.

[Vijy]

2 minutes ago, SUMO said:

Well scientists said that same thing about michael johnson but then came Usain bolt and even bolt didn't had the best of start in 100 m sprint.

Yes, of course. I'm not saying that study was definitive. It's more of an open question as to what kind of max speeds could be achievable. I find it hard to believe (given that speed guns have existed for several decades) that speeds of 180 kmph (and above) would be achievable; perhaps 170 kmph can be done.

[SUMO]

4 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Yes, of course. I'm not saying that study was definitive. It's more of an open question as to what kind of max speeds could be achievable. I find it hard to believe (given that speed guns have existed for several decades) that speeds of 180 kmph (and above) would be achievable; perhaps 170 kmph can be done.

One thing is clear from the article that to throw the ball the strength lies in tendons and ligaments packing on muscles won't help much.
Lance armstrong had 30% larger lungs than average man. Isn't it possible somebody to be born with stronger and flexible ligament as god's gift...may be some yoga asanas can help too

[Vijy]

3 hours ago, SUMO said:

One thing is clear from the article that to throw the ball the strength lies in tendons and ligaments packing on muscles won't help much.
Lance armstrong had 30% larger lungs than average man. Isn't it possible somebody to be born with stronger and flexible ligament as god's gift...may be some yoga asanas can help too

[Rightarmfast]

12 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

Atul Sharma

Not Md Zahid?

[Rightarmfast]

16 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

This was a India thread.

lolz... md Zahid is the pakistani version of Atul Sharma. All Pakistanis claim him to be some sort of speed demon. However, whenever he had played against India, he was treated like a pedestrian bowler :)

[Rightarmfast]

4 hours ago, Shaz1 said:

Naw there is a major difference between the two. One actually played international cricket while the other was all hype. Md Zahid was mistreated by the PCB. Never got the care he deserved. His international career ended prematurely.

Zahid played,however he was all hype too. Yes, comparing him to Atul sharma is an over stretch, I agree. I will give you that. Zahid looked like a hard working bowler to me, but at no point did he appear to be a Marshal or an Akram.

[Rightarmfast]

8 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

Don't think anyone hypes him to be a Akram or Marshal. I think most his hype comes from his speed. He was said to be faster than Akthar himself. Which is what Akthar admited. Most fans now a days remember him for his mistreatment by PCB. When he got a major back injury he was not supported by the PCB.

Ok Bhai, Zahid may have been faster than shoaib of 1998-99, when shoaib was still bowling a fastest of 152-154ish. However, whenever I saw Zahid, he didnt seem fast and neither did he hurry any of the batsmen. I mean Indian batsmen of 90s were notoriously bad against that serious pace, but he was absolutely toothless against Indian batsmen, that too in Canada where even Ganguly was getting wickets.

[rkt.india]

10 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Ok Bhai, Zahid may have been faster than shoaib of 1998-99, when shoaib was still bowling a fastest of 152-154ish. However, whenever I saw Zahid, he didnt seem fast and neither did he hurry any of the batsmen. I mean Indian batsmen of 90s were notoriously bad against that serious pace, but he was absolutely toothless against Indian batsmen, that too in Canada where even Ganguly was getting wickets.

Zahid was certainly quick in 1996. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 1, 2017 by rkt.india

[Rightarmfast]

Zahid certainly could have been quick. but he never looked a frighteningly quick bowler to me. Not 160 for sure.

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Zahid certainly could have been quick. but he never looked a frighteningly quick bowler to me. Not 160 for sure.

nah not 160 at that time. No one at the age of 20 could bowl 160. Even Shoaib and Lee bowled 160 in their mid to late 20s. Unfortunately Zahid suffered a serious back injury in 1997 during his debut series and lost his way. He played his last test in 2003 against SA and I remember watching it live and he bowled 138-143 even then. 

[Rightarmfast]

33 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

nah not 160 at that time. No one at the age of 20 could bowl 160. Even Shoaib and Lee bowled 160 in their mid to late 20s. Unfortunately Zahid suffered a serious back injury in 1997 during his debut series and lost his way. He played his last test in 2003 against SA and I remember watching it live and he bowled 138-143 even then. 

So thats exactly what I have been saying. The Pakistanis keep hyping him to be a 160 bowler when infact, he was more of 145-150ish bowler when at his fastest. I could be + - 2-3 k's, but not more than that I think.

[express bowling]

No bowler in the history of cricket has bowled any significant percentage of deliveries above the 155 k mark.

 

Yet, we see some pacers being called 160 k pacers.

 

It is like calling Umesh, Aaron and Ishant 152 k pacers because they have bowled a few deliveries at that pace.

 

Zahid is looking about 140 k to 150 k in the 2nd video and a bit slower than that in the first video....and this was at his peak pace.

 

 

Edited July 1, 2017 by express bowling

[the don]

The zahid yorker that castled rahul dravid was very quick . Dravid was beaten for sheer pace reminiscent of the akhtar yorker to dravid but in that instamce it was a combination of reverse swing and speed but zahid just went through dravid with pace .

There is a youtube video of that spell . He was beating azharuddin and sachin with pace . Lara called him the fastest at the time . He clocked extreme speeds in a tour game in newzealnd .There is an article about it in the newzealand press  .

   At his fastest before the back injury he was certainly as quick as Adam Milne if not quicker .

Akhtar was a beast . Cant conpare him to anyone. We have not seen a quicker bowler in world cricket than akhtar circa 2000 - 2003.

Edited July 1, 2017 by the don

[the don]

4 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

So thats exactly what I have been saying. The Pakistanis keep hyping him to be a 160 bowler when infact, he was more of 145-150ish bowler when at his fastest. I could be + - 2-3 k's, but not more than that I think.

Becausr he had lost his pace by than and that was a known fact .

Everyone realised he wasnt quick anymore . Pre injury mark taylor and brian lara reckoned he was the fastest of the time .

Infact taylor specifically mentioned that he had never faced a quicker pair of bowlers than akhtar and zahid.

[the don]

19 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Ok Bhai, Zahid may have been faster than shoaib of 1998-99, when shoaib was still bowling a fastest of 152-154ish. However, whenever I saw Zahid, he didnt seem fast and neither did he hurry any of the batsmen. I mean Indian batsmen of 90s were notoriously bad against that serious pace, but he was absolutely toothless against Indian batsmen, that too in Canada where even Ganguly was getting wickets.

Here is Rahul dravid making him look toothless  

Notice how there is absolutely no swing , no reverse . Just sheer pace . https://youtu.be/Dc3Le88Jzyk

Edited July 1, 2017 by the don

[the don]

2 hours ago, express bowling said:

No bowler in the history of cricket has bowled any significant percentage of deliveries above the 155 k mark.

 

Yet, we see some pacers being called 160 k pacers.

 

It is like calling Umesh, Aaron and Ishant 152 k pacers because they have bowled a few deliveries at that pace.

 

Zahid is looking about 140 k to 150 k in the 2nd video and a bit slower than that in the first video....and this was at his peak pace.

 

 

Even umar gul has bowled a few at 152 kph in his career doesnt make him express nor  has he beaten batsmen for pace like zahid and shoaib did . 

There is a reason why sami isnt hyped for his pace by Pakistani fans.even though he bowled 155 kph plus in the 2002-2003 season because pakistani fans know he was a yard or two slower than zahid and akhtar.

For batsmen like mark taylor and lara to vouch for his speed he must have been genuinely express at the time.

Zahid pre injury was express . In a different pace league to these bowlers you mentioned.

[Rightarmfast]

15 minutes ago, the don said:

Here is Rahul dravid making him look toothless  

Notice how there is absolutely no swing , no reverse . Just sheer pace . https://youtu.be/Dc3Le88Jzyk

Cherry picking one instance is your idea of proving your point? lolz! Typical Pakistani nonsensical logic!