Inswinging yorkers !!!

[express bowling]

3 hours ago, Asim said:

Among Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib: Only shoaib used to take wickets mainly with 'Pace' factor or using angles etc... Wasim was just a 137k bowler but was some artist with ball; probably the most complete pacer I have seen... Waqar at his peak was unplayable because of pace with swing but even more importantly The Perfection...

Akram was a 137 k pacer , and the slowest of the trio, but he he could make batsmen " feel whatever pace he had "  by bowling in awkward areas, getting bounce suddenly from short of length deliveries and always making the batsmen play.

 

Shoaib was 15 k quicker but batsmen did not have to play him always and he was a more predictable bowler once batsmen got to know him.

Edited August 7, 2016 by express bowling

[Singh bling]

Akram in his peak was definately above 140k bowler in limited over cricket

 

 

 

37 year old Akram  taking wickets against Namibia  and all his bowls are over 135ks.If he was capable of bowling at this pace at the age of 37 then definately he was quicker in his peak.

 

Also please remember the fact that Pakistani cricketers hide their age, so his real age could have been 39 or 40

Edited August 8, 2016 by Singh bling

[urnotserious]

56 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

Akram in his peak was definately above 140k bowler in limited over cricket

 

 

 

37 year old Akram  taking wickets against Namibia  and all his bowls are over 135ks.If he was capable of bowling at this pace at the age of 37 then definately he was quicker in his peak.

 

Also please remember the fact that Pakistani cricketers hide their age, so his real age could have been 39 or 40

At and around 140K it makes him a fast medium bowler but he always has the notoriety of being a out and out fast bowler which he never was.

[maniac]

With these monster bats and change in technique of backfoot across standing deep in the crease.... Bowlers cannot afford to bowl 6/6 inswinging Yorkers unless you are express.

 

not saying waqar wouldn't be successful in this era but just my view.... Malinga has a good bouncer and a killer slower ball and variations of Yorker as well... Towards the end of his career when he tried to get greedy and over dependent on the Yorker his success rate diminished as well.... Similarly with constant monitoring of the ball condition and change in technique.... Waqar wouldn't have enjoyed the same level of success.

 

one of the earliest pioneer of this modern technique of back and across and smacking the Yorker is none other than Ajay jadeja... Who would have thought? As an indian cricket fan...if you haven't already watched the video a 100 times, I would suggest check it out for the 101st time.... Very modern day t20 style slogging that was in the 96 qf

[Asim]

On 8/7/2016 at 11:22 AM, express bowling said:

Akram was a 137 k pacer , and the slowest of the trio, but he he could make batsmen " feel whatever pace he had "  by bowling in awkward areas, getting bounce suddenly from short of length deliveries and always making the batsmen play.

 

Shoaib was 15 k quicker but batsmen did not have to play him always and he was a more predictable bowler once batsmen got to know him.

Yes, Pace was not an Akram thing because the control, accuracy and variations he had, he never had to bother about Pace, which probably helped him prolonging career, had PCB not dropped all those seniors after 03, sure he could've easily served 2,3 more years in limited overs... Shoaib was just 'on his day' type of bowler... on his day, he use to destroy any lineup on any surface and if its not, he will struggle even in Aus, Eng conditions... Waqar; the Waqar what he was known for, career almost got ended after 97,98 due to team's internal politics and he lost his pace too, used to struggle in off n on chances he got but somehow he managed to make an amazing comeback in 2000, now he was 138-142 bowler but used all his experience to get similar, at times even better results, in limited overs cricket...

[Ankit_sharma03]

52 minutes ago, Asim said:

Yes, Pace was not an Akram thing because the control, accuracy and variations he had, he never had to bother about Pace, which probably helped him prolonging career, had PCB not dropped all those seniors after 03, sure he could've easily served 2,3 more years in limited overs... Shoaib was just 'on his day' type of bowler... on his day, he use to destroy any lineup on any surface and if its not, he will struggle even in Aus, Eng conditions... Waqar; the Waqar what he was known for, career almost got ended after 97,98 due to team's internal politics and he lost his pace too, used to struggle in off n on chances he got but somehow he managed to make an amazing comeback in 2000, now he was 138-142 bowler but used all his experience to get similar, at times even better results, in limited overs cricket...

Pace is not everything, Pace is essential but Pace is dangerous with some movement. Tait, akhtar, thompson all had great pace but lillee, steyn, Akram had movment with pace. A ball bowled at 160k with no movement can be used to an advantage by batsman but a bowl from 135k above with some movement can put any batsman to test. 

For me whats essential with every yorker is how late it swings. Ill give one example even though this aint a yorker and neither inswinger. 

Steyn bowls a peach to Pujara at 133k, The deilvery was on middle leg and it moved really late towards off hence pujara was caught LBW. This ball would have been unplayable for anyone. Now take Tait's example he may bowl a ball on similar line on middle n leg but if there is no movement the ball will reach the fence faster.

Its about Pace n movement

 

[rkt.india]

32 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Pace is not everything, Pace is essential but Pace is dangerous with some movement. Tait, akhtar, thompson all had great pace but lillee, steyn, Akram had movment with pace. A ball bowled at 160k with no movement can be used to an advantage by batsman but a bowl from 135k above with some movement can put any batsman to test. 

For me whats essential with every yorker is how late it swings. Ill give one example even though this aint a yorker and neither inswinger. 

Steyn bowls a peach to Pujara at 133k, The deilvery was on middle leg and it moved really late towards off hence pujara was caught LBW. This ball would have been unplayable for anyone. Now take Tait's example he may bowl a ball on similar line on middle n leg but if there is no movement the ball will reach the fence faster.

Its about Pace n movement

 

Problem is swing alone isnt enough. Because for swing, you need certain conditions, even for reverse swing. Steyn is so successful not just because of swing but because he has pace too. He could bounce batsmen out too when there wasn't much help in the air. That is where James Anderson lacked. You need a combination of swing, pace, accuracy, bounce to succeed in all conditions.

[Ankit_sharma03]

18 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Problem is swing alone isnt enough. Because for swing, you need certain conditions, even for reverse swing. Steyn is so successful not just because of swing but because he has pace too. He could bounce batsmen out too when there wasn't much help in the air. That is where James Anderson lacked. You need a combination of swing, pace, accuracy, bounce to succeed in all conditions.

True, u need movement at some sought of pace. Someone like Praveen kumar had the swing but lack of pace is where he suffered in long. Even a guy like Binny, Ganguly could move the ball but no pace. 

N not only swing a bowler should also be able to seam the ball as you wont get swing in all conditions. 

 

Edited August 9, 2016 by Ankit_sharma03

[express bowling]

2 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

True, u need movement at some sought of pace. Someone like Praveen kumar had the swing but lack of pace is where he suffered in long. Even a guy like Binny, Ganguly could move the ball but no pace. 

N not only swing a bowler should also be able to seam the ball as you wont get swing in all conditions. 

 

To become a top wicket-taking pacer,  a bowler must have the ability to analyze the batsmen and playing conditions and to set-up batsmen using them.

 

Having different tools, like pace, bounce, seam movement, conventional swing, reverse swing, accuracy, bouncers, yorkers etc. helps them do well in different conditions.   It is not possible for most bowlers to have all these tools but some pace, bounce, accuracy and some movement would be the minimum requirement for pacers starting their careers or  in their prime.

 

In our test team, Shami would tick most boxes.

[Rightarmfast]

18 hours ago, Singh bling said:

Akram in his peak was definately above 140k bowler in limited over cricket

 

 

 

37 year old Akram  taking wickets against Namibia  and all his bowls are over 135ks.If he was capable of bowling at this pace at the age of 37 then definately he was quicker in his peak.

 

Also please remember the fact that Pakistani cricketers hide their age, so his real age could have been 39 or 40

Javagal Srinath was bowling at 140+ and hit a fastest of 143k's in 2003 WC when he was in his mid 30's. But people never called him out and out fast.

 

The reason why Wasim and Waqar's yorkers were unplayable was ( one of the many reasons ), their action was very awkward. Wasim coming from left arm was anyway awkward for a batsman, on top of that his run up and action was deceptive. Even Waqar had a slingy action. Dont forget that in late 80's and early 90's, batsmen were not equipped to playing reverse swing. By around 95-96, the same yorkers of Waqar had become way less lethal! Batsmen got used to it.

Batsmen of today are well informed and have studied these deliveries way more. 

[Vilander]

On 8/7/2016 at 0:35 AM, Asim said:

For left handers, Waqar used to happily concede for 2 boundaries with juicy wide away going balls and next one the perfect in-swinging right in toes... Jayasuria used to be one easy victim of this... For Lara, he took 5 to set him up... Real amazing aspect was execution of final delivery...

and bottle cap.

[Singh bling]

3 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

Javagal Srinath was bowling at 140+ and hit a fastest of 143k's in 2003 WC when he was in his mid 30's. But people never called him out and out fast.

 

The reason why Wasim and Waqar's yorkers were unplayable was ( one of the many reasons ), their action was very awkward. Wasim coming from left arm was anyway awkward for a batsman, on top of that his run up and action was deceptive. Even Waqar had a slingy action. Dont forget that in late 80's and early 90's, batsmen were not equipped to playing reverse swing. By around 95-96, the same yorkers of Waqar had become way less lethal! Batsmen got used to it.

Batsmen of today are well informed and have studied these deliveries way more. 

Srinath was definately fast but I don't think he was constantly bowling 140s in WC 2003 

 

Srinath took 4-5 wickets against netherland  , Bowls at 135ks to 139

India vs Australia , none of Srinath's bowl above 140ks

 

India vs Pakistan very few balls of Srinath but none above 140k

[Vilander]

23 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

Srinath was definately fast but I don't think he was constantly bowling 140s in WC 2003 

 

Srinath took 4-5 wickets against netherland  , Bowls at 135ks to 139

India vs Australia , none of Srinath's bowl above 140ks

 

India vs Pakistan very few balls of Srinath but none above 140k

 

 

Did you see the 2003 word cup live ? I would guess not, he was not consistently above 140 none of the three were, but he used to bowl a lot of 142k deliveries.

[express bowling]

@ Singh bling

 

Srinath bowled 135 k to 143 k when he was at the absolute  end of his career. You don't get to see all deliveries in a highlights package.

 

That is impressive pace for an " old pacer ".

 

 

[Singh bling]

29 minutes ago, Vilander said:

 

 

Did you see the 2003 word cup live ? I would guess not, he was not consistently above 140 none of the three were, but he used to bowl a lot of 142k deliveries.

I had seen 2003 world cup and I don't remember Srinath above 140ks all I remember that Zaheer and Nehra were extremely quick in that WC.

also I remember 1999-2000 India Austalia and Pakistan series when speed guns were first use and once they showed fastest deliveries by all pacers in the season and at last spot I saw Srinath at 141.4 fastest and I was like WTH  not even a single bowl by any Indian pacer in mid 140s 

TBH on any net discussion fact from a memory is not a good argument 

[Asim]

9 hours ago, Vilander said:

and bottle cap.

chalo at least we had bowlers to get Results after that unlike sachin and dravid

[Vilander]

8 hours ago, Asim said:

chalo at least we had bowlers to get Results after that unlike sachin and dravid

so you mean you accept that your people cheated ok, but sachin dravid were getting results in batting without cheating 

[Asim]

55 minutes ago, Vilander said:

so you mean you accept that your people cheated ok, but sachin dravid were getting results in batting without cheating 

yes I agree "in batting without cheating"

[Rightarmfast]

18 hours ago, Singh bling said:

Srinath was definately fast but I don't think he was constantly bowling 140s in WC 2003 

 

Srinath took 4-5 wickets against netherland  , Bowls at 135ks to 139

India vs Australia , none of Srinath's bowl above 140ks

 

India vs Pakistan very few balls of Srinath but none above 140k

Your basis of judgement are a few deliveries in the highlits? I remember the entire series and I have been checking the speeds since 99 WC, when speed guns were in operation first, in the Aus vs Ind match... An excerpt from then -

 

Srinath faster but less deadly

LONDON, June 5 (AFP) — Indian paceman Javagal Srinath was timed faster than Australia’s Glenn McGrath when the speed gun was unveiled for the first time at the cricket World Cup, reports said today.

Srinath’s fastest delivery was clocked by the speed gun at 93 miles per hour against McGrath’s 88 - which removed Sachin Tendulkar for zero - at The Oval yesterday.

But the lanky New South Welshman had the last laugh, leading Australia to a 77-run victory with a hostile opening spell that claimed Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and skipper Mohammad Azharuddin.

Srinath also worked up higher pace through his spells, averaging 86 miles an hour against McGrath’s 84.

The speed gun, created by a South African firm, measures the speed of the ball from the moment it leaves the hand till it hits the wicket.

Among the other bowlers timed at the first super six match, the fastest deliveries by Australians, Damien Fleming and Paul Reiffel were identical at 86 miles an hour.

Indian seamer Venkatesh Prasad was clocked at 83 miles an hour and Debashish Mohanty at 81 miles.

Leg-spinners Shane Warne and Anil Kumble gave an indication of their contrasting styles, when the Australian averaged 51 miles an hour against the Indian’s 60. Kumble’s fastest delivery at 73 miles an hour was just three miles slower than seamer Steve Waugh.

The speed gun will throw up the fastest bowler at the World Cup with Pakistani Shoaib Akhtar, the "97 miles-an-hour" man, tipped to break the 100-mile barrier.

 

 

 

You can find it here -

http://www.tribuneindia.com/1999/99jun06/sports.htm#10

 

Srinath bowled consistently above 135 and clocked 140 often and hit 143.3 as his fastest speed in 2003 WC. 

[Singh bling]

55 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

Your basis of judgement are a few deliveries in the highlits? I remember the entire series and I have been checking the speeds since 99 WC, when speed guns were in operation first, in the Aus vs Ind match... An excerpt from then -

 

Srinath faster but less deadly

LONDON, June 5 (AFP) — Indian paceman Javagal Srinath was timed faster than Australia’s Glenn McGrath when the speed gun was unveiled for the first time at the cricket World Cup, reports said today.

Srinath’s fastest delivery was clocked by the speed gun at 93 miles per hour against McGrath’s 88 - which removed Sachin Tendulkar for zero - at The Oval yesterday.

But the lanky New South Welshman had the last laugh, leading Australia to a 77-run victory with a hostile opening spell that claimed Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and skipper Mohammad Azharuddin.

Srinath also worked up higher pace through his spells, averaging 86 miles an hour against McGrath’s 84.

The speed gun, created by a South African firm, measures the speed of the ball from the moment it leaves the hand till it hits the wicket.

Among the other bowlers timed at the first super six match, the fastest deliveries by Australians, Damien Fleming and Paul Reiffel were identical at 86 miles an hour.

Indian seamer Venkatesh Prasad was clocked at 83 miles an hour and Debashish Mohanty at 81 miles.

Leg-spinners Shane Warne and Anil Kumble gave an indication of their contrasting styles, when the Australian averaged 51 miles an hour against the Indian’s 60. Kumble’s fastest delivery at 73 miles an hour was just three miles slower than seamer Steve Waugh.

The speed gun will throw up the fastest bowler at the World Cup with Pakistani Shoaib Akhtar, the "97 miles-an-hour" man, tipped to break the 100-mile barrier.

 

 

 

You can find it here -

http://www.tribuneindia.com/1999/99jun06/sports.htm#10

 

Srinath bowled consistently above 135 and clocked 140 often and hit 143.3 as his fastest speed in 2003 WC. 

Thanks for quoting this article as this is from 1999 WC not 2003 . I myself read this and clearly remember Srinath bowled 149.6 fastest ball  at that time His average speed in 1999 is mentioned at 86mph which 138 kmph while Mcgrath who is now considered as line length bowler was just 2mph slower in average speed.