Ranji Trophy 2016/17

[Texan]

5 minutes ago, MCcricket said:

would he play as a bowler in any side like SA, Eng ,Aus no he might only if he batted as an all rounder to go with his medium pace.

 

 

7 minutes ago, MCcricket said:

In test matches for a bowler to survive or thrive you need pace, or bounce coming from the likes of Ambrose or Walsh, 

Philander bowls at about the same pace as BK. Is Philander considered a successful bowler? With an average of 22 after 35 Tests, of course.

Was Shaun Pollock a fast bowler? Shaun Tait was express pace, why was he not successful in Tests?

[MCcricket]

12 minutes ago, Texan said:

 

Philander bowls at about the same pace as BK. Is Philander considered a successful bowler? With an average of 22 after 35 Tests, of course.

Was Shaun Pollock a fast bowler? Shaun Tait was express pace, why was he not successful in Tests?

I was expecting that Philander name popping up, haven't you followed the controversy about Philander n quota system,also a trundler or medium pacer can survive a bit more in AUS or SA , Eng as per conditions, also have you seen S Pollock bowl before his injuries lol, he was not express but not a medium pacer either, he was F/m so was Fannie who to me was a very good Bowler, simple point BK is a one trick pony and he is not versatile, he can only be a support bowler in certain conditions he will get 5 fers but those will be one of

Edited November 13, 2016 by MCcricket

[Texan]

7 minutes ago, MCcricket said:

I was expecting that Philander name popping up, haven't you followed the controversy about Philander n quota system,also a trundler or medium pacer can survive a bit more in AUS or SA , Eng as per conditions, also have you seen S Pollock bowl before his injuries lol, he was not express but not a medium pacer either, he was F/m so was Fannie who to me was a very good Bowler, simple point BK is a one trick pony and he is not versatile, he can only be a support bowler in certain conditions he will get 5 fers but those will be one of

Philander has bowled consistently well in a number of places including Asia. Pollock was never anywhere close to express pace. He was mostly medium-fast, very similar to the pace at which BK bowls.

[express bowling]

Bhuvi was specifically picked for the 2 test matches... 1 in the WI and the other in India...because the playing conditions had help for swing bowlers.

 

To his credit, Bhuvi made the most of those conditions....much better than other seamers of either teams.  

 

He is a thinking bowler and knows what sequence of deliveries to bowl to take wickets...provided there is some consistent movement on offer.

 

Can he do the same on neutral tracks and flat tracks  for pacers.....the type we get in most test matches in Asia.  We are getting many such pitches outside Asia too these days.

 

Only time will tell when he plays on those tracks and in those conditions.

 

I would like to see how he performs when he gets a chance to play all or almost all test matches spanning 2 complete test series.  That would give us a better idea about him.

[MCcricket]

17 minutes ago, Texan said:

Philander has bowled consistently well in a number of places including Asia. Pollock was never anywhere close to express pace. He was mostly medium-fast, very similar to the pace at which BK bowls.

Plz read , where did I ever say he was express, I specifically mentioned he was F/m before injury n he is quite taller n gets more bounce compared to BK also when you have guys like Steyn, Morkel operating the first change guys like Philander get wkts

[Texan]

3 minutes ago, MCcricket said:

Plz read , where did I ever say he was express, I specifically mentioned he was F/m before injury n he is quite taller n gets more bounce compared to BK also when you have guys like Steyn, Morkel operating the first change guys like Philander get wkts

Pollock would be more m/f than f/m. I would say McGrath was f/m - another bowler that was not express pace, yet very successful. Our very own Kapil Dev was a m/f bowler who was very skillful. In today's age, he would also get cast away as being "only effective when swing was on offer". What I am asking for is this "speed gun" analysis of bowlers is not healthy. We have to look at what skills they bring in instead of just getting blinded by pace. Skillful bowlers are able to exploit even a tiny bit of advantage that conditions can offer. Who knows, if BK was playing the Rajkot Test, he may have been able to exploit the grass on the pitch better than our other bowlers. Shaun Tait, one of the fastest bowlers of the current century was a failure in international cricket, specifically Tests.

[express bowling]

27 minutes ago, Texan said:

Philander has bowled consistently well in a number of places including Asia. Pollock was never anywhere close to express pace. He was mostly medium-fast, very similar to the pace at which BK bowls.

 

Philander is more comparable to Bhuvi in terms of pace, bounce and height.  He averages 32 in Asia which is much higher than his overall average but still decent though.

 

Pollock was the same pace as Bhuvi but was much taller, hit the deck harder on occasions and got more bounce. His type of bowling is not really comparable with Bhuvi.

[MCcricket]

You have forgotten that our pacers had created plenty of chances on this Rajkot wkt but for the dropped catches,BK is a one trick pony who is not versatile, guys like him Mohit, PK can serve India in ODi n sometimes in test but they cannot be successful in test because of their limitations

[Texan]

1 minute ago, MCcricket said:

You have forgotten that our pacers had created plenty of chances on this Rajkot wkt but for the dropped catches,BK is a one trick pony who is not versatile, guys like him Mohit, PK can serve India in ODi n sometimes in test but they cannot be successful in test because of their limitations

When BK took those wickets against WI, two sitters were also dropped then. I'm not saying that our pacers didn't do well in this match, but with BK you never know if he would have been able to create even more chances.

[express bowling]

4 minutes ago, Texan said:

Our very own Kapil Dev was a m/f bowler who was very skillful. In today's age, he would also get cast away as being "only effective when swing was on offer". 

Kapil was very lively in terms of pace before his knee injury and pace drop in 1986.

 

From 1978 to 1985...when he got most of his test wickets....Kapil was clearly a fast-medium bowler who bowled a sharp bouncer too whenever needed.

 

After his pace drop....despite his high skill level...Kapil's  SR and wickets per match fell sharply and his bowling average went down too.

 

The main thing to look for in a bowler is wicket taking ability....whatever his speed.  Whether Bhuvi has it more than others.....only time will tell when he plays test matches consistently and not only in helpful conditions.

[Texan]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Kapil was very lively in terms of pace before his knee injury and pace drop in 1986.

 

From 1978 to 1985...when he got most of his test wickets....Kapil was clearly a fast-medium bowler who bowled a sharp bouncer too whenever needed.

 

After his pace drop....despite his high skill level...Kapil's  SR and wickets per match fell sharply and his bowling average went down too.

 

The main thing to look for in a bowler is wicket taking ability....whatever his speed.  Whether Bhuvi has it more than others.....only time will tell when he plays test matches consistently and not only in helpful conditions.

Ohh come on man. Kapil was never really that fast. Kapil operated on being accurate and swinging the ball. As for bouncers, even BK is capable of bowling a sharp bouncer.

[MCcricket]

You see every bowler is unique, but there are factors which make a bowler threatening, first n foremost is pace, then comes length, consistency, point of release, seam ,swing, action

Pace is the first factor as faster the ball comes at you less is the reaction time , yes pace isn't everything but there is a big difference if a bowler swings it at 140 n one does it at 130 , a guy who does it at 130 he gives the batter extra time to adjust to seam n swing, at 140 the bowler has enough pace to be versatile as he with his pace can initially concentrate on seam n swing n occasionally quick one n bouncer to keep batsmen honest n then when the ball become old he can still be threatening bowling at 140 as the ball gets much older he can get extra reverse too.

A bowler lacking pace is like a batter who cannot hit boundaries and so is limited,why do we rate Virat so high coz he is versatile, why is Shami rated highly coz he has all the attributes, pace, skill, n he is a trier, what makes Bhuvi an occasional player coz he doesn't have what it takes pace wise, if Bhuvi could bowl same pace as Umesh or Ishant you think he would not be playing he would've coz then it gives him extra dimension n the captain can use him at any stage of the game

[express bowling]

15 minutes ago, Texan said:

Ohh come on man. Kapil was never really that fast. Kapil operated on being accurate and swinging the ball. As for bouncers, even BK is capable of bowling a sharp bouncer.

I did not say fast......but fast-medium.  About Zaheer Khan's pace.

 

Kapil's bouncers were better than Umesh Yadav's, let alone Bhuvi. It was well directed,  at the head or neck area and  skidded on.

Edited November 13, 2016 by express bowling

[Bleed-Blue]

Bhuvi is our only bowler that can bowl a consistent line and length all day.

[MCcricket]

Because he is slow n the trade of is more control generally, you have to be stupid to assume a tearway will have more control then a medium pacer or trundler , but a tearway can take four in four n under any conditions n a medium pacer preys on batters patience rather then taking wkts against the run of play

[Ankit_sharma03]

Kuldeep takes 4 wkts, lekin faida kya........

Edited November 13, 2016 by Ankit_sharma03

[SUMO]

kuldeep and rahul both did well today...needed to be in the XI next test but....

[Texan]

4 hours ago, MCcricket said:

Because he is slow n the trade of is more control generally, you have to be stupid to assume a tearway will have more control then a medium pacer or trundler , but a tearway can take four in four n under any conditions n a medium pacer preys on batters patience rather then taking wkts against the run of play

Can you remind me of a recent spell from Umesh or Aaron where they took 4 in 4 or even say 5 in a spell? 

[gakgupta]

3 hours ago, SUMO said:

kuldeep and rahul both did well today...needed to be in the XI next test but....

too early to bring kuldeep in.....let him spend couple of seasons in domestics

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Texan said:

Why weren't other pacers successful? The conditions in WI were not helpful for the other bowlers. How come only Bhuvi was able to get the ball to talk?

Who says other bowlers weren't successful. All three WI pacers did well. Shami was off colour in first inning but made up in 2nd innings. If you see in that series, first test pitch was a patta and Yadav picked 4 in first innings. In all his test career, apart from MCG and Perth 2012, yadav is yet to play a single test in such helpful conditions and in those two tests, he had picked up 12 wickets.