Purely on performance who are the best young fast bowlers in Indian domestics

[rkt.india]

14 hours ago, maniac said:

Here is the thing...Aron got a shot purely on his ability to bowl fast while Vinay Kumar got a shot because he was a consistent domestic performer....End result both very ordinary.

 

On the other hand Shami was fast as well as a good domestic performer,Bhuvi was not the fastest but good domestic performer and they both have had a decent international career.

 

We just can't get a bowler in because he can hit 150K....that is the equivalent of giving Sarfaraz a test cap based on some innovative strokes in IPL.

 

At the same time,there is nothing wrong fast tracking a young bowler,who has hit a purple patch and has had a great start,much like we want Pant and other young batsmen given a shot.

 

Also we need to look past TTF who have had  their shot at big time after consistent performances in FC but give shot to the ones who are performing consistently in FC but never had their shot.

Aaron averages 20 odd in last 3 years in FC cricket, so, he has done well in FC cricket too since he has been relatively injury free after 2012.

[express bowling]

2 hours ago, Texan said:

All those blindly trusting in speed gun analysis should just watch the terrific short pitched spell being bowled by Neil Wagner. He is bowling at just 130 - 134 but targeting those bouncers so perfectly, that he has Pak batsmen hobbling. Just bounced out Younis Khan. 

 

The speed-gun readings,  shown on TV, show release speeds of deliveries. From the point of view of hurrying the batsman, what is important is ...at what speed the ball reaches the batsman. Some bowlers lose less pace after their ball pitches, due to a variety of factors which include seam position, grip of the ball at release, over-spin or under-spin imparted on the ball etc.  There is also the issue of bounce being generated by the seamer by hitting the deck hard.

 

What most of us look for in a seamer is .....the ability to hurry the batsman while playing by a combination of pace, bounce and deceptive pace. If these are present in a seamer, the release speed does not matter that much.

 

Which is why I have been advocating for Nathu Singh although he rarely touches 140 k as of now.  Bowls some spells at 130 k to 136 k even.  He hurries batsmen visually by pace and bounce and bowls swinging yorkers at will.

Edited November 19, 2016 by express bowling

[rkt.india]

14 hours ago, maniac said:

 

PK was not a failure in tests,he has himself to blame for his indiscipline...Also in ODI's when he looked really promising in CB series 2008,he was bowling 135-140 which is not exactly phaaast but showed he had promise.

 

Irfan Pathan,RP Singh won us matches bowling in the mid 130's....may be the odd ball of 140 but again they were picked on promise they showed in domestics and not because they were phaaast.

 

Sreeshanth and Ishant were 2 bowlers who could hit 140K's consistently but it wasn't their pace but skill that won us games and even they were picked on merit/potential and not just purely on pace...Sreeshant I believe took a hattrick in his debut season.

 

You don't pick players purely on assumed potential or ability to hit 140K's,you pick players on performance and assess the skills of the ones who are performing like pace,swing etc. or additional attributes like great fielding,batting ability and then pick the best of the lot.

 

 

 

Sreesanth had a very orinary FC record when picked for India. Sandeep Warrier playing currently has far better record that Sreesanth had. Same with Pathan and RP. They were picked at 19 years of age. Same with Ishant. They all were picked on potential and not what they had done in FC cricket.

[rkt.india]

47 minutes ago, Texan said:

All those blindly trusting in speed gun analysis should just watch the terrific short pitched spell being bowled by Neil Wagner. He is bowling at just 130 - 134 but targeting those bouncers so perfectly, that he has Pak batsmen hobbling. Just bounced out Younis Khan. 

Bouncer is all about accuarcy and surprising the batsman even if one bowls 150K. Misbah is predominantly a front foot player and such players are always suspect against bouncers.

[maniac]

13 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 

Above average swing bowlers means they are better than most others as swing bowlers ......NOT that  they have high averages    

 

I did not say that they have got extended runs  but they have played for decent lengths of time.  READ properly.   PK has played 68 ODIs, Irfan 120 ODIs and 29 tests and Bhuvi is still in our team with 57 ODIs and 15 tests.

 

I have not specified their speeds...where have you got it from.....generally speaking, BK would be called medium-fast and the other 2 medium.  It is not just about release speeds but also about bounce or  skid off the deck after pitching.

 

Anyway...what is your point exactly  ?

 

Bhuvi is playing for India and should play....I have no problem.  The other 2 are gone....so bad luck. I had nothing to do with their removal from team India.    

Bhai mere my point about the average as in statistics was not in reference to misunderstanding what you wrote.

 

the point was that they are not above average as in skill( again I am clear it is not stat FYI) but very good swing bowlers who had potential to be one of the best.

 

the point I am making is their failure especially PK and Pathan had nothing to do with them being trundlers or pace...it was. Ore to do with fitness, indiscipline and in Pathans case misguidance.

 

My point basically is I have a problem with people calling Bhuvi an "average" bowler or a just adequate bowler when the fact is in terms of our present options he is clearly one of the best we have. I have a problem with the condescending tone towards him because he doesn't bowl the apparent 150 clicks

 

clarify hua ki aur kuch?

[maniac]

12 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Sreesanth had a very orinary FC record when picked for India. Sandeep Warrier playing currently has far better record that Sreesanth had. Same with Pathan and RP. They were picked at 19 years of age. Same with Ishant. They all were picked on potential and not what they had done in FC cricket.

I might be wrong about this but didn't Sreedhanth take a hattrick in FC the season he made his debut? Ishant I agree was picked on potential-not sure how well he did in any domestic games that season.

 

as I said there should be a balance between potential, someone who has that it factor and actual tangible performances.

 

blindly looking at stats is as bad as picking someone just because he bowls an odd delivery at 150k.

[rkt.india]

13 minutes ago, maniac said:

I might be wrong about this but didn't Sreedhanth take a hattrick in FC the season he made his debut? Ishant I agree was picked on potential-not sure how well he did in any domestic games that season.

 

as I said there should be a balance between potential, someone who has that it factor and actual tangible performances.

 

blindly looking at stats is as bad as picking someone just because he bowls an odd delivery at 150k.

Hattrick alone does not matter. Lot of bowlers take hattrick in domestic cricket. Even Pawan Suyal has a hattrick, but Sreesanth was picked based on promise. He even played for India Board president XI along with Munaf Patel and RP Singh who was only 17 hen, was the first FC for these two, in 2003 against NZ. When Aaron was picked for India he had done well for India A in Australia. His FC record was bad because he was riddled with injuries and never played matches on a stretch. He has been relatively injury free since 2012 and is averaging 20 odd in last 3 years.

[express bowling]

5 minutes ago, maniac said:

 

the point I am making is their failure especially PK and Pathan had nothing to do with them being trundlers or pace...it was. Ore to do with fitness, indiscipline and in Pathans case misguidance.

Both Pathan and PK were very good at moving the ball.  Their control was quite good too.  Their sequence of deliveries, in an attempt to fox the batsmen, was again good.

 

Why they faded away is another issue, but, in the time they played....how did they fare despite having high skills   ?  Pathan averages 32   in tests and 30  in ODIs  and Praveen averages 36 in ODIs ( his test career has only 6 tests in favourable conditions and hence a very small sample size )

 

When bowlers average 30 to 36 despite having high skills that means the missing factor was probably pace and bounce.

 

Similarly, we see our current lot of pacers also average in the same range  of 30 to 36. They have pace but lack sufficient skills.

 

Which is why i want seamers who combine skills with pace and bounce.

 

If we want seamers who average less than 25 or even less than 28...after playing 30+ or 50 = matches then you need both skills and pace / bounce.  It is not a case of either / or.

 

 

5 minutes ago, maniac said:

 

My point basically is I have a problem with people calling Bhuvi an "average" bowler or a just adequate bowler when the fact is in terms of our present options he is clearly one of the best we have. I have a problem with the condescending tone towards him because he doesn't bowl the apparent 150 clicks

 

 

I don't think anyone calls Bhuvi an ordinary bowler. He is a highly skilled bowler but needs to up his pace / bounce.

 

Similarly...Umesh, Ishant, Shami etc. have pace and need to up their skill level.

 

You maybe happy with skilled medium pacers or  semi-skilled fast bowlers.....but I want skilled fast-medium or fast  bowlers and not fully happy with any of the seamers we have in our team.

 

There is a reason India has never produced a single pacer who averages less than 25 in test matches in our history...we are happy with either skills or with pace/bounce and never want both.

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Both Pathan and PK were very good at moving the ball.  Their control was quite good too.  Their sequence of deliveries, in an attempt to fox the batsmen, was again good.

 

Why they faded away is another issue, but, in the time they played....how did they fare despite having high skills   ?  Pathan averages 32   in tests and 30  in ODIs  and Praveen averages 36 in ODIs ( his test career has only 6 tests in favourable conditions and hence a very small sample size )

 

When bowlers average 30 to 36 despite having high skills that means the missing factor was probably pace and bounce.

 

Similarly, we see our current lot of pacers also average in the same range  of 30 to 36. They have pace but lack sufficient skills.

 

Which is why i want seamers who combine skills with pace and bounce.

 

If we want seamers who average less than 25 or even less than 28...after playing 30+ or 50 = matches then you need both skills and pace / bounce.  It is not a case of either / or.

 

 

 

I don't think anyone calls Bhuvi an ordinary bowler. He is a highly skilled bowler but needs to up his pace / bounce.

 

Similarly...Umesh, Ishant, Shami etc. have pace and need to up their skill level.

 

You maybe happy with skilled medium pacers or  semi-skilled fast bowlers.....but I want skilled fast-medium or fast  bowlers and not fully happy with any of the seamers we have in our team.

 

There is a reason India has never produced a single pacer who averages less than 25 in test matches in our history...we are happy with either skills or with pace/bounce and never want both.

Bhuvi is bowling at 135 clicks..... you want him to start bowling at 150??? Those kind of bowlers are once in a generation or need to made using robotics.

 

Philander is nothing extra special...he just had opportunities in very favorable conditions.

 

Pathan averaging 30 with the ball and add to his batting was a gem of a find....too bad what happened to him.

 

I personally don't like PK but the point I am trying to make is it does not make is you have to find the right balance and play horses for courses like we have been doing so far under kumble-kohli but what is concerning is the lack of backups who are ready to step up...hence the thread.

 

ofcourse every one want bowlers with skill and pace unfortunately one of them place for Australia and the other for South Africa but even he is retiring.

[express bowling]

25 minutes ago, maniac said:

Bhuvi is bowling at 135 clicks..... you want him to start bowling at 150??? Those kind of bowlers are once in a generation or need to made using robotics.

 

I am not talking about speed-gun readings at all but visually hurrying batsmen with some pace / bounce.  Batsmen are not bothered about speed-guns when batting but are bothered when they are hurried and end up making mistakes.  Bhuvi does not do this often enough unless playing on green-tops.

 

Forget about bowling speeds...Bhuvi has only  60 wickets from 57 ODIs and 41 wickets from 15 tests....you are happy with this from one of our leading bowlers who, according to you , is so special  ?

 

 

Quote

 

Philander is nothing extra special...he just had opportunities in very favorable conditions.

 

It is not important whether a player is special.  This is a professional sport.   Philander is doing his job better than most other bowlers in the world

.

Quote

 

Pathan averaging 30 with the ball and add to his batting was a gem of a find....too bad what happened to him.

His batting ability is moot to this discussion. The topic was whether pace is at all a necessity in an attempt to produce strike-bowlers among seamers.

 

Quote

 

I personally don't like PK but the point I am trying to make is it does not make is you have to find the right balance and play horses for courses like we have been doing so far under kumble-kohli but what is concerning is the lack of backups who are ready to step up...hence the thread.

 

ofcourse every one want bowlers with skill and pace unfortunately one of them place for Australia and the other for South Africa but even he is retiring.

Test matches are won by strike-bowlers...those who have high wickets per match, low averages and low strike-rates.

 

If we want to find such strike-seamers for India.....we should strive for those who possess both skills and decent pace/ bounce. If a rare gem of a bowler emerges among a medium pacer...he is more than welcome to play.  

 

Top test teams have produced tens of pacers over the years who have had both skills and pace / bounce ...and this has resulted in them having much more strike bowlers.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2016 by express bowling

[Texan]

7 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

I am not talking about speed-gun readings at all but visually hurrying batsmen with some pace / bounce.  Batsmen are not bothered about speed-guns when batting but are bothered when they are hurried and end up making mistakes.  Bhuvi does not do this often enough unless playing on green-tops.

 

Forget about bowling speeds...Bhuvi has only  60 wickets from 57 ODIs and 41 wickets from 15 tests....you are happy with this from one of our leading bowlers who, according to you , is so special  ?

This is the problem I have with speed gun analysis. Why do you think he does not hurry batsmen????? 

 

Watch these wickets he got in his most recent Test v/s NZ.

 

 

 

Wickey number 1 Guptill - Tries to half leave the ball and hit the elbow on to the stumps. Extra bounce causes the ball to hit the elbow instead of going through to the keeper. But, it was only bowled at 128, so Bhuvi must be slow and he cannot get wickets with bounce

 

Wicket number 2 Henry Nicholls - Straight ball, no swing or seam, just hurried the batsman into his shot and ended up inside edging on to the stumps. But of course, it only registered 132 on the speed gun, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 3 Ross Taylor - Done in by extra bounce. This is as good a ball as it gets. This is the kind of bowling that got McGrath a majority of his wickets. But it was only 128, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 4 Santner - This is now with an old ball, so Bhuv uses the angle and lands the ball on the perfect line and length and again beats the batsman for pace. See no swing or seam movement here either. Just using the crease and beating the batsman for pace (visually, not the speed gun). But but but.... it was only 135, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 5 Matt Henry - Another straight ball delivered at perfect line and length and beats the batsman for pace (visually). But but but but.... hey that was only 134, how can we consider that it was the pace? No no no... Bhuvi must be slow

 

 

[rkt.india]

14 minutes ago, Texan said:

This is the problem I have with speed gun analysis. Why do you think he does not hurry batsmen????? 

 

Watch these wickets he got in his most recent Test v/s NZ.

 

 

 

Wickey number 1 Guptill - Tries to half leave the ball and hit the elbow on to the stumps. Extra bounce causes the ball to hit the elbow instead of going through to the keeper. But, it was only bowled at 128, so Bhuvi must be slow and he cannot get wickets with bounce

 

Wicket number 2 Henry Nicholls - Straight ball, no swing or seam, just hurried the batsman into his shot and ended up inside edging on to the stumps. But of course, it only registered 132 on the speed gun, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 3 Ross Taylor - Done in by extra bounce. This is as good a ball as it gets. This is the kind of bowling that got McGrath a majority of his wickets. But it was only 128, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 4 Santner - This is now with an old ball, so Bhuv uses the angle and lands the ball on the perfect line and length and again beats the batsman for pace. See no swing or seam movement here either. Just using the crease and beating the batsman for pace (visually, not the speed gun). But but but.... it was only 135, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 5 Matt Henry - Another straight ball delivered at perfect line and length and beats the batsman for pace (visually). But but but but.... hey that was only 134, how can we consider that it was the pace? No no no... Bhuvi must be slow

 

 

These wickets had a lot to do with the pitch which had a lot for pacers. 

[Texan]

12 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

These wickets had a lot to do with the pitch which had a lot for pacers. 

What do you mean by the pitch having a lot for pacers? See Bhuvi is not very fast. He is only supposed to be useful when the ball swings or seams. How was he able to beat batsmen with pace and bounce?

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Texan said:

This is the problem I have with speed gun analysis. Why do you think he does not hurry batsmen????? 

 

Watch these wickets he got in his most recent Test v/s NZ.

 

 

 

Wickey number 1 Guptill - Tries to half leave the ball and hit the elbow on to the stumps. Extra bounce causes the ball to hit the elbow instead of going through to the keeper. But, it was only bowled at 128, so Bhuvi must be slow and he cannot get wickets with bounce

 

Wicket number 2 Henry Nicholls - Straight ball, no swing or seam, just hurried the batsman into his shot and ended up inside edging on to the stumps. But of course, it only registered 132 on the speed gun, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 3 Ross Taylor - Done in by extra bounce. This is as good a ball as it gets. This is the kind of bowling that got McGrath a majority of his wickets. But it was only 128, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 4 Santner - This is now with an old ball, so Bhuv uses the angle and lands the ball on the perfect line and length and again beats the batsman for pace. See no swing or seam movement here either. Just using the crease and beating the batsman for pace (visually, not the speed gun). But but but.... it was only 135, so Bhuvi must be slow

 

Wicket number 5 Matt Henry - Another straight ball delivered at perfect line and length and beats the batsman for pace (visually). But but but but.... hey that was only 134, how can we consider that it was the pace? No no no... Bhuvi must be slow

 

 

 

Bhai...he was specifically picked for a track which had a lot of pace and bounce for seamers.  Did you not watch the series   ?

[Texan]

12 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Bhai...he was specifically picked for a track which had a lot of pace and bounce for seamers.  Did you not watch the series   ?

You said that he cannot pick wickets with pace or bounce and that he cannot hurry batsmen. I showed you evidence of him doing so and still bowling in the 128-135 range. 

[express bowling]

11 minutes ago, Texan said:

You said that he cannot pick wickets with pace or bounce and that he cannot hurry batsmen. I showed you evidence of him doing so and still bowling in the 128-135 range. 

I was talking about hurrying batsmen on most types of pitches...not  selected ones with pace and bounce

 

My objective is to find  strike bowlers for  India on all types of pitches....not pitch dependent heroes.

 

It is because of this attitude that we have not been able to produce even one bowler who averages below 25 and has taken 100 wickets....in our history.

Edited November 19, 2016 by express bowling

[Texan]

12 minutes ago, express bowling said:

I was talking about hurrying batsmen on most types of pitches...not  selected ones.

 

My objective is to find  strike bowlers for  India on all types of pitches....not pitch dependent heroes.

 

It is because of this attitude that we have not been able to produce even one bowler who averages below 25 and has taken 100 wickets....in our history.

Show me where Umesh Yadav or Varun Aaron have hurried batsmen for pace on flat pitches. Even 140-145 bowlers are not able to rush batsmen for pace on flat pitches. You need 150+ for that like Starc, Wahab, Shoaib. 

[express bowling]

11 minutes ago, Texan said:

Show me where Umesh Yadav or Varun Aaron have hurried batsmen for pace on flat pitches. Even 140-145 bowlers are not able to rush batsmen for pace on flat pitches. You need 150+ for that like Starc, Wahab, Shoaib. 

Umesh Yadav was hurrying batsmen all day today on a very slow surface.

 

They hurry batsmen on all kinds of surfaces but do not have the necessary skills to pick up wickets by the truckloads.

 

Most of our pacers , fast or slow, are very ordinary ....but we do no realize it.

 

I  want strike bowlers for India...future ATGs.....but do not see anyone on the horizon.....fast or slow.  Shami is the closest but even he has not been fully up to the mark.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2016 by express bowling

[Texan]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Umesh Yadav was hurrying batsmen all day today on a very slow surface.

 

They hurry batsmen on all kinds of surfaces but do not have the necessary skills to pick up wickets by the truckloads.

 

Most of our pacers , fast or slow, are very ordinary ....but we do no realize it.

 

I  want strike bowlers for India...future ATGs.....but do not see anyone on the horizon.....fast or slow.  Shami is the closest but even he has not been up to the mark.

If he was truly hurrying batsmen for pace consistently, he would be getting wickets. 140-145 without skill is not the pace that will trouble any international team. I have seen even Bangladesh batsmen smash Varun Aaron all over the place. You have to be 150+ for troubling batsmen with genuine pace alone. Umesh has now played 22 Tests, so its not like he is new to Test cricket and he averages 38. Aaron is even worse, averaging 53. 

[express bowling]

12 minutes ago, Texan said:

If he was truly hurrying batsmen for pace consistently, he would be getting wickets. 140-145 without skill is not the pace that will trouble any international team. I have seen even Bangladesh batsmen smash Varun Aaron all over the place. You have to be 150+ for troubling batsmen with genuine pace alone. Umesh has now played 22 Tests, so its not like he is new to Test cricket and he averages 38. Aaron is even worse, averaging 53. 

Hurrying batsmen for pace is not the only quality required for taking wickets  regularly in international cricket.

 

You are honing on the wrong point.  They hurry batsmen but lack the sequence of deliveries that are required for setting up batsmen and taking wickets  regularly.

 

What are you fighting about when I am saying that Umesh Yadav is an ordinary bowler ?

 

I want international quality strike bowlers among our pacers and none of them are good enough.

 

Pacers who have both skills and pace / bounce are required for producing strike seamers  and we don't have any.  ( Shami is the closest we have )

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2016 by express bowling