Umesh Yadav the best India pacer: Rodney Hogg

[rkt.india]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

actually no, quite a few bowlers bowled most of their careers under 135k and did just fine. McGrath, Pollock, Philander, Botham, Willis, Hadlee, Kapil- these were all GREAT bowlers.

You want people who bowled 135K or less but were merely adequate- we have the likes of Caddick, Hoggard, Streak, Chris Martin, Siddle, McDermott, Zaheer, Vaas- the list is endless for people who did adequate job and still bowled at 135Ks or less for all/most of their careers.

It is a misconception that you need pace to be an adequate test bowler- which Umesh is not. 
And Umesh, is a colossal failure at this point at being adequate, never mind great. 

 

I am talking about great bowlers and from the list you gave, Bob Willis was quick, Hadlee was pretty quick too when he started. Thing is once you have skills and experience, even if you bowl at slower pace, it can work for you. McGrath would not have lasted long if he had bowled 125-130 from his debut. In the second list, you named Siddle. Siddle bowled up to 150KPH at his peak and as soon as he lost his pace, he lost his effectiveness too and lost his place in the team.  Vaas was another bowler who had metronomic accuracy which is very hard to achieve. Zaheer even in his last stage of his career bowled up 140 and always raised his pace whenever required.  Even Hoggard could hit 140kph at his peak. Any bowler bowling around 85 mph with good accuracy is not slow in test cricket. Likes of Mcgrath, Hoggard, Willis, Hadlee, Hoggard, Sidle, Zak, Mcdermott all could do that. 

 

Another thing likes of Botham, Hggard, Caddick played a lot of their cricket in England. Imagine Bhuvi playing half of his cricket there, he would have been averaging in early 20s and Umesh is yet to play a single test in places like SA, NZ, England which helps paces the most. Most of his cricket has been on ultra flat pitches either in India or in Australia, there apart from two venues of MCG and Perth in 2012 where he took 12 wickets in 2 games, all other pitches have been utter flat and all Indian pacers struggled there.

 

Moreover, I dont say one needs to bowl quick every over or in every spell but one needs to have the ability to crank the pace up when nothing is happening and make things happen. This is the biggest reason for Dale Steyn being effective and staying injury free for so long and still bowling quick when required.

[Muloghonto]

12 minutes ago, Vilander said:

Anecdotal summarily rejected.

Doesn't matter what you reject. What matters is, in the era before comprehensive speed gun testing, what the batsmen say.

 

[Cricketics]

1 minute ago, Vilander said:

Ryan Harris used to hit 140 most of the time too. Good example.

Yes, And was very successful at 135ks too.

 

I will give you my take on this.

 

I am not too worried about pace honestly as long as it is decent. I love pace bowling like most here. Infact more than some of you guys as it is my bread and butter now part time. I do it day in day out, work hard to get faster as I still play competitive cricket right now and hope to get that cricinfo profile of my own one day. 

 

My whole take is that we sometimes act too desperate to protect our favorite bowlers because we like them to be backed as they are different.

 

Like Bhuvi fans like me will feel about him having great line and length and that he should play because he is more accurate. 

 

Umesh fans like Umesh for his pace and bounce and feel he should because we need to develop a culture.

 

Both fan groups have a point and both are wrong also for protecting them at times where they shouldn't.

 

But one thing is true that both provide unique opinions because both are two very different bowlers to have come out of India in the last 2 decades because one is really fast and the other is really good with the swing. 

 

 

I thiink amongst all this we sometimes forget that all of us are right but there we have reached a point of stalemate. It's basically agree to disagree point.

 

MY TWO CENTS

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

I am talking about great bowlers and from the list you gave, Bob Willis was quick, Hadlee was pretty quick too when he started. Thing is once you have skills and experience, even if you bowl at slower pace, it can work for you. McGrath would not have lasted long if he had bowled 125-130 from his debut. In the second list, you named Siddle. Siddle bowled up to 150KPH at his peak and as soon as he lost his pace, he lost his effectiveness too and lost his place in the team.  Vaas was another bowler who had metronomic accuracy which is very hard to achieve. Zaheer even in his last stage of his career bowled up 140 and always raised his pace whenever required.  Even Hoggard could hit 140kph at his peak. Any bowler bowling around 85 mph with good accuracy is not slow in test cricket. Likes of Mcgrath, Hoggard, Willis, Hadlee, Hoggard, Sidle, Zak, Mcdermott all could do that. 

 

Another thing likes of Botham, Hggard, Caddick played a lot of their cricket in England. Imagine Bhuvi playing half of his cricket there, he would have been averaging in early 20s and Umesh is yet to play a single test in places like SA, NZ, England which helps paces the most. Most of his cricket has been on ultra flat pitches either in India or in Australia, there apart from two venues of MCG and Perth in 2012 where he took 12 wickets in 2 games, all other pitches have been utter flat and all Indian pacers struggled there.

 

Moreover, I dont say one needs to bowl quick every over or in every spell but one needs to have the ability to crank the pace up when nothing is happening and make things happen. This is the biggest reason for Dale Steyn being effective and staying injury free for so long and still bowling quick when required.

Its total BS to say 'you need to start out at a quick pace to be able to bowl at a slower pace'. 

All the bowlers named, were good bowlers with or without pace and when they lost their pace, they compensated, showing pace is not required to be a good bowler- which is what you claimed. And if McGrath bowled with as much accuracy at the end as in the start (which he didnt), he'd be just as effective at 125kph. Same goes for Ambrose, who at 125kph (and at that time we had speed guns), he ended up averaging <20.

 

And none of those bowlers, in the last phase of their careers 'needed to crank the pace up when nothing happens'. Infact they are on RECORD saying that when nothing happened, they kept things tight and built pressure. You want me to show you bowler after bowler saying that when pitch is not responsive, they keep it tight and hope things work, not bowl even faster ?

Siddle, Willis, etc. all got most of their wickets at the slower side of things. 

[rkt.india]

5 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Yes, And was very successful at 135ks too.

 

I will give you my take on this.

 

I am not too worried about pace honestly as long as it is decent. I love pace bowling like most here. Infact more than some of you guys as it is my bread and butter now part time. I do it day in day out, work hard to get faster as I still play competitive cricket right now and hope to get that cricinfo profile of my own one day. 

 

My whole take is that we sometimes act too desperate to protect our favorite bowlers because we like them to be backed as they are different.

 

Like Bhuvi fans like me will feel about him having great line and length and that he should play because he is more accurate. 

 

Umesh fans like Umesh for his pace and bounce and feel he should because we need to develop a culture.

 

Both fan groups have a point and both are wrong also for protecting them at times where they shouldn't.

 

But one thing is true that both provide unique opinions because both are two very different bowlers to have come out of India in the last 2 decades because one is really fast and the other is really good with the swing. 

 

 

I thiink amongst all this we sometimes forget that all of us are right but there we have reached a point of stalemate. It's basically agree to disagree point.

 

MY TWO CENTS

Rayan Harris never bowled 135K. He was 140-145K bowler even in his last test match. He has hit up to 150Ks too.

[Cricketics]

4 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Rayan Harris never bowled 135K. He was 140-145K bowler even in his last test match. He has hit up to 150Ks too.

A lot of times n Ashes he bowled in 135-140k more consistently. Especially in Ashes he was around consistently more in 138-141 range than 145. He could hit 150 is another thing which he did, but he was more consistent in 138-141 which is stil very good pace for test matches.

[express bowling]

3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

actually no, quite a few bowlers bowled most of their careers under 135k and did just fine. McGrath, Pollock, Philander, Botham, Willis, Hadlee, Kapil- these were all GREAT bowlers.

Only a few days ago, you were saying that you saw McGrath bowling 140 k and 141 k consistently in the West Indies.      In the 1999 WC, he averaged 138 k which is very good speed.  There were no speed guns in his peak years and we will never know how quick he was then.

 

Pollock was also known as a fast bowler in his youth. 

 

Willis was a genuine fast bowler

 

Hadlee had good pace pace in his heydays.  Boycott says that he was genuinely quick. he played on till age 40 and many people just remember his last years.

 

Kapil Dev was a fast-medium pacer from 1978 to 1985 with a good sharp bouncer.  Most of his test wickets were during this period and he became an average bowler after his knee injury and consequent reduction of pace.

 

Quote

You want people who bowled 135K or less but were merely adequate- we have the likes of Caddick, Hoggard, Streak, Chris Martin, Siddle, McDermott, Zaheer, Vaas- the list is endless for people who did adequate job and still bowled at 135Ks or less for all/most of their careers.

 

 

All these  pacers bowled 135 k to 142 k spells in their peak years in almost every test they played and all had good bouncers. Caddick and McDermott  had extra bounce too.

 

 

If a pacer is tall, has a steeper trajectory and gets steep bounce..... he can afford to be a bit slower in terms of release speeds.

 

 

Edited February 22, 2017 by express bowling

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Its total BS to say 'you need to start out at a quick pace to be able to bowl at a slower pace'. 

All the bowlers named, were good bowlers with or without pace and when they lost their pace, they compensated, showing pace is not required to be a good bowler- which is what you claimed. And if McGrath bowled with as much accuracy at the end as in the start (which he didnt), he'd be just as effective at 125kph. Same goes for Ambrose, who at 125kph (and at that time we had speed guns), he ended up averaging <20.

 

And none of those bowlers, in the last phase of their careers 'needed to crank the pace up when nothing happens'. Infact they are on RECORD saying that when nothing happened, they kept things tight and built pressure. You want me to show you bowler after bowler saying that when pitch is not responsive, they keep it tight and hope things work, not bowl even faster ?

Siddle, Willis, etc. all got most of their wickets at the slower side of things. 

it is not BS. it is true. A rookie pacer does not have enough experience or skills to bowl effectively at 125-130KPH. Very few bowlers can do that and those bowlers are ones who have relatively high first class experience like Philander. A rookie bowler coming up without playing a lot of FC cricket will need some pace to establish himself. No team picks bowlers who lack pace in test cricket. It is their pace that brings them team into the team and keeps them afloat early on even if they are not so successful. They learn other skills later on and can be effective even if they dont bowl as quick as they bowled when they were younger. Glen McGrath was not successful from test one but he was considered quick and also had bounce.

 

No bowler debuting at 21-22 will be highly accurate. Name me a single bowler who has been picked by successful teams like Aus, SA, England at 21-22 on the criteria of accuracy and has been successful in the last 20 years. I dont remember anyone, can you name one such bowler? You keep giving examples of Curtly Ambrose, he was already a great bowler by the end of his career and it was his pace and bounce that made him great and he could do well even at 130K at the end of his career because he had bounce and he could bowl good length all day and due to his bounce, batsmen would not found him easy to tackle. Same with Courtney Walsh, same with McGrath, same with Pollock. Bounce is as much a part of a bowler's arsenal as pace. In fact, a 6 foot 6 fast bowler bowling at 135-136KPH with with decent accuracy and bounce is much more difficult to handle than a short pacer 5'10 bowling at 140-142KPH especially in places like Aus, SA, NZ or even England. We Indians are not blessed with such tall bowlers who could bowl at 135K with such accuracy and bounce.

 

Regarding Siddle, he just became a support bowler as soon as he lost his pace and then was dropped. He was at his best when he bowled 140k or more.

[rkt.india]

13 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

A lot of times n Ashes he bowled in 135-140k more consistently. Especially in Ashes he was around consistently more in 138-141 range than 145. He could hit 150 is another thing which he did, but he was more consistent in 138-141 which is stil very good pace for test matches.

138-141 is very good pace and he could regularly hit corridor of uncertainty day in day. His comparison with Bhuvi is meaningless because Bhuvi is predominantly a swing bowler, kiss the surface bowler, while Harris never really swung the ball. He was a seam bowler and used to hit the deck hard.

[rkt.india]

6 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

they become quick or slow depending on the debate,many times in the past he claimed how quick the bowlers in the past were ..

yes, according him all bowlers in 80s bowled 95 mph consistently whole day.

[Cricketics]

Just now, rkt.india said:

138-141 is very good pace and he could regularly hit corridor of uncertainty day in day. His comparison with Bhuvi is meaningless because Bhuvi is predominantly a swing bowler, kiss the surface bowler, while Harris never really swung the ball. He was a seam bowler and used to hit the deck hard.

Lol, Ryan Harris never swung? Don't say that to anyone, especially to him. You just watched few games of his then or probably caught few highlights.

 

He bowled seam, yes, but he swung  a lot too. I have followed his career closely. He made lot of changes to his bowling. Even sacrifised bit of pace when his wrist position wasn't coming fine. He used to play and was spokeperson and before that a player at Manly Beach cricket club in where I played some cricket. He used to explain us about how to bowl swing and seam. He was pretty young then. He used to always play around with his wrist to try different things.

 

Find some matches of Australia and you will see him swinging the ball good.

[Mosher]

This thread is hilarious. So many great bowlers suddenly turned into trundlers to fit a narrative

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Lol, Ryan Harris never swung? Don't say that to anyone, especially to him. You just watched few games of his then or probably caught few highlights.

 

He bowled seam, yes, but he swung  a lot too. I have followed his career closely. He made lot of changes to his bowling. Even sacrifised bit of pace when his wrist position wasn't coming fine. He used to play and was spokeperson and before that a player at Manly Beach cricket club in where I played some cricket. He used to explain us about how to bowl swing and seam. He was pretty young then. He used to always play around with his wrist to try different things.

 

Find some matches of Australia and you will see him swinging the ball good.

how could he swing the ball when he did not even have a seam position for swing. Ryan Harris was one of most favorite bowler and he was not a swing bowler. There is a basic seam position to swing the ball which Yadav and Bhuvi have, Harris didn't have that kind of seam position.

Edited February 22, 2017 by rkt.india

[Cricketics]

Just now, rkt.india said:

how could he swing the ball when he did not even have a seam position for swing. He had a wobbly seam like Philander and Shaun Pollock. Ryan Harris was one of most favorite bowler. He was not a swing bowler.

How many times have you seen him bowl? If majority of his balls or wicket taking balls were seam, doesn't mean he was just a seam bowler. He used to bowl both swing and seam. In test cricket, he can't try same things and he wa onenof those who kept trying different things. 

[rkt.india]

10 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

How many times have you seen him bowl? If majority of his balls or wicket taking balls were seam, doesn't mean he was just a seam bowler. He used to bowl both swing and seam. In test cricket, he can't try same things and he wa onenof those who kept trying different things. 

I have watched him a lot. He had an upright seam position which most of the seam bowlers have. Swing bowlers will have seam position either pointing towards first slip for outswing in case of Steyn and leg slip for inswing in case of Bhuvi. Anderson could bowl both swing so he alternated his seam position according to the swing he wanted to achieve. Bhuvi can bowl outswing too but he started predominantly as an inswing bowler and his outswing isnt that effective because of his closed action. These are the basics of swing that ball swings in the direction of the seam and when ball swings opposite to seam position that is called reverse swing. No bowler really get reverse swing these days and we confuse reverse with contrast swing. Regarding Harris, he was more like Philander, Pollock with his seam position. 

Edited February 22, 2017 by rkt.india

[Cricketics]

8 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

how could he swing the ball when he did not even have a seam position for swing. Ryan Harris was one of most favorite bowler and he was not a swing bowler. There is a basic seam position to swing the ball which Yadav and Bhuvi have, Harris didn't have that kind of seam position.

Read this. Nice interview

 

He shares how he always had the swing when he was young.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/851245.html

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, Cricketics said:

Read this. Nice interview

 

He shares how he always had the swing when he was young.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/851245.html

but he barely swung the new ball. He always seamed the ball. People dont even know what is swing and what is seam. Like they dont even understand what is reverse swing. There are so many misconception in cricket world.

[Cricketics]

3 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

I have watched him a lot. He had an upright seam position which most of the seam bowlers have. Swing bowlers will have seam position either pointing towards first slip for outswing in case of Steyn and leg slip for inswing in case of Bhuvi. Anderson could bowl both swing so he alternated his seam position according to the swing he wanted to achieve. Bhuvi can bowl outswing too but he started predominantly as an inswing bowler and his outswing isnt that effective because of his close action. These are the basics of swing that ball swings in the direction of the seam and when ball swings opposite to seam position that is called reverse swing. No bowler really get reverse swing these days and we confuse reverse with contrast swing. Regarding Harris, he was more like Philander, Pollock with his seam position. 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/851245.html

 

"When I wasn't swinging it as much, I tinkered with moving that seam around a bit. I got to a stage where I had it pointing to third slip, which was too much. I tinkered with having my thumb underneath, on the seam, where it joins the ball, or actually on the stitching. It would really depend on how I felt on the day. If it was coming out really good, I'd stick with what I started with. If I was not so sure, or it wasn't swinging as much, I'd make subtle changes."

 

"every single day you bowl it can be different."

 

 

Just what I told you above. He played around a lot with the ball. Most swing and seam bowlers do. 

 

[express bowling]

22 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

yes, according him all bowlers in 80s bowled 95 mph consistently whole day.

And yet, some of the same bowlers are 80 mph  to 83 mph for this debate    

[Cricketics]

Just now, rkt.india said:

but he barely swung the new ball. He always seamed the ball. People dont even know what is swing and what is seam. Like they dont even understand what is reverse swing. There are so many misconception in cricket world.

Because a lot of terms came late, like contrast swing etc.

 

Then you have one guy who uses terms like corridor of uncertainity and one guy calls it avenue of apprehension etc.

 

MCC book or something doesn't have it clearly defined. It never will because such is the nature of the game, it keeps changing or something keeps coming up.