Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BANFAN
That's what bowlers do in T20s and in death overs of ODIs to not to allow the batsman take advantage of the pace....since they swing at everything..... But you can't do that or the major part of ODI and Test cricket....
If you have real pacers, they can reduce pace when necessary....but a slow medium is limited he can't increase pace when necessary...and when a paver cuts down pace he will look as accurate as the limited pace guys....you decide what is advantageous...
|
If we had good fast bowlers then it would be an obvious choice isn't it!
what Jeesh is saying is that when we have crap fast bowlers it's better to go with medium pacers who at least have control over line and length and can bowl to a game plan.
You sound as if no medium pacers have had success in ODIs and Test cricket. To succeed in the longer formats the line and length is more important than pace (even though having pace always helps and is preferred). Mcgrath, Pollock didn't blast people out with pace... they did it through bowling consistent channels