Fast Bowling

[Sohel]

Sports reporting in general and cricket reporting in particular isn't good in Bangladesh. We have "reporters" simply writing down a narrative summery of the statistics without presenting the qualitative context. We know nothing about the type and quality of the deliveries or strokes influencing match through the reporter's description of just how those numbers came about and when. Some write well and some don't but the match reporting tends to be poor when compared to those in Cricinfo and other news sources. As a matter of fact, I cannot think of a single published Bangladeshi report with such context other than one of Mohammad Isam's written a while ago.

When it comes reports not related to a match, we tend to conflate terms and create unnecessary controversy. We have a long way to go when it comes to sports reporting also.

[Blah]

Originally Posted by Ian Pont
Any idea what other world fast bowlers you guys think the Bangladesh pacers are on a par with? Is this just about speed (as in other bowlers bowl 125-135 so we are not slower).

IMO taken these facts in to consideration that:

- Bangladesh as a cricket team or a nation is not associated with a pace boiling attack or pace bowler breading ground;
- the fact that Bangladesh rarely plays more than 2 pace bowlers in a game
- and you can literally count in one hand the number of pace attack options we have.

Bangladesh medium fast bowlers are as good as any fast bowlers in the world (minus the few that are the best).

I think its a false dichotomy to associate raw speed with quality of bowler.

If you want to speak strictly on numbers to compare bangladesh pace bowlers with others in the world. Bangladesh as a team doesn't play enough games in enough variation of condition as frequently for a long enough time to make such a comparison. The only Bangladesh player that comes in to mind is mashrafe, who has been in and out of the game more often than my last relationship.

At the end of the day you have to rely on coach's opinion and take it with a grain of salt.

[fuadomar]

Originally Posted by kalpurush
Bangladesh pacers are on par or EVEN better than any Indian bowlers at the moment IMHO if you consider only SPEED.

Our pacers are better than any Zimbabwean also. WE aren't that behind as to Pakistani pacers as well at the mement.

Too opmistic of a comment. Let's not talk about the main pool of pacers of India. I saw Umesh Yadav, Varun Aaron, Mandeep Singh to bowl at more than 145 KM/h speed consistently in IPL. Name me some with the same speed in BD.

[kalpurush]

Originally Posted by fuadomar
Too opmistic of a comment. Let's not talk about the main pool of pacers of India. I saw Umesh Yadav, Varun Aaron, Mandeep Singh to bowl at more than 145 KM/h speed consistently in IPL. Name me some with the same speed in BD.

I was referrng national team. And I have never seen the above bowlers bowling consistently at more than 145km/h. They bowled at 140 +, but was inconsistent.

RBX can bowl at 140 +
Even our Sha Rukh Khan can bowl at 140 + too!

[Gowza]

yeah don't think BD pacers are up to the mark whether it be speed or quality, especially comparing them to RSA, Eng, Aus. however there are a number of players who can hit 140+ and can consistently bowl 135+, problem is in BD there isn't the quality coaching, competition or self motivation and work ethic for these players to really hone their trade to the quality of international cricket.

they have the tools, but they don't put it all together. don't need to be a 150kph bowler to succeed internationally, 130kph+ and control, accuracy, line and length, movement, seam etc those things are jsut as important as pace at the highest level, as long as they bowl 130+ their pace is fine just need to work on the other things.

[Kohli_Sox]

party time for Sharapova but he bowls 6 bouncers or short pitches anyway so for Sharapova it's all same

[Night_wolf]

Originally Posted by kalpurush
Even our Sha Rukh Khan can bowl at 140 + too!

i think indian sha rukh khan can bowl faster then ours KP bhai...forget 140k+

[zinatf]

^ Nekre!
Good thread Ian

Rubel's pretty fast....Mash was as well, but thanks to the series of injuries he had....he won't be bowling with that pace unless he wants to limp permanently

[Ian Pont]

Originally Posted by Blah

I think its a false dichotomy to associate raw speed with quality of bowler.

This where I really disagree with you. To bowl quick isn't some kind of random act. I don't know ANY genuinely fast bowlers who are not quality.

Let's keep it simple and take the fastest balls of all time by bowler, and you tell me if the bowlers are not quality:

1. Shoaib Akthar 161.3
2. Brett Lee 160.8
3. Shaun Tait 160.7
4. Jeff Thomson 160.4
5. Andy Roberts 159.5
6. Fidel Edwards 157.7
7. Mohammed Sami 156.4
7. Shane Bond 156.4
9. Dale Steyn 155.7
9. Lasith Malinga 155.7

I guarantee you this: if any Bangladeshi bowler bowled at these speeds he would be quality.

Speed gives you an undeniable asset on even the flattest, friendliest bowling pitches.

Don't get sucked into the camp that says 128 kph is 'quality'. The truth is, if you bowl that slowly, you have to have amazing control, swing and movement. If the Bangladesh attack gets smoked it's usually Nazmul (or Mash) who we praise because they have been effective compared to the rest.

The 10 bowlers listed above prove your theory quite wrong and in fact you can associate high speed with quality of bowler. It's not a dichotomy to be be a genuine speed bowler and quality as the two are often associated. It's simply that so few coaches can coach speed into bowlers that we don't focus on it.

[Navo]

Ian, I agree that speed is definitely a factor but how much speed do you need?

Among the 10 you listed, how many would you pick in your all time xi? Andy Roberts, Jeff Thompson or Steyn maybe? The others have been very good, without becoming all time greats. Shaun Tait is usually very wayward when he bowls at his fastest and Bond was always prone to injury. Lee and Malinga (in ODIs and T20) have lived up to their potential somewhat but the remaining have not.

Many of the bowlers who are spoken of when all time xis are made are usually a bit slower than the above but admittedly, not by much. You have the Wasims, Waqars, Holdings etc. Towards the end of their careers, Wasim and Waqar still took a sizable number of wickets despite their pace easing up.

[Kohli_Sox]

Originally Posted by Ian Pont
This where I really disagree with you. To bowl quick isn't some kind of random act. I don't know ANY genuinely fast bowlers who are not quality.

Let's keep it simple and take the fastest balls of all time by bowler, and you tell me if the bowlers are not quality:

1. Shoaib Akthar 161.3
2. Brett Lee 160.8
3. Shaun Tait 160.7
4. Jeff Thomson 160.4
5. Andy Roberts 159.5
6. Fidel Edwards 157.7
7. Mohammed Sami 156.4
7. Shane Bond 156.4
9. Dale Steyn 155.7
9. Lasith Malinga 155.7

I guarantee you this: if any Bangladeshi bowler bowled at these speeds he would be quality.

Speed gives you an undeniable asset on even the flattest, friendliest bowling pitches.

Don's get sucked into the camp that says 128 kph is 'quality'. The truth is, if you bowl that slowly, you have to have amazing control, swing and movement. If the Bangladesh attack gets smoked it's usually Nazmul (or Mash) who we praise because they have been effective compared to the rest.

The 10 bowlers listed above prove your theory quite wrong and in fact you can associate high speed with quality of bowler. It's not a dichotomy to be be a genuine speed bowler and quality as the two are often associated. It's simply that so few coaches can coach speed into bowlers that we don't focus on it.

Yes but one important thing to note. When we discuss about speed, the speed range is also important. I agree that high speed brings quality inevitably given one can atleast pitch the ball in line but for this equation of speed and quality, bowler needs to hit 150 mark regularly. There are many bowlers in the range of 135-145 who are pretty average. So if a bowler hits 150 and pitch the ball in line, quality comes in automatically.

[Ian Pont]

Originally Posted by Kohli_Sox
Yes but one important thing to note. When we discuss about speed, the speed range is also important. I agree that high speed brings quality inevitably given one can atleast pitch the ball in line but for this equation of speed and quality, bowler needs to hit 150 mark regularly. There are many bowlers in the range of 135-145 who are pretty average. So if a bowler hits 150 and pitch the ball in line, quality comes in automatically.

Thats my point. I am talking about raw pace... the poster (Blah) said raw speed doesn't mean quality. I am saying it virtually always does. 135-145 isn't 'raw speed'. Bowling above 90 mph is 'speed' which is in the 148-158 range

[Ian Pont]

Originally Posted by Navo
Ian, I agree that speed is definitely a factor but how much speed do you need?

Among the 10 you listed, how many would you pick in your all time xi? Andy Roberts, Jeff Thompson or Steyn maybe? The others have been very good, without becoming all time greats. Shaun Tait is usually very wayward when he bowls at his fastest and Bond was always prone to injury. Lee and Malinga (in ODIs and T20) have lived up to their potential somewhat but the remaining have not.

Many of the bowlers who are spoken of when all time xis are made are usually a bit slower than the above but admittedly, not by much. You have the Wasims, Waqars, Holdings etc. Towards the end of their careers, Wasim and Waqar still took a sizable number of wickets despite their pace easing up.

Everyone you mentioned bowled 145 kph and above. In history, the greatest fast bowlers were also those who bowled these speeds.

In the modern game, it is only McGrath (who bowled 128-135) and Pollock (who started at 145 then dropped to 134) who can be classed as legends as bowlers who deserve legendary status - but they were not STRICTLY pace bowlers anyway.

Blah's argument is so flawed because to be classified as truly 'fast' you are bowling above 145. None of the Bangladesh bowlers can do that regularly. Only Rubel has crossed that a few times. So none can be classified thus as fast bowlers.

A great fast bowler can drop his speed and swing the ball about (Steyn, Donald, Anderson) if they need to. A medium pace bowler cannot suddenly find 10-15 kph from nowhere.

[Night_wolf]

^but you told us you saw sahadat bowl 145+ in nets

[BD Rox]

I don't think we've speed guns during nets.

[Ian Pont]

Originally Posted by Night_wolf
^but you told us you saw sahadat bowl 145+ in nets

Sadly NW, he has never been able to translate this into matches. And I feel that he is now stuck between trying to bowl a line and length or going for pace. His speed has again dropped and I notice he is back to his old habit of collapsing his front leg - something we had worked on and was having success with, hence the upgraded speeds.

[BD Rox]

We should all now forget Shahadat. Let him be where he is. No need to have any sort of headache for him. Chapter closed.

[Blah]

Originally Posted by Ian Pont
This where I really disagree with you. To bowl quick isn't some kind of random act. I don't know ANY genuinely fast bowlers who are not quality.

Let's keep it simple and take the fastest balls of all time by bowler, and you tell me if the bowlers are not quality:

1. Shoaib Akthar 161.3
2. Brett Lee 160.8
3. Shaun Tait 160.7
4. Jeff Thomson 160.4
5. Andy Roberts 159.5
6. Fidel Edwards 157.7
7. Mohammed Sami 156.4
7. Shane Bond 156.4
9. Dale Steyn 155.7
9. Lasith Malinga 155.7

I guarantee you this: if any Bangladeshi bowler bowled at these speeds he would be quality.

Speed gives you an undeniable asset on even the flattest, friendliest bowling pitches.

Don't get sucked into the camp that says 128 kph is 'quality'. The truth is, if you bowl that slowly, you have to have amazing control, swing and movement. If the Bangladesh attack gets smoked it's usually Nazmul (or Mash) who we praise because they have been effective compared to the rest.

The 10 bowlers listed above prove your theory quite wrong and in fact you can associate high speed with quality of bowler. It's not a dichotomy to be be a genuine speed bowler and quality as the two are often associated. It's simply that so few coaches can coach speed into bowlers that we don't focus on it.

I spend a good part of 30 minutes writing a thoughtful reply with examples and stats from cricinfo statsguru but unfortunately I accidently closed the tab with a keyboard shortcut.

So I will make it short.

When I said :

I think its a false dichotomy to associate raw speed with quality of bowler.

I meant to say is that raw speed can be one of the qualities of a good bowler but having raw speed alone doesn't make one (or a pre-requisite to be) a quality bowler; hence the association of raw speed with quality of bowler is wrong.

How many winning games was a fast bowler involved with (but also look at their avg)?

I can only see 3 from the top 10 who consistently bowled 145+, most others had their best career when they actually slowed down.

[al Furqaan]

In the Asia cup shahadat was bowling at his usual pace of 135, occaisionally approaching closer to 140. He hasn't bowled Thant quick in a few years.

[Kohli_Sox]

Originally Posted by Night_wolf
^but you told us you saw sahadat bowl 145+ in nets

maybe those balls were all going right over the batsman's head out goes over the wall and right into the roof of double decker bus

[fiasnahk]

^ Lol, People lost sight of the ball after a Shahadat Hussain super bouncer due to distractions met by his annoying scream. The ball was sighted on the moon.

[TigerEz]

i remember virat kohli was struggling big time against shahadats bowling in asia cup :p

[Kohli_Sox]

Originally Posted by fiasnahk
^ Lol, People lost sight of the ball after a Shahadat Hussain super bouncer due to distractions met by his annoying scream. The ball was sighted on the moon.

The NASA sighted the ball as another planet, some of them arguably thought at last scientists were able to find a living place but to massive disappointment of much anticipated crowds gathered on a rainy day in Alabama and Alaska, they denied the whole matter but reports confirmed that they will still continue to assess the condition and later might send a pathfinder to know the actual facts.

[Ian Pont]

Originally Posted by Blah
I
I meant to say is that raw speed can be one of the qualities of a good bowler but having raw speed alone doesn't make one (or a pre-requisite to be) a quality bowler; hence the association of raw speed with quality of bowler is wrong.

How many winning games was a fast bowler involved with (but also look at their avg)?

I can only see 3 from the top 10 who consistently bowled 145+, most others had their best career when they actually slowed down.

...and you can make any comments to change the argument to suit you, bhai.

Fact is, if you can bowl 150 kph plus, you are a pretty special bowler, not some random chump who doesn't know what he is doing. If you understand biomechanics you would know this.

I fully understand you are trying to make the age old argument of 'slow down bowl a line and length' in general. My stance is if you can bowl excess speeds you are LIKELY to be a quality bowler. If you can only bowl 128 then you are not, unless you have amazing control, swing, movement etc etc etc.

If the Bangladesh attack all bowled in excess of 150 kph (like West Indies did in the 1980s) then it would be a completely different bowling attack to now and would forever alter how Bangladesh was perceived in the world.

Case closed.

[BengaliPagol]

Originally Posted by Ian Pont
...and you can make any comments to change the argument to suit you, bhai.

Fact is, if you can bowl 150 kph plus, you are a pretty special bowler, not some random chump who doesn't know what he is doing. If you understand biomechanics you would know this.

I fully understand you are trying to make the age old argument of 'slow down bowl a line and length' in general. My stance is if you can bowl excess speeds you are LIKELY to be a quality bowler. If you can only bowl 128 then you are not, unless you have amazing control, swing, movement etc etc etc.

If the Bangladesh attack all bowled in excess of 150 kph (like West Indies did in the 1980s) then it would be a completely different bowling attack to now and would forever alter how Bangladesh was perceived in the world.

Case closed.

So why cant Bangladesh produce 150k+ bowlers?

Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Opera Mobile)