Ishant Sharma...overcoached?!

[DaRick]

Very harsh. Ignores all the good bowling he did between the wickets which more than likely caused a lot of the poor shots.

By nature, it does. Any wicket-by-wicket analysis will ignore the nonwicket-taking balls, along with the setting up of a batsman to get a wicket (although RP has often struck me as too erratic to bowl consistently to a plan).

I was countering his claim that most of his wickets were caused by good deliveries, not poor shots. On that level alone, I disagree.

On the other hand, a wicket-by-wicket analysis will also ignore all of the poor bowling that he did. Except for early on in Sydney and maybe Perth, he did do a lot of that. His economy rate is a reflection of his oft-erratic line and length, along with the admittedly over-the-top contempt that many of the Australian batsmen appear to have held him in. I do feel rather the same way about Brett Lee's performances during the 2005 Ashes. Sometimes, he was good; often, he was pretty poor.

The above reminds me very strongly of when Richard was claiming Glenn McGrath got a succession of poor shots in the early 00's so doesn't deserve credit for the wickets he took.

Comparing RP Singh to Glenn McGrath is simply not valid. In the early 2000's, McGrath was an established world-class bowler, in every format of the game. Glenn McGrath also had oft-exemplary control of line, length and seam (if not swing, at that time). He also had a far better bouncer and yorker than RP Singh could muster. RP probably generates more swing than the early 2000's version of McGrath, but that's about it.

Wickets are rarely down to the wicket-taking ball alone. As Shaun Tait and others have found, bowlers who rely purely on bowling jaffas to take wickets won't take many.

True, but I've never rated Shaun Tait, anyway (although he is very dangerous on 'his day').

Not to mention that the balls he got Hussey, Haydos, etc. with her pretty good anyway, full and swinging away.

I recall him getting wickets with quite a few wide half-volleys. Sure he was swinging the ball, but so was Scott Muller when he got wickets in the exact same manner. We're not gonna say that he bowled well, now, are we?

No doubt that he did bowl 6-7 good deliveries to get wickets, though.

Yeah they weren't great shots but at that level, you're not going to get batsmen nicking on the defensive all the time.

You're right. But how many of his wickets should be due to impromptu poor shots?

A large part of good swing bowling is drawing the poor shot too. Doesn't mean it's poor bowling at all.

Well, it's not if you set-up the batsman before hand, ala Brett Lee. RP Singh lacks the control to do this on a frequent basis.

Certainly there were times Singh was ordinary in the series but credit where credit is due his spells with the new cherry in Sydney were outstanding and he deserved every wicket in my view.

Like I said, he bowled well early on in Sydney and even Perth. I feel that RP Singh's performances were grossly overrated, but that's not to say that he didn't bowl well sometimes.

He bowled relatively well at other times too.

I don't know. He was too damn expensive, for my liking, with too much dross (did you see the rest of the Sydney Test match?).

Was moving the ball around more than any swing bowler has done in Australia for years.

Maybe.

You double posted, BTW.

 

[Richard]

Very harsh. Ignores all the good bowling he did between the wickets which more than likely caused a lot of the poor shots. The above reminds me very strongly of when Richard was claiming Glenn McGrath got a succession of poor shots in the early 00's so doesn't deserve credit for the wickets he took. Wickets are rarely down to the wicket-taking ball alone.

As I've said ad infinitum, while there are occasions when wickets with seemingly-average deliveries are indeed a result of good bowling, there are as many if not more where they're not. And wickets with out-and-out bad deliveries are NEVER good bowling.

Basically, most people will go to any level to attempt to give praise for good figures, whether they were deserved or not. Only very rarely will good figures be acknowledged as not deserved.

 

[Cricket_God]

Did you read what I wrote above? I made the mistake of saying that you needed pace to bowl reverse swing earlier, then rectified that by saying that it merely aided it, with the correct wrist position.



I don't believe this. During the test series versus Australia, RP Singh bowled at around 130-135 km/h on average (maybe up to 137-138 km/h). During the test series versus South Africa, he was even slower. He is certainly not 'Johnson-quick'. At any rate, Johnson has gone 150 km/h+ in the one-dayers. Even at his flattest, I haven't seen Johnson bowl slower than around 135 km/h.

NOTE: Oh, so that's in T20's huh? South African ones, no less. Brett Lee has also been extraordinarily quick in South Africa. Besides, I notice that bowlers tend to bowl more quickly with the white ball than with the red ball. Shaun Tait and Brett Lee have reached 160 km/h with the white ball, but not (to my knowledge) with the red ball.

NOTE #2: I failed to see a serious difference between the Channel 9 and ESPN speedometers, from what little of RP Singh's performances I could find (and revisit) on YouTube.



Leading the attack does give RP Singh some leeway, but not enough for me to state that he bowled well consistently throughout the series. Consultation of his average and economy rate is more than enough to indicate this.



Nah, I don't think that he would've made much of a difference in Adelaide. Not bowling in Adelaide would have helped him, actually.

Nobody else generated a great deal of reverse swing, from memory...certainly not enough to avoid the inflation of figures for everybody bar Mitchell Johnson and Ishant Sharma (who both had poor averages at the start).

Stuart Clark, who generates less reverse swing due to his relative lack of pace, had diabolical figures. It's not that hard to ascertain, then, that there wasn't lots of reverse swing on offer for the bowlers. In fact, there wasn't a lot of anything, really. It epitomised a dead track.

He led the attack pretty well early on in Sydney, but certainly not after that. Andrew Symonds, in particular, took him to the cleaners. I don't remember him leaving much of an impression on me in the second innings, although he could've gotten Hussey's scalp.

As for Perth, he leaked runs pretty quickly. That being said, he did take plenty of wickets in the first innings, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. He wasn't nearly as effective later, though.



Yes, he did bowl better against Australia's left-handed batsmen than he did against the right-handed batsmen. The fact that he got more conventional swing than reverse swing over the series (and bowled better with the new ball) helped him, too, as did some of the reckless strokes.



I certainly did watch the series. Occassionally, I had to go out, so I didn't watch 100% of it, but I watched more than enough (and through Cricinfo, too).

As for RP Singh's wickets coming primarily from good bowling, I beg to differ. Let's do a breakdown:

1) Michael Clarke: Full, wide one which Clarke awkwardly cut to Laxman. Not great bowling.
2) Michael Hussey: Full, wide one which Hussey went after outside the off, managed to edge it behind. Not great bowling.
3) Phil Jaques: Short and wide one which Jaques (possibly underestimating the bounce) edged behind. A reckless shot, moreso than good bowling.
4) Matthew Hayden: Good delivery, squared Hayden up outside offstump
5) Michael Hussey: Good delivery, surprised Hussey with the bounce
6) Adam Gilchrist: Decent delivery, got Gilchrist to drive one which moved away slightly
7) Andrew Symonds: Reckless shot, trying to smash a full and wide one, not great bowling
8) Michael Hussey: Full and wide, Hussey threw the bat outside off, not great bowling
9) Adam Gilchrist: Lifter outside off, squared Gilchrist up, good delivery
10) Brett Lee: Decent delivery, with Lee pushing away from his body
11) Stuart Clark: Short and wide, under-edge, not great bowling
12) Michael Hussey: Apparently a poor decision, but not a bad delivery from what I saw
13) Shaun Tait: Missed a swinging half-volley, don't know whether that counts

6-7/13 were caused by reckless shots, more than good bowling. Your argument doesn't hold up. Mine isn't as solid as I thought that it was, admittedly, but that's still a significant portion.

Besides, it still doesn't change the fact that he was often cannon fodder on James Anderson's level, bar early on in Sydney and Perth.

Go then Check your eyes if you can't see the difference between speedometers
of espn and nine ,espn measures the speed when ball hits the ground,

during the series in india he was coming back from injury so his pace was down,
i have seen him bowl at speed up to 147 in odis,T20 go check some odi matches

dumb,leading the attack does lead to extra pressure,

remember the delivery with which ishant got hayden out,he beat him for pace and that was reverse swing fool.

fool,india played 5 bowlers but as he was injured the burden came on to 4 bowlers
so inda did miss him.

andrew symonds should not have been their that jackass bribed even the third umpire

and fool why did the batsman not connect with the wide deliveries

beacause fools like you do not get late swing.

and about cannon fodder ,wait all your bowlers were cannon fodder,except lee

 

[Cricket_God]

By nature, it does. Any wicket-by-wicket analysis will ignore the nonwicket-taking balls, along with the setting up of a batsman to get a wicket (although RP has often struck me as too erratic to bowl consistently to a plan).

I was countering his claim that most of his wickets were caused by good deliveries, not poor shots. On that level alone, I disagree.

On the other hand, a wicket-by-wicket analysis will also ignore all of the poor bowling that he did. Except for early on in Sydney and maybe Perth, he did do a lot of that. His economy rate is a reflection of his oft-erratic line and length, along with the admittedly over-the-top contempt that many of the Australian batsmen appear to have held him in. I do feel rather the same way about Brett Lee's performances during the 2005 Ashes. Sometimes, he was good; often, he was pretty poor.



Comparing RP Singh to Glenn McGrath is simply not valid. In the early 2000's, McGrath was an established world-class bowler, in every format of the game. Glenn McGrath also had oft-exemplary control of line, length and seam (if not swing, at that time). He also had a far better bouncer and yorker than RP Singh could muster. RP probably generates more swing than the early 2000's version of McGrath, but that's about it.



True, but I've never rated Shaun Tait, anyway (although he is very dangerous on 'his day').



I recall him getting wickets with quite a few wide half-volleys. Sure he was swinging the ball, but so was Scott Muller when he got wickets in the exact same manner. We're not gonna say that he bowled well, now, are we?

No doubt that he did bowl 6-7 good deliveries to get wickets, though.



You're right. But how many of his wickets should be due to impromptu poor shots?



Well, it's not if you set-up the batsman before hand, ala Brett Lee. RP Singh lacks the control to do this on a frequent basis.



Like I said, he bowled well early on in Sydney and even Perth. I feel that RP Singh's performances were grossly overrated, but that's not to say that he didn't bowl well sometimes.



I don't know. He was too damn expensive, for my liking, with too much dross (did you see the rest of the Sydney Test match?).



Maybe.

You double posted, BTW.

you know little about cricket na
you know nothing

saying mcgrath got less swing than r.p in 2000's is foolish,
mcgrath is a seam bowler while R.P is a swing bowler
so no comparisons can be made he is newbie and mcgrath is a legend

and the point he was making was bowling is about building up pressure
most time its the pressure that gets batsman out

R.P singh has a good bouncer and yorker, and better pace than mcgrath,


and you expect a 22 year old to be the best bowler or what,give him some time
he will get control its progression my friend

 

[Athlai]

I pity the fool...

 

[DaRick]

I pity the fool...

He does use that word a lot, doesn't he? I'll reply to his 'posts' when I feel like it.

 

[vic_orthdox]

RP's got to bowl full attacking lines to get wickets, through his swing. He'll always go for runs because of that. And agree completely with T_C, isolating wicket-taking balls is a completely useless exercise.

 

[Manee]

I've just noticed something about RP Singh - he releases the ball always with the seam pointing to a right handers fine leg - this is probably what causes his issue of line, as the ball will not go where the body has aligned it to go. Saj Mahmood suffers from a similar issue, with him pointing to third man, naturally, since he is right handed.

 

[vic_orthdox]

It'll start where the body is aligned to go, and then it will swing.

 

[Manee]

It'll start where the body is aligned to go, and then it will swing.

Apologies, was unclear, the seam points to fine leg, but so does the wrist. The wrist is behind the ball, not pointing where the body is.

 

[DaRick]

RP's got to bowl full attacking lines to get wickets, through his swing.

Can a ER of 4+ be justified through these means? I'm skeptical.

 

[Cricket_God]

I've just noticed something about RP Singh - he releases the ball always with the seam pointing to a right handers fine leg - this is probably what causes his issue of line, as the ball will not go where the body has aligned it to go. Saj Mahmood suffers from a similar issue, with him pointing to third man, naturally, since he is right handed.

line and length comes with expereince as any bowler will tell you,
young bowlers generally lack control mainly ,

and do not compare him to saj ,he has better control than him

and r.p singh bowls on the flattest picthes in the world
in his debut on the flattest track in the universe he got a five wicket hall
so stats do not always tell the whole story,

 

[Manee]

line and length comes with expereince as any bowler will tell you,
young bowlers generally lack control mainly ,

and do not compare him to saj ,he has better control than him

and r.p singh bowls on the flattest picthes in the world
in his debut on the flattest track in the universe he got a five wicket hall
so stats do not always tell the whole story,

I know stats do not tell the entire story, but I have watched RP Singh bowl extensively and seen that his control of line is unacceptable for international level.

PS: It is a shame that you and Da Rick got off on the wrong foot, considering you are both Dragonball Z fans.

 

[Cricket_God]

Can a ER of 4+ be justified through these means? I'm skeptical.

he has started his career it will come down and the fact is he played
5 tests on the flattest tracks in off season also so stats are misleading

 

[Cricket_God]

I know stats do not tell the entire story, but I have watched RP Singh bowl extensively and seen that his control of line is unacceptable for international level.

PS: It is a shame that you and Da Rick got off on the wrong foot, considering you are both Dragonball Z fans.

in india we had to throw young bowlers to learn lessons at international level
so we have to bear with it,but he has great potential

his action is the simple and allows him to get bounce when he needs to hit the pitch and swing it also,and waqar younis is his great fan.

he wrote his views and i expressed my views so no problem,also i think this thread was about ishant and we have discussed everything here.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Can a ER of 4+ be justified through these means? I'm skeptical.

From what I saw of RP, was a bowler who still didn't know how to bowl in a constrictive manner, e.g back of a length, in tight, make the batsman hit to mid-off/mid-on. How the Australians tend to bowl, especially at home. He still bowls in an attacking manner throughout. I think that's more to do with his high run rate; he doesn't have the bowling smarts at the moment to adjust his game.

 

[Cricket_God]

From what I saw of RP, was a bowler who still didn't know how to bowl in a constrictive manner, e.g back of a length, in tight, make the batsman hit to mid-off/mid-on. How the Australians tend to bowl, especially at home. He still bowls in an attacking manner throughout. I think that's more to do with his high run rate; he doesn't have the bowling smarts at the moment to adjust his game.

spot on,in india we have blood youngsters in international level as if we play
them in first class due to flat pitches most bowlers will be military medium pacers
if they play domestic crikcet for a few years.

R.p is 22 and learning and the fact is he swings the ball at good pace,also his muscles are
building and he will be at his fastest around 25/26 so give him some time.

 

[Manee]

spot on,in india we have blood youngsters in international level as if we play
them in first class due to flat pitches most bowlers will be military medium pacers
if they play domestic crikcet for a few years.

It would be much more productive to make domestic cricket a better tuning station for future talent. The money generated from the IPL could be used to improve pitches, outfields, etc. I don't agree with blooding youngsters into international cricket unless it is a policy of youth in ODI cricket - either you are good enough for international cricket or you are not, simple as that.

R.p is 22 and learning and the fact is he swings the ball at good pace,also his muscles are
building and he will be at his fastest around 25/26 so give him some time.

I'd like to think he'd be his fastest at 25/26, be Indian pacers tend to slow down after a few years in international cricket - look at Nehra, Zaheer and Irfan Pathan.

Cricket_God, what's up with the funky formatting of your posts with line breaks every so often. And also, you were saying on PC that you had Orissa trials, how did they go?

 

[Cricket_God]

It would be much more productive to make domestic cricket a better tuning station for future talent. The money generated from the IPL could be used to improve pitches, outfields, etc. I don't agree with blooding youngsters into international cricket unless it is a policy of youth in ODI cricket - either you are good enough for international cricket or you are not, simple as that.



I'd like to think he'd be his fastest at 25/26, be Indian pacers tend to slow down after a few years in international cricket - look at Nehra, Zaheer and Irfan Pathan.

Cricket_God, what's up with the funky formatting of your posts with line breaks every so often. And also, you were saying on PC that you had Orissa trials, how did they go?

Its a myth that indian pacers slow down its just media hype and the speed guns used in sub continent.,

nehra,pathan,zaheer are bowling quicker in terms of average speed.

yeah got a 45 but what can i do i am no minister son here money is everything.
we have that fatass corrupt minister as our head of oca

 

[Manee]

Its a myth that indian pacers slow down its just media hype and the speed guns used in sub continent.,

nehra,pathan,zaheer are bowling quicker in terms of average speed.

Agreed that the media over hypes the decline in pace, but one is certainly evident. Zaheer is in no way whatsoever quicker than New Zealand 2002/3. Likewise, Pathan has lost a yard of pace since he came onto the scene. He came onto the scene at 135kph, dropped to about 125kph and is now at about 130kph. Also, Pathan has lost pace off the pitch too; his short balls are as inoccuous as is possible. Nehra has also lost a yard of pace, he timed at 145kph in WC2003 and although the readings there were high, he bowls at 130kph now and I doubt that South African conditions can increase speed by 15kph.

yeah got a 45 but what can i do i am no minister son here money is everything.

What is 'a 45'? Out of 50?