Ishant Sharma...overcoached?!

[Cricket_God]

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.



What is 'a 45'? Out of 50?

Zaheer was quick but for short time in those days,nowadays he has better average speed
may not have higher top speed but greater average speed.

irfan-i have seen every match of irfan and i can put my life on line and say
he is bowling quicker than he ever had,as he was bowling well his speed was
thought to be high but in reality he avearges more now and touches 140 kmph
once in awhile

his problem is his action he had a curve like bracken which he has lost in his action
so less pace of the pitch and he is now more of a hit the deck bowler.

nehra- i do not know but he looked quick in the ipl do not read much in to speed guns,
wrong speed guns has lead to irfan downfall as media kept saying to him he has dropped pace and he went for pace
and lost everything.

na 45 runs ,our selection is wierd a tournament of the best clubs is organised and mainly
people get selected in that tournament,usually the top run getter and,anybody who has good contacts does get selected

 

[Manee]

irfan-i have seen every match of irfan and i can put my life on line and say
he is bowling quicker than he ever had,as he was bowling well his speed was
thought to be high but in reality he avearges more now and touches 140 kmph
once in awhile

He touched 140kph in his first stint - however, I accept that the timed speed is the same but everyone acknowledges that he has lost the 'zip' which led to comparisons with Wasim Akram, early in his career.

his problem is his action he had a curve like bracken which he has lost in his action
so less pace of the pitch and he is now more of a hit the deck bowler.

If he has decided to become a hit the deck bowler, it is a crap move. Batsmen have too much time to play him. I agree that he did have a natural arc in his action and I disagree with Sekhar and Lillee, if it was their advice for him to remove it. That being said, it was a mystery to all what the issue with his action was in 2006 and early 2007 that was causing his ****tyness and perhaps it was necessary.

na 45 runs ,our selection is wierd a tournament of the best clubs is organised and mainly
people get selected in that tournament,usually the top run getter,anybody who has good contacts does get selected

How old are you? Did you try out for Orissa's first team?

 

[Cricket_God]

He touched 140kph in his first stint - however, I accept that the timed speed is the same but everyone acknowledges that he has lost the 'zip' which led to comparisons with Wasim Akram, early in his career.



If he has decided to become a hit the deck bowler, it is a crap move. Batsmen have too much time to play him. I agree that he did have a natural arc in his action and I disagree with Sekhar and Lillee, if it was their advice for him to remove it. That being said, it was a mystery to all what the issue with his action was in 2006 and early 2007 that was causing his ****tyness and perhaps it was necessary.



How old are you? Did you try out for Orissa's first team?

19,

 

[Cricket_God]

He touched 140kph in his first stint - however, I accept that the timed speed is the same but everyone acknowledges that he has lost the 'zip' which led to comparisons with Wasim Akram, early in his career.



If he has decided to become a hit the deck bowler, it is a crap move. Batsmen have too much time to play him. I agree that he did have a natural arc in his action and I disagree with Sekhar and Lillee, if it was their advice for him to remove it. That being said, it was a mystery to all what the issue with his action was in 2006 and early 2007 that was causing his ****tyness and perhaps it was necessary.

Actually it was due to his form,he went through a lean patch and media after seeing
the faulty speed guns started saying he has lost his pace,in every interview
he was asked the same thing,and then he tried to increase his pace before the westindies
tour,and did not do well then greg took him to all the great bowlers ,nobody took him to
wasim though.then everybody started mending his action andy roberts said he has to mend his runup,holding said he holds the ball too deep,and now look at him he from being
one fo the brightest prospects in the world is now struggling to find a place in the national team.But i hope he gets back to his natural action as soon
as possible .

Moral of the story-do not notice speed guns in sub continent.

 

[Manee]

Actually it was due to his form,he went through a lean patch and media after seeing
the faulty speed guns started saying he has lost his pace,in every interview
he was asked the same thing,and then he tried to increase his pace before the westindies
tour,and did not do well then greg took him to all the great bowlers ,nobody took him to
wasim though.then everybody started mending his action andy roberts said he has to mend his runup,holding said he holds the ball too deep,and now look at him he from being
one fo the brightest prospects in the world is now struggling to find a place in the national team.

He did go through a lean patch, but he stopped swinging the ball too and lost a lot of accuracy. Speed guns are not simply 'faulty' at international level, but atmospheric conditions can affect the readings depending on the country and altitude - that is a fact. Speed guns will 99% of the time give an accrate comparison between a bowler and his peers in the same match and Pathan was 5-10kph below Munaf, Zaheer, etc, whereas he used to bowl at a similar pace. I agree that it was plain idiocy to send Pathan to bowler after bowler during tournaments and this should have been done away from the national team. It is also silly to have a player see more than one coach in a short period of time. I agree that Wasim would have been the best coach for Pathan and he actually did see him during the Champions Trophy, having subsequent improvement. Alas, the BCCI will not hire Wasim as a consultant though and Wasim would not accept, lest he be called a traitor by hardcore Pakistani fans.

Pathan's issue was a mystery and the BCCI could have avoided the chaos by sending Pathan to the NCA (if only it was in the state it is now, back then) to analyse his action and with him, work for a solution. He cannot ignore information from greats like Holding and Roberts, so he must be kept away from being bombarded with so much information - this is an area where the BCCI monopoly can be positive.

Moral of the story-do not notice speed guns in sub continent.

But the low readings were in West Indies

 

[DaRick]

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,

There's little difference between RP Singh's speeds on Nine and ESPN. Besides, doesn't a cricket ball slow down dramatically upon contact with the pitch where pacemen are concerned? A radar gun should measure a cricket ball's speed before this point. I sincerely doubt that what you claim is true. Do you have any evidence to prove me wrong on this one?

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

I will.

dumb,leading the attack does lead to extra pressure

I meant 'leeway' where me judging him was concerned. I would've thought that this was reasonably obvious, but clearly not.

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

Yes, OK, but there wasn't that much reverse on offer on the whole. I don't, for instance, recall Lee and Johnson getting much, except maybe when they pitched it full.

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

It also allowed Anil Kumble and Harbhajan Singh more time to strut their stuff (albeit disappointingly). I do feel that the pitch was more helpful for spinners than pacemen (Symonds got some deliveries to bounce sharply out of the rough on the last day), so I stand by my prior statements. Not bowling in Adelaide helped RP Singh, contrary to what some think.

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

What an inflammatory statement. Do the world a favour and get the hell over it. Seriously. We don't need people like you whipping up hatred on the forum by flogging a long-dead horse.

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

beacause fools like you do not get late swing.

Whooooooooooooooooosh. Seriously though, WTF?

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

OK, now it's my turn to wonder whether you watched the series. What about Stuart Clark and Mitchell Johnson, then? If they were cannon fodder, what was RP Singh? The modern Patterson Thompson?

 

[DaRick]

you know little about cricket na
you know nothing

Ooooh, he's got me there!



Coming from someone who labelled Stuart Clark 'cannon fodder', though, what can I expect?

saying mcgrath got less swing than r.p in 2000's is foolish

I never said that. Is reading comprehension not one of your strong points?

Besides, the early 2000's version of Glenn McGrath got less swing than RP Singh.

mcgrath is a seam bowler while R.P is a swing bowler

No ****, sherlock.

so no comparisons can be made he is newbie and mcgrath is a legend

I didn't make the comparison, really. Top_Cat did. I merely countered his comparison of RP's situation to Glenn McGrath's. I never once said that the two made for a valid comparison.

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

The point I made was that RP Singh doesn't have enough control to build up pressure consistently, rendering Top_Cat's comparison of him to McGrath's situation void.

R.P singh has a good bouncer and yorker

His bouncer isn't really very good - every time he bowled one, he was often swatted nonchalantly (most notably by Andrew Symonds).

His yorkers are, though, at least in the T20 format. I feel that McGrath exhibited greater control over his than RP, though.

and better pace than mcgrath

So? Is Shaun Tait a legend now, then?

and you expect a 22 year old to be the best bowler or what

Where did I say that I expected him to be? I just simply don't rate him, nor his performances in Australia. Ishant Sharma is better.

give him some time
he will get control its progression my friend

Control is not something you obtain magically. But, it is likely that his control will improve. It will have to, if he wants to be anything more than a sub-Test bowler.

P.S: So you like Dragonball Z, huh? That's very interesting, to say the least. I do, too, obviously (hence my avatar).

 

[Cricket_God]

There's little difference between RP Singh's speeds on Nine and ESPN. Besides, doesn't a cricket ball slow down dramatically upon contact with the pitch where pacemen are concerned? A radar gun should measure a cricket ball's speed before this point. I sincerely doubt that what you claim is true. Do you have any evidence to prove me wrong on this one?



I will.



I meant 'leeway' where me judging him was concerned. I would've thought that this was reasonably obvious, but clearly not.



Yes, OK, but there wasn't that much reverse on offer on the whole. I don't, for instance, recall Lee and Johnson getting much, except maybe when they pitched it full.



It also allowed Anil Kumble and Harbhajan Singh more time to strut their stuff (albeit disappointingly). I do feel that the pitch was more helpful for spinners than pacemen (Symonds got some deliveries to bounce sharply out of the rough on the last day), so I stand by my prior statements. Not bowling in Adelaide helped RP Singh, contrary to what some think.





What an inflammatory statement. Do the world a favour and get the hell over it. Seriously. We don't need people like you whipping up hatred on the forum by flogging a long-dead horse.



Whooooooooooooooooosh. Seriously though, WTF?



OK, now it's my turn to wonder whether you watched the series. What about Stuart Clark and Mitchell Johnson, then? If they're cannon fodder, what does that make RP Singh? The modern Patterson Thompson?

Evidence you want-brett lee did not bowl one ball over 140 in the first test match in the espn speed gun,ishantsharma never toucked 150 in the espnstar speed gun,even
the espn star commentators were following channnel nine
and i will say it on more time-eson measures speed when the ball hits the ground and if you watched the asia cup you would ahve known where as sky,nine,neo sports
measure speed from hands

you want some proof about r.p beating batsman with yorkers and pace check this out-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfSD_9r0bLc
now shut your mouth.

Playing with five bowlers meant fast bowlers could go all out and be rotated,so
it was a loss specially rp being good against lefthanders.and we had less batsman
as we played five bowlers so it was a loss it was like playing 10 men.


I Simply do not rate clark,he is useless on flat tracks against good teams i saw him in
subcontinent against bangladesh and he looked half the bowler.

johnson was cannon fodder most members would agree he does not do anything with the
ball and out of the 16 wikcets he took 5 were of top order batsman and he generally
struggled against top order batsman and the wickets he got by the post you wrote
were of bad shots

 

[Cricket_God]

Ooooh, he's got me there!



Coming from someone who labelled Stuart Clark 'cannon fodder', though, what can I expect?



I never said that. Is reading comprehension not one of your strong points?

Besides, the early 2000's version of Glenn McGrath got less swing than RP Singh.



No ****, sherlock.



I didn't make the comparison, really. Top_Cat did. I merely countered his comparison of RP's situation to Glenn McGrath's. I never once said that the two made for a valid comparison.



The point I made was that RP Singh doesn't have enough control to build up pressure consistently, rendering Top_Cat's comparison of him to McGrath's situation void.



His bouncer isn't really very good - every time he bowled one, he was often swatted nonchalantly (most notably by Andrew Symonds).

His yorkers are, though, at least in the T20 format. I feel that McGrath exhibited greater control over his than RP, though.



So? Is Shaun Tait a legend now, then?



Where did I say that I expected him to be? I just simply don't rate him, nor his performances in Australia. Ishant Sharma is better.



Control is not something you obtain magically. But, it is likely that his control will improve. It will have to, if he wants to be anything more than a sub-Test bowler.

P.S: So you like Dragonball Z, huh? That's very interesting, to say the least. I do, too, obviously (hence my avatar).

control improves as you progress and gain experience you know how to handle match situations well,and do not forget it was his fist tour of australia,in england he
was great also.you may not like him but fact is he did well against your team and got top
order wickets,ishant has more potential than r.p but in cricket as in any sport hardwork
atlast is the winner

i also do not rate clark or johnson ,but thats my opinion as i hate to see fast bowlers
with keeper standing to stumps,and guy who has pace but does not have movement.

 

[Cricket_God]

He did go through a lean patch, but he stopped swinging the ball too and lost a lot of accuracy. Speed guns are not simply 'faulty' at international level, but atmospheric conditions can affect the readings depending on the country and altitude - that is a fact. Speed guns will 99% of the time give an accrate comparison between a bowler and his peers in the same match and Pathan was 5-10kph below Munaf, Zaheer, etc, whereas he used to bowl at a similar pace. I agree that it was plain idiocy to send Pathan to bowler after bowler during tournaments and this should have been done away from the national team. It is also silly to have a player see more than one coach in a short period of time. I agree that Wasim would have been the best coach for Pathan and he actually did see him during the Champions Trophy, having subsequent improvement. Alas, the BCCI will not hire Wasim as a consultant though and Wasim would not accept, lest he be called a traitor by hardcore Pakistani fans.

Pathan's issue was a mystery and the BCCI could have avoided the chaos by sending Pathan to the NCA (if only it was in the state it is now, back then) to analyse his action and with him, work for a solution. He cannot ignore information from greats like Holding and Roberts, so he must be kept away from being bombarded with so much information - this is an area where the BCCI monopoly can be positive.


But the low readings were in West Indies

i meant asian channels

to da rick-did you play the latest dbz game?

 

[Richard]

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

That's absolute nonsense. Line and length comes with bowling more, simple as. The more you bowl, the better your accuracy will be.

Of course, though, there's a peak and a sky to what everyone can achieve. Even if you bowl all day every day (aside from the fact that's impossible from a fitness POV) you'll still not get past your own.

Some good young bowlers can bowl with excellent control - most of the best ones have good control from an early age. And plenty are every bit as wayward (or not so accurate) as they pass their 30th birthday as they were at their 21st.

Simply assuming "he's young, his accuracy will get better" is naive in the extreme. The only way to improve your accuracy is to bowl - lots. Simply getting older and more experienced won't help.

 

[DaRick]

Evidence you want-brett lee did not bowl one ball over 140 in the first test match in the espn speed gun,ishantsharma never toucked 150 in the espnstar speed gun,even
the espn star commentators were following channnel nine
and i will say it on more time-eson measures speed when the ball hits the ground and if you watched the asia cup you would ahve known where as sky,nine,neo sports
measure speed from hands

TBF, I've hardly ever watched NEO Sports coverage.

It's interesting that you say that about Brett Lee, though, because he certainly went well above 140+ km/h using the ESPN speedometer in the Adelaide test match, on a pitch which was not terribly quick. I can't find footage of his bowling in Melbourne using the ESPN speedometer - much of it was removed.

you want some proof about r.p beating batsman with yorkers and pace check this out-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfSD_9r0bLc
now shut your mouth.

Read my reply to your next paragraph. I rate his T20 yorkers quite highly.

Playing with five bowlers meant fast bowlers could go all out and be rotated,so
it was a loss specially rp being good against lefthanders.and we had less batsman
as we played five bowlers so it was a loss it was like playing 10 men.

Having 10 men would usually be something of a burden, but RP Singh is a certified rabbit with the bat and a poor fielder, to boot. A substitute (you'd hope) would add more in the field than him (although there's no such thing as a substitute batsman, obviously).

At any rate, is it really wise to go 'all out' in the scorching heat which is characteristic of Adelaide? Does RP Singh have the stamina to do so? From what I've seen of him, probably not.

I Simply do not rate clark,he is useless on flat tracks against good teams i saw him in
subcontinent against bangladesh and he looked half the bowler.

True to an extent, although that Bangladeshi test occured when he was an international greenhorn.

The pitches that you guys played on were also pretty flat (Perth and Melbourne were the most bowler friendly, but neither offered the seam movement that Clark thrives on). Clark also bowled pretty well against you guys, save for the Adelaide test match.

It is generally true that he is less effective on Adelaide-esque roads, but he's not really 'useless' under any circumstance - he's too accurate and bowls too intelligently. Even if he doesn't take wickets, he can build up pressure, something which RP Singh certainly cannot do.

johnson was cannon fodder most members would agree he does not do anything with the
ball and out of the 16 wikcets he took 5 were of top order batsman and he generally
struggled against top order batsman and the wickets he got by the post you wrote
were of bad shots

Agree about the tailender quotient, although that's more a circumstanial thing than a reflection of how well he bowled in general. But to be fair, let's do a wicket-by-wicket analysis of Johnson:

1) MS Dhoni: Full and wide, reverse swing, but not great bowling
2) A Kumble: Moved in then moved away, good delivery
3) RP Singh: Chopped a ball which was moving in onto the stumps, batsman error
4) R Dravid: Short and wide, slashed to slip, not great bowling
5) Harbhajan Singh: Edged to gully, decent delivery
6) V Sehwag: Cramped him for room outside the off, good bowling but a poor shot
7) SC Ganguly: Caught spectacularly off a fairly wide delivery, not a great delivery
8) IK Pathan: Trapped him in front, good bowling
9) RP Singh: Squared him up, got the edge, good bowling
10) SC Ganguly: Full and swinging away, got the edge, probably the only decent delivery he bowled during that spell
11) IK Pathan: Good delivery, drew Pathan forward, bounced and seamed away
12) R Dravid: Good delivery, forced Dravid to play at it outside offstump
13) MS Dhoni: Short and wide, not great bowling, impetuous shot
14) A Kumble: Tired shot off a fairly tired delivery
15) IK Pathan: Trapped lbw after shuffling across, good delivery
16) SC Ganguly: Full, but picked out Hussey at cover - bowling to a plan (perhaps)

By my count, Mitchell Johnson bowled 9-10/16 decent-to-good deliveries to get wickets.

 

[Cricket_God]

That's absolute nonsense. Line and length comes with bowling more, simple as. The more you bowl, the better your accuracy will be.

Of course, though, there's a peak and a sky to what everyone can achieve. Even if you bowl all day every day (aside from the fact that's impossible from a fitness POV) you'll still not get past your own.

Some good young bowlers can bowl with excellent control - most of the best ones have good control from an early age. And plenty are every bit as wayward (or not so accurate) as they pass their 30th birthday as they were at their 21st.

Simply assuming "he's young, his accuracy will get better" is naive in the extreme. The only way to improve your accuracy is to bowl - lots. Simply getting older and more experienced won't help.

Man you just are saying the same thing in a different way,by expereince i meant when he bowls more overs in international cricket and whats the fuss
about r.p he has bolwed well in england ,australia just because some dumb guy is not his fan does not mean much

 

[Top_Cat]

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.

Say it all you want, doesn't make it any more or less true. I didn't agree then and still don't.

DaRick: I take your point that RP wasn't brilliant for the whole series or even the whole Sydney Test. But that spell was brilliant in my view and I think you're not giving him enough credit, especially with what Jack said that a bowler searching for swing, especially in Australia, will go for more runs. As with Richard, just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

 

[DaRick]

control improves as you progress and gain experience you know how to handle match situations well,and do not forget it was his fist tour of australia,in england he
was great also.

Admittedly, I didn't watch much of the Ind.vs.ENG series, mainly because my parents cancelled the subscription to FOX Sports .

If, by 'experience', you mean on-field experience (i.e - bowling lots of overs) then yes, control does improve as you gain experience. Touring party experience does not, though.

you may not like him but fact is he did well against your team and got top
order wickets,ishant has more potential than r.p but in cricket as in any sport hardwork
atlast is the winner

No, he did well sometimes. Often, he was pretty damn poor. There's a difference.

The hard work statement is true, but who of RP Singh and Ishant Sharma has a better work ethic?

i also do not rate clark or johnson ,but thats my opinion as i hate to see fast bowlers
with keeper standing to stumps,and guy who has pace but does not have movement.

Your reasons for disliking Stuart Clark, in particular, are extremely odd, but you have a right to an opinion as much as I do.

 

[DaRick]

to da rick-did you play the latest dbz game?

Truth be told, I haven't played any since January 2002.

However, I have been revisiting the episodes on YouTube, for the first time in years.

 

[Top_Cat]

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

Not justified, as such. Explained. Let's not forget he's still a vastly inexperienced Test bowler. He'll pretty likely come back to Australia a far better bowler, having had a mix of success and going for runs. The point is, from viewing his bowling, he's on the right track and just needs some refinement. He's not a crap bowler.

 

[DaRick]

DaRick: I take your point that RP wasn't brilliant for the whole series or even the whole Sydney Test. But that spell was brilliant in my view and I think you're not giving him enough credit, especially with what Jack said that a bowler searching for swing, especially in Australia, will go for more runs.

Hey, I admitted repeatedly (to you and Cricket_God) that RP Singh bowled well in Sydney early on. I can't deny that, although I have a right not to rate him or his Australian performances in general.

 

[DaRick]

Not justified, as such. Explained. Let's not forget he's still a vastly inexperienced Test bowler. He'll pretty likely come back to Australia a far better bowler, having had a mix of success and going for runs. The point is, from viewing his bowling, he's on the right track and just needs some refinement. He's not a crap bowler.

Given the travails of recent Indian pacemen (Balaji, Nehra, Agarkar, et.al), we'll have to wait to see whether he comes back at all.

 

[Cricket_God]

TBF, I've hardly ever watched NEO Sports coverage.

It's interesting that you say that about Brett Lee, though, because he certainly went well above 140+ km/h using the ESPN speedometer in the Adelaide test match, on a pitch which was not terribly quick. I can't find footage of his bowling in Melbourne using the ESPN speedometer - much of it was removed.



Read my reply to your next paragraph. I rate his T20 yorkers quite highly.



Having 10 men would usually be something of a burden, but RP Singh is a certified rabbit with the bat and a poor fielder, to boot. A substitute (you'd hope) would add more in the field than him (although there's no such thing as a substitute batsman, obviously).

At any rate, is it really wise to go 'all out' in the scorching heat which is characteristic of Adelaide? Does RP Singh have the stamina to do so? From what I've seen of him, probably not.



True to an extent, although that Bangladeshi test occured when he was an international greenhorn.

The pitches that you guys played on were also pretty flat (Perth and Melbourne were the most bowler friendly, but neither offered the seam movement that Clark thrives on). Clark also bowled pretty well against you guys, save for the Adelaide test match.

It is generally true that he is less effective on Adelaide-esque roads, but he's not really 'useless' under any circumstance - he's too accurate and bowls too intelligently. Even if he doesn't take wickets, he can build up pressure, something which RP Singh certainly cannot do.



Agree about the tailender quotient, although that's more a circumstanial thing than a reflection of how well he bowled in general. But to be fair, let's do a wicket-by-wicket analysis of Johnson:

1) MS Dhoni: Full and wide, reverse swing, but not great bowling
2) A Kumble: Moved in then moved away, good delivery
3) RP Singh: Chopped a ball which was moving in onto the stumps, batsman error
4) R Dravid: Short and wide, slashed to slip, not great bowling
5) Harbhajan Singh: Edged to gully, decent delivery
6) V Sehwag: Cramped him for room outside the off, good bowling but a poor shot
7) SC Ganguly: Caught spectacularly off a fairly wide delivery, not a great delivery
8) IK Pathan: Trapped him in front, good bowling
9) RP Singh: Squared him up, got the edge, good bowling
10) SC Ganguly: Full and swinging away, got the edge, probably the only decent delivery he bowled during that spell
11) IK Pathan: Good delivery, drew Pathan forward, bounced and seamed away
12) R Dravid: Good delivery, forced Dravid to play at it outside offstump
13) MS Dhoni: Short and wide, not great bowling, impetuous shot
14) A Kumble: Tired shot off a fairly tired delivery
15) IK Pathan: Trapped lbw after shuffling across, good delivery
16) SC Ganguly: Full, but picked out Hussey at cover - bowling to a plan (perhaps)

By my count, Mitchell Johnson bowled 9-10/16 decent-to-good deliveries to get wickets.

You do not get it do you,
espn star-measures the speed when the ball hits the ground ,
nine-measures the speed from the hand so its the real speed and is quicker

channel nine-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ucvus4uiKE
espn-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=invesDWAgPw

this difference is only of praveen kumar,if you do not believe it now
you are blind.

There is nothing as T20 yorkers,he bowls good yorkers:

R.p Singh is no rabbit with the bat atleast you should not be saying so remember
how his patnership in perth with vvs laxman turned the match and he was saying to laxman that he is comfortable facing tait and laxman should face lee.

man,playing with 5 bowlers would have meant rotating the bowlers so that they do not get tired so they do not have to bowl long spells that the point in playing 5 bowlers

clark bowls well only when ball seams and pety and melbourne did seam a bit,
he is ineffective on flat tracks as he simply does not have a yorker or pace to trouble the batsman,

he is a experienced bowler and rp singh is learning so you cannot expect a younster to
match a experienced guy.also it was rp singh first tour to australia.in england
he bowled well and build up pressure also.

your analysis shows the good deliveries were mainly to tailenders,the fact is he was
no threat to indian toporder he just kept bowling wide out side the off stump.
unless he starts to swing the ball which i doubt he ever will he will
a odi bowler


wait for the champions trophy in pakistan if you say australian picthes are flat,pitches in sub continent
are mother of flatbeds in the world