Swalec Stadium

[rivera213]

Na, I saw every Australia vs South Africa game and barring the dismissals, none of the Saffie batsmen showed signs of discomfort against Siddle.

Vertical movement doesn't account and isn't an excuse for playing the wrong line. If a ball takes off but the batsman is playing the correct line, the ball will hit higher on the bat- but the line will still be correct.

Not playing the correct bounce doesn't mean anything in these examples since whether the ball was 1 inch off the ground of 10 feet, the bat position was wrong. When you see people turning their bats (so the handle is facing square and the toe facing square leg) that's incorrect technique. Move the bat straight up in the same line (of course this can't be done when the ball swings) or out of the way and there wont be a problem.

Some of the dismissals were shots from bowlers so you can let them off for poor judgement but MacKenzie isn't a test level batsman on wickets which aren't flat and slow IMO, Boucher played a very wild shot for the one he verbally lashed himself for, Smith's was lack of footwork.

McGrath bogged batsmen down with his relentlessly impeccible line and length. It often forced batsmen into taking a risk, or risk not scoring for long periods. He also had the ability to use natural conditions in his favour- no-one I've seen has used the slope at Lord's better than he and 26 wickets @ 11.50, 27.3SR proves he was great at Lord's.

Whether Siddle will do well in the Ashes remains to be seen and if he does so, I'll be the first to say well done. IAH, I don't really care if he does or doesn't bowl well as long as we win. Lol

 

[Richard]

Yeah, that was going to be my next comment. I don't want to sound conceited Rich, but I would go as far as to venture I'm a better bowler than you by quite a margin. Not good enough to play FC or Tests though I'll admit. Nowhere near it. I was good at hitting the seam though and moving it around and have had a large number of deliveries jump off the seam.

I don't doubt you're a considerably better bowler than me - you (I presume) have rather more physical talent and assets than I will ever have (height, speed of arm, speed of leg, natural fitness, etc.). However, I'm actually very into the aspects which are possible to learn, and I do know about how to use the seam, use the crease, gain maximum purchase out of your action, etc.

 

[Top_Cat]

Na, I saw every Australia vs South Africa game and barring the dismissals, none of the Saffie batsmen showed signs of discomfort against Siddle.

You and I saw different games then.

Vertical movement doesn't account and isn't an excuse for playing the wrong line. If a ball takes off but the batsman is playing the correct line, the ball will hit higher on the bat- but the line will still be correct.

Still missing the point; only if the bat is totally stationary at contact will vertical movement be nullified. But Test batters play more forcing shots, on the front foot especially, rarely do Test guys just dead-bat the ball. Vertical movement does help with taking the edge. It's why pace bowlers are taught to always at least try to hit the seam because lateral movement at higher levels isn't enough. You need the ball to appear to be 'rushing' onto the bat. This is exactly what seam movement does.

McGrath bogged batsmen down with his relentlessly impeccible line and length. It often forced batsmen into taking a risk, or risk not scoring for long periods. He also had the ability to use natural conditions in his favour- no-one I've seen has used the slope at Lord's better than he and 26 wickets @ 11.50, 27.3SR proves he was great at Lord's.

McGrath being merely accurate is a myth. To be not just a Test-level bowler but an all-time great, you reckon all you have to do is be really accurate at 125-130km/h? You just have to look at his dismissals; McGrath had a heaps of clean-bowleds and LBW's as well as catches behind the wicket. He beat batsmen, didn't just wait for them to get frustrated and have a go.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Na, I saw every Australia vs South Africa game and barring the dismissals, none of the Saffie batsmen showed signs of discomfort against Siddle.

Vertical movement doesn't account and isn't an excuse for playing the wrong line. If a ball takes off but the batsman is playing the correct line, the ball will hit higher on the bat- but the line will still be correct.

Not playing the correct bounce doesn't mean anything in these examples since whether the ball was 1 inch off the ground of 10 feet, the bat position was wrong. When you see people turning their bats (so the handle is facing square and the toe facing square leg) that's incorrect technique. Move the bat straight up in the same line (of course this can't be done when the ball swings) or out of the way and there wont be a problem.

Some of the dismissals were shots from bowlers so you can let them off for poor judgement but MacKenzie isn't a test level batsman on wickets which aren't flat and slow IMO, Boucher played a very wild shot for the one he verbally lashed himself for, Smith's was lack of footwork.

McGrath bogged batsmen down with his relentlessly impeccible line and length. It often forced batsmen into taking a risk, or risk not scoring for long periods. He also had the ability to use natural conditions in his favour- no-one I've seen has used the slope at Lord's better than he and 26 wickets @ 11.50, 27.3SR proves he was great at Lord's.

Whether Siddle will do well in the Ashes remains to be seen and if he does so, I'll be the first to say well done. IAH, I don't really care if he does or doesn't bowl well as long as we win. Lol

Like someone else said, the bat's not always perfectly perpendicular to the ground, so what you suggest will always happen won't.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I don't doubt you're a considerably better bowler than me - you (I presume) have rather more physical talent and assets than I will ever have (height, speed of arm, speed of leg, natural fitness, etc.). However, I'm actually very into the aspects which are possible to learn, and I do know about how to use the seam, use the crease, gain maximum purchase out of your action, etc.

If this is truly the case then you should have seen at least a few gain more vertical movement off the seam.

 

[cowboy up]

McGrath being merely accurate is a myth. To be not just a Test-level bowler but an all-time great, you reckon all you have to do is be really accurate at 125-130km/h? You just have to look at his dismissals; McGrath had a heaps of clean-bowleds and LBW's as well as catches behind the wicket. He beat batsmen, didn't just wait for them to get frustrated and have a go.[/QUOTE]

totally agree,if you can find footage [maybe on you tube] of the first test at lords in 05 series [not sure which innings] mcgrath takes 5 for not many and the movement off the pitch from around 15 inches outside off stump was unbelivable.[if you have a copy of ea sports cricket 07,go to the ashes scenarios and choose england,the first one is "peitersen to the rescue"then they show you the actuall footage of what im talking about,best cricket game ever ****s all over ricky pointing 07]mcgrath had a great bowling mind,he still was deadly accurate but it was his ability to out think the batsman,get everything possible out of a pitch with bounce and seam movement, deceive the batsman with pace[he had a handy slower ball] and also when he had a batsman under pressure he very rarely let them off with a rubbish ball that the batsman can put away and release all the pressure that he has been working hard to build

 

[Smith]

Another big differentiator between McGrath was that the relative number of hit-me balls he bowled were ridiculously small in number. This made the batsman take the additional risk to get on top of him and most often than not, McGrath won/

 

[cowboy up]

Another big differentiator between McGrath was that the relative number of hit-me balls he bowled were ridiculously small in number. This made the batsman take the additional risk to get on top of him and most often than not, McGrath won/

hence what i said at the end of my thread,very rarely let the pressure off the batsman with a rubbish ball

 

[oitoitoi]

Another big differentiator between McGrath was that the relative number of hit-me balls he bowled were ridiculously small in number. This made the batsman take the additional risk to get on top of him and most often than not, McGrath won/

Sehwag once said that Mcgrath was the only bowler he ever faced where he felt he had to show him respect and couldn't hit him at will, he was just so ridiculously accurate.

 

[Uppercut]

McGrath being merely accurate is a myth. To be not just a Test-level bowler but an all-time great, you reckon all you have to do is be really accurate at 125-130km/h? You just have to look at his dismissals; McGrath had a heaps of clean-bowleds and LBW's as well as catches behind the wicket. He beat batsmen, didn't just wait for them to get frustrated and have a go.

Quite. His accuracy was what makes him stand out from other all-time greats, just as Ambrose had his bounce and Marshall had his lateral movement. It's stupid to think that means it was the only weapon he had.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Another big differentiator between McGrath was that the relative number of hit-me balls he bowled were ridiculously small in number. This made the batsman take the additional risk to get on top of him and most often than not, McGrath won/

The funny thing is though, a lot of McGrath's wickets seemed to come from batsmen getting edges not playing risky shots, or him beating them all ends up.

 

[Son Of Coco]

McGrath being merely accurate is a myth. To be not just a Test-level bowler but an all-time great, you reckon all you have to do is be really accurate at 125-130km/h? You just have to look at his dismissals; McGrath had a heaps of clean-bowleds and LBW's as well as catches behind the wicket. He beat batsmen, didn't just wait for them to get frustrated and have a go.

Yeah, he was a hell of a lot more than that. I've read on here a few times that McGrath was 'just accurate' or 'he bored the batsman out'. May as well just type 'I don't really have much of a clue'. (Not aiming that at anyone in particular by the way, as I can't remember who said the above, but it sticks out each time it's written).

 

[Top_Cat]

Quite. His accuracy was what makes him stand out from other all-time greats, just as Ambrose had his bounce and Marshall had his lateral movement. It's stupid to think that means it was the only weapon he had.

Ambi is often criminally under-rated too. I think they're just those sorts of sportsmen where you have to be, for example, a pace bowler to understand just how good they were and how difficult it was to do what they did.

 

[rivera213]

You and I saw different games then.

Or you saw the game as an Australian fan and I saw it as a neutral.

Still missing the point; only if the bat is totally stationary at contact will vertical movement be nullified. But Test batters play more forcing shots, on the front foot especially, rarely do Test guys just dead-bat the ball. Vertical movement does help with taking the edge. It's why pace bowlers are taught to always at least try to hit the seam because lateral movement at higher levels isn't enough. You need the ball to appear to be 'rushing' onto the bat. This is exactly what seam movement does.

There were no edges in the wickets Siddle took wickets with though (I mentioned that the best deliveries "Vicious", love that nick btw, bowled in the game weren't justly rewarded) the bat COMPLETELY missed the ball. You can't do that unless you completely misjudge the line.

Not trying to be patronising or antyhing here, just explaining what I mean. If the the ball is inline with off-stump and you're playing a front-foot shot assuming it'll hit the sweet spot and the ball takes a wicket bounce and spits at you, you shouldn't move the bat away from that line unless you're certain it will go over the wicket. None of the deliveries were the batsmen played the wrong line spat so much to warrant moving the bat away (and that didn't happen with the wickets).

I agree vertical movement helps taking an edge (and that at least shows the bat is in the right line) but I'm talking specifically about the wicket taking deliveries from Siddle. They were mostly down to batsmen errors IMO.

McGrath being merely accurate is a myth. To be not just a Test-level bowler but an all-time great, you reckon all you have to do is be really accurate at 125-130km/h? You just have to look at his dismissals; McGrath had a heaps of clean-bowleds and LBW's as well as catches behind the wicket. He beat batsmen, didn't just wait for them to get frustrated and have a go.

I didn't say he was ONLY accurate, though he did bowl long spells were he bogged batsmen down and force them to play shots and got wickets from that way of bowling.

He beat batsmen moreso in the first 3/4 of his career and only really bowled as low as 125-130kph for the last couple of years. At peak he bowled up to 92mph, people don't think he bowled that fast because he didn't look to be putting much in, but I remember him clocking 90mph+ a fair few times and got much more clean bowled and lbw then. He still had the accuracy and ability ut it's easier to bowl someone at 90mph than it is at 77mph.

He bowled as many jaffas as anyone else in the last few years of his career though- the balls to Vaughan and Pietersen in the Ashes as well as a number in the spell at Lord's in 2005, but he didn't bowl at 77mph or so for an extended time in his career so I don't agree that he had his whole career being a medium to medium-fast bowler and outfoxing batsmen.

 

[Top_Cat]

Or you saw the game as an Australian fan and I saw it as a neutral.

Err, no.

He beat batsmen moreso in the first 3/4 of his career and only really bowled as low as 125-130kph for the last couple of years. At peak he bowled up to 92mph, people don't think he bowled that fast because he didn't look to be putting much in, but I remember him clocking 90mph+ a fair few times and got much more clean bowled and lbw then. He still had the accuracy and ability ut it's easier to bowl someone at 90mph than it is at 77mph.

Got past 90mph on occasion, sure. His average speed was around the 135 mark for a lot of his career, though. He's publicly said many times speed wasn't his focus and that he throttled back deliberately because he got more lift. And I distinctly remember, even in his first Test, McGrath's quickest being clocked at 138km/h. And when channel 9 first introduced the speed cameras in 1999, a full 7 years before he retired, McGrath was again around the 130-135km/h mark. In fact it's famous that Greg Blewett was clocked faster in the Adelaide Test that season. Rarely did he try to beat batsmen with speed, just wasn't his tactic. Saying he went past 145km/h regularly or that it was responsible for significant proportion of his wickets isn't really accurate.

 

[rivera213]

Err, no.

Think so.

Johnson bowled superb, Siddle didn't own the batsmen by any means.

Got past 90mph on occasion, sure. His average speed was around the 135 mark for a lot of his career, though. He's publicly said many times speed wasn't his focus and that he throttled back deliberately because he got more lift. And I distinctly remember, even in his first Test, McGrath's quickest being clocked at 138km/h. And when channel 9 first introduced the speed cameras in 1999, a full 7 years before he retired, McGrath was again around the 130-135km/h mark. In fact it's famous that Greg Blewett was clocked faster in the Adelaide Test that season. Rarely did he try to beat batsmen with speed, just wasn't his tactic. Saying he went past 145km/h regularly or that it was responsible for significant proportion of his wickets isn't really accurate.

You missed the point. I wasn't saying he was a Dennis Lillee, but that it was easier to get lbw, bowled and edges bowling.

The Aussie speed guns are notorious for being the least accurate, but McGrath has also clocked 90mph+ a number of times in Australia from memory.

McGrath was around the 135-140kph/84-87mph mark a lot of the time in the middle part of his career which is much faster in reality than 77mph. It's not just me who says he was considerably slower in the last few years of his career than when he was at peak, it's every commentator. 84mph with his skill, accuracy and cunning was more than enough.

A drop in 10kph is pretty significant, though obviously since Glenn didn't bank on pace, it didn't hinder him as much as it will Brett Lee.

 

[Smith]

The funny thing is though, a lot of McGrath's wickets seemed to come from batsmen getting edges not playing risky shots, or him beating them all ends up.

Edges imho are more due to batsmen playing shots instead of leaving the ball right? McGrath was as skilled as any fast bowler ever to have bowled on planet earth, and he had the bonus of nagging accuracy. He owned lesser batsman with his superb skill and he owned the best ones with their weakness, by gripping a deathhold on their egos. For me he is the best modern fast bowler.

 

[Uppercut]

Ambi is often criminally under-rated too. I think they're just those sorts of sportsmen where you have to be, for example, a pace bowler to understand just how good they were and how difficult it was to do what they did.

Yeah, he sure is. He had the misfortune of playing at the same time as Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Walsh, Donald and Pollock. When incredibly good quicks are so common it's easy to forget just how impressive what they did was.

 

[Top_Cat]

Think so.

Johnson bowled superb, Siddle didn't own the batsmen by any means.

Haha, what? Who said he did? You're essentially charging he bowled poo and took poles which is just a smidge harsh.

Accusation of nationalistic bias is a nothing statement and a cheap shot.

You missed the point. I wasn't saying he was a Dennis Lillee, but that it was easier to get lbw, bowled and edges bowling.

The Aussie speed guns are notorious for being the least accurate,

Says who? It's a pretty non-sensical thing to say anyway since just about everyone uses Dopler speed guns anyway. If the guns used in Aus are inaccurate, so are the rest.

but McGrath has also clocked 90mph+ a number of times in Australia from memory.

Of course he has. I saw him get past 140km/h a few times in the 2003 WC against Namibia too.

McGrath was around the 135-140kph/84-87mph mark a lot of the time in the middle part of his career which is much faster in reality than 77mph. It's not just me who says he was considerably slower in the last few years of his career than when he was at peak, it's every commentator. 84mph with his skill, accuracy and cunning was more than enough.

A drop in 10kph is pretty significant, though obviously since Glenn didn't bank on pace, it didn't hinder him as much as it will Brett Lee.

I still think you're focussing in on his top pace. His average pace, without knowing for sure myself, would have dropped 5km/h over his career. Max. No doubt he had more zip early on, as is to be expected, but even then all that really meant was that he was more consistently in the 135-140km/h bracket than ratcheting it up past 145km/h regularly.

TBH, it's a moot point. Even when bowling slower, McGrath was still beating top players with movement and doing it just as well as he was with a little more speed. Harking way back to the key point, there's no way McGrath was merely an accurate bowler who waited for mistakes from the batsmen.

 

[Trumpers_Ghost]

Think so.

Johnson bowled superb, Siddle didn't own the batsmen by any means.




You missed the point. I wasn't saying he was a Dennis Lillee, but that it was easier to get lbw, bowled and edges bowling.

The Aussie speed guns are notorious for being the least accurate, but McGrath has also clocked 90mph+ a number of times in Australia from memory.

McGrath was around the 135-140kph/84-87mph mark a lot of the time in the middle part of his career which is much faster in reality than 77mph. It's not just me who says he was considerably slower in the last few years of his career than when he was at peak, it's every commentator. 84mph with his skill, accuracy and cunning was more than enough.

A drop in 10kph is pretty significant, though obviously since Glenn didn't bank on pace, it didn't hinder him as much as it will Brett Lee.

This I've never heard before

maybe I should have contested all those speeding fines....