Will Tait break Akhtars world record?

[Richard]

TBH, I don't agree. I have seen batters very late on the ball or miss by miles to guys the speedgun says they shouldn't. Reckon Curtly's seam movement gave him an extra 10Km/h visually, for example.

That's why the naked eye - of batsman as well as spectator - isn't a reliable gauge of speed of delivery.

Other factors to add to the "why was he late on that when it was only 86mph?" include: the batsman doesn't always pick the ball up as early as he'd normally expect to (some grounds you have to ask what the point is in the sightscreen at all, so little use is it); some bowlers lose way more speed off the pitch than others; a bowler with an awkward action (a la Courtney Walsh or Colin Croft) will as-a-rule be much more difficult to sight than a bowler with the perfect natural action like Andy Roberts or Michael Holding; a batsman always has more time to play a short one than a full one because the most loss of speed occurs on pitching.

Basically I always have to laugh when a commentator says "well that ball was clearly more than 86mph because of the way the batsman reacted". Nope, don't work like that. The scientific instrument is infinitely less likely to have erred than the human eye. But so many human brains don't fully understand what it is their eye is seeing.

Akhtar's quick ball to Knight he played with relatively little fuss and he went for 8 an over that day.

Just FTR, Shoaib's opening spell in that match was a damn good one, as well as being unbelievably quick. It was later that he - and in fact the rest of the Pakistan attack - went to pot.

In 2001 there was an Australia vs Pakistan game where Shoaib broke the record for fastest recorded delivery at Gilchrist (97.6mph or something) which was a wide one that Gilchrist whacked through point in characteristic style. The next one was about 96mph and he was late on it, bowled, even though it didn't noticeably swing so much as one degree.

Top-class batsmen almost never get beaten for pace but someone like Gilchrist, with his high backlift, was a prime candidate. Pretty sure I once saw Shoaib smash his stumps when it seemed he'd got the bat about halfway down too. TBF though, that was a big inswinger which no batsman in history would've had a realistic hope in hell of playing. But I reckon some would've got closer than Gilchrist did.

 

[Richard]

Well, Murali and Warne on those, would be a nightmare. Kumble would be far worse than a nightmare, because he pitches everything within stumps.

That's true, but it's their misfortune they never got to bowl on them. Verity got advantages Kumble did not, so thus while Verity might not have been much if at all better than Kumble he was certainly an incrdibly difficult bowler to face a damn sight more often than Kumble was.

Ditto a great many other bowlers on either side of the uncovered-wickets divide. Underwood, whose career spanned it, is proof enough of that; averaged about 16 in the days of fully uncovered decks and about 30 after they begun to be covered.

 

[Richard]

How so?

Batsmen can analyse their own technique and improve it same way bowlers can. Batsmen can analyse a bowler's strengths and weaknesses the same way bowlers can analyse a batsman's.

The technological study of bowling and batting certainly helps offer the chance for batsmen and bowlers to get better, but it certainly doesn't offer one the chance to improve more than the other.

 

[L Trumper]

Top-class batsmen almost never get beaten for pace but someone like Gilchrist, with his high backlift, was a prime candidate. Pretty sure I once saw Shoaib smash his stumps when it seemed he'd got the bat about halfway down too. TBF though, that was a big inswinger which no batsman in history would've had a realistic hope in hell of playing. But I reckon some would've got closer than Gilchrist did.

I think thats the same spell where he got ricky and two waughs in three balls. Waugh brothers don't have a clue either.

 

[Richard]

FCA also falls short in deciding the kind of chance. Is brushing the fielders fingers at deep extra-cover the same as giving 1st slip a sitter that he drops on his foot?

If you want to discuss this it's probably best we do so privately-ish, save both of us from Marc's imbecilic input.

 

[Richard]

I think thats the same spell where he got ricky and two waughs in three balls. Waugh brothers don't have a clue either.

Well TBF they were both past it by then and didn't have a clue against plenty besides (remember Mark Waugh getting out to a Nathan Astle delivery that was as innocuous a delivery from as nobody a bowler as you could wish to see) but yeah, that spell was all the explanation anyone needs of how, when the best bowlers get it right, it doesn't matter how good the batsmen are - he can simply be too hot to handle.

You couldn't wish to see a better spell than that. If you dig deep enough you'll find the odd few as good (McGrath on the opening afternoon at Lord's in 2005 for instance) but not many, and certainly none better.

 

[Goughy]

Sure does, if you mean it's been detrimental. Sheffield Shield average of 110.

Bradman appears to have a stumping for South Australia. Anyone know the story behind that?

 

[Top_Cat]

Bradman appears to have a stumping for South Australia. Anyone know the story behind that?

Haha, wow, had no idea. Reckon some of the crustier members would know. Might ask around.

 

[Goughy]

Bradman appears to have a stumping for South Australia. Anyone know the story behind that?

Haha, wow, had no idea. Reckon some of the crustier members would know. Might ask around.

That was easy enough to find out. God bless the internet

"15 January 1938: South Australia played a Sheffield Shield match v New South Wales in Sydney. Because South Australia's regular wicket-keeper had a broken finger Bradman kept wickets, stumping one & taking 3 catches"

http://www.cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/16/16490.html

Bill O'Reilly the man stumped

 

[Furball]

Sure does, if you mean it's been detrimental. Sheffield Shield average of 110.

Got a link for that?

Not that I don't believe you, I've either misinterpreted or not properly remembered what was posted.

 

[Top_Cat]

That was easy enough to find out. God bless the internet

"15 January 1938: South Australia played a Sheffield Shield match v New South Wales in Sydney. Because South Australia's regular wicket-keeper had a broken finger Bradman kept wickets, stumping one & taking 3 catches"

The Home of CricketArchive

Bill O'Reilly the man stumped

Hah, he'd have loved that. From what I've read, they were huge rivals.

Got a link for that?

Not that I don't believe you, I've either misinterpreted or not properly remembered what was posted.

Nope, I grabbed his innings' from Cricket Archive and worked it out. Has the same number on Wikipedia, though.

Donald Bradman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[archie mac]

I never heard that Grimmet and O'Riely bowed to Bradman in test cricket. Perhaps you may be able to point a test match they did so.

3rd Test 1942, after Bradman was taken prisoner by Germany, and forced to play against Australia in a Test match on the BCG (Berlin Cricket ground). I know that according to the MCC it was not an official Test match, however at the time (with a threat to kill Bradman) they agreed to give it Test status.

The Scores

Germany

Ehlers Not out 111
Heize Bld O'Reilly 0
Bradman LBW O'Reilly 99.94


Total 2 dec 210.94

Australia all out 0 in both innings after the German fast bowler Helmet bowled with hand grenades painted red. Not allowed but the umpires were both dressed in black

 

[Richard]

Y'know, it took me a few reads to realise that the above post wasn't serious.

 

[Migara]

That was a good fish.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Y'know, it took me a few reads to realise that the above post wasn't serious.

You thought Bradman was taken prisoner by the Germans?

 

[Richard]

Didn't read it from start to finish but begun in the middle. I wasn't aware of Bradman being taken prisoner but am not fully familar with his war years so wouldn't be able to know beyond doubt that it didn't happen. So nothing stood-out on first glance, no.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Not even him getting out for 99.94?

 

[Richard]

It was that bit that caused me to finally twig it.

 

[Faisal1985]

Tait will easily surpass Shoaib....but i personally rather see Steyn bowling

 

[Sir Alex]

It was that bit that caused me to finally twig it.

And you took "several" reads to see that?