Ambrose Vs Mcgrath?

[Xuhaib]

Reckon Akram is on many former greats list as the most difficult bowler faced.Martin Crowe and Lara surely Dravid in 2000 also held that opinion not sure whether he has changed it now.

 

[zaremba]

Its interesting, I've thought that myself about seamers at times. Instructive footage was McGrath to Warner in an Allstars T20 last summer - tightened him up with two balls moving into him, then says over the mic - I'll take this one away here, its coming straight to you at slip Warnie.

Sure enough, next ball, moves away, Warner nicks it and Gilly takes it in front of Warne.

Footage is probably on YouTube if you want to have a look at it.

Blimey. Well if he could genuinely do this then that's pretty darned impressive.

Swing movement always looks prettier but seam movement, when done well, may actually be more effective Less chance for the batsman to adjust. Perhaps?

 

[GotSpin]

Blimey. Well if he could genuinely do this then that's pretty darned impressive.

Swing movement always looks prettier but seam movement, when done well, may actually be more effective Less chance for the batsman to adjust. Perhaps?

Always felt it was easier to react to a seaming delivery then swinging myself. Nothing worse than a ball changing its flight plans mid air as a batsmen.

 

[zaremba]

Always felt it was easier to react to a seaming delivery then swinging myself. Nothing worse than a ball changing its flight plans mid air as a batsmen.

Yeah I suppose it's harder to judge the path of a swinging ball, but on the other hand you do get more time to adjust than with a seamer (since a swinging ball will generally swing before it pitches; having said which I suppose a swinging ball will often be pitched up a little bit further than a seamer).

Personally I have virtually no useful first-hand knowledge of such matters, my batting talents being such that I can rarely lay bat on a slow straight delivery, so these subtleties are wasted on me.

 

[GotSpin]

Yeah I suppose it's harder to judge the path of a swinging ball, but on the other hand you do get more time to adjust than with a seamer (since a swinging ball will generally swing before it pitches; having said which I suppose a swinging ball will often be pitched up a little bit further than a seamer).

Personally I have virtually no useful first-hand knowledge of such matters, my batting talents being such that I can rarely lay bat on a slow straight delivery, so these subtleties are wasted on me.

With Mcs pin point accuracy, and ability to have batsmen confused as to whether they should play on the front or back foot combined with his other array of tricks, seam, as obviously witnessed, was good enough to do more than an adequate job.

From personal experiences, however, swing is just so much harder to face.

 

[Top_Cat]

Blimey. Well if he could genuinely do this then that's pretty darned impressive.

Saw it myself too, was a great bit of bowling. Poor Warner, surrounded by Warne and Gilly with McGrath steaming in, even post-retirement, looked hapless.

Swing movement always looks prettier but seam movement, when done well, may actually be more effective Less chance for the batsman to adjust. Perhaps?

It's the better all-wicket option, I reckon.

 

[zaremba]

It's the better all-wicket option, I reckon.

Which?

 

[Manee]

A lot of people point out Ambrose's pace, but was he really that much quicker than McGrath? I've never seen an Ambrose spell (albeit, I haven't seen much of him), that'd be classed as very quick. As for Mcgrath, I simply cannot understand people saying that he is boring to watch, he has an excellent strike rate and average, he took wickets at a top rate and beat the bat often when he wasn't getting people out. People discredit his accuracy as a mere facet of his bowling, but I'd argue he was on a par on his own regarding accuracy, even when compared to fellow great fast bowlers. His hawkeye pitchmaps have often been truly extraordinary.

 

[archie mac]

A lot of people point out Ambrose's pace, but was he really that much quicker than McGrath? I've never seen an Ambrose spell (albeit, I haven't seen much of him), that'd be classed as very quick. As for Mcgrath, I simply cannot understand people saying that he is boring to watch, he has an excellent strike rate and average, he took wickets at a top rate and beat the bat often when he wasn't getting people out. People discredit his accuracy as a mere facet of his bowling, but I'd argue he was on a par on his own regarding accuracy, even when compared to fellow great fast bowlers. His hawkeye pitchmaps have often been truly extraordinary.

I find it hard to understand that people thought he was anything but boring to watch, still a fine bowler and even a great one when you look at his stats.

I watched Ambrose beat Mark Taylor with sheer pace in the latters first Test bowling him twice with Taylor being late on both yorkers (the first was a no-ball)

Not sure if there is vision, but the over to Dean Jones after he asked Ambrose to take off his white sweat bands, was an over McGrath could only dream about

 

[zaremba]

A lot of people point out Ambrose's pace, but was he really that much quicker than McGrath? I've never seen an Ambrose spell (albeit, I haven't seen much of him), that'd be classed as very quick. As for Mcgrath, I simply cannot understand people saying that he is boring to watch, he has an excellent strike rate and average, he took wickets at a top rate and beat the bat often when he wasn't getting people out. People discredit his accuracy as a mere facet of his bowling, but I'd argue he was on a par on his own regarding accuracy, even when compared to fellow great fast bowlers. His hawkeye pitchmaps have often been truly extraordinary.

I agree about McGrath. As to Ambrose, in the late 80s and early 90s he was capable of genuinely quick spells.

McGrath himself was pretty quick for the first part of his career. But of the two Curtly definitely had the edge as far as top speed was concerned.

 

[Top_Cat]

Which?

Seam. I've maintained for a while now, though, that the batting techniques of the world are ripe for the plucking for someone who can swing the ball really well (wrote a CW article about it, in fact ). Dale Steyn is on the job at least.

And yeah, Ambi was pretty quick early days. Not an all-out speedster but probably a lick or two quicker than McGrath for a year or two longer. Ambi's outrageous seam movement made him look faster in retrospect than he was, I reckon.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Blimey. Well if he could genuinely do this then that's pretty darned impressive.

Swing movement always looks prettier but seam movement, when done well, may actually be more effective Less chance for the batsman to adjust. Perhaps?

I'd agree, if you can move it off a good length regularly it gives batsman practically no time to adjust. If you can swing it late then that's also very difficult to play.

I'd also imagine McGrath had more control over the seam movement than we would think.

 

[Stapel]

Yep but the seam movement is what all seamers ought to be able to get. I think it's probably true that he hit the seam more than most. He also got a lot of bounce. And also for the larger part of his career his pace was pretty sharp.

As for subtle variations, yes he produced them but I'm not entirely sure how deliberate they would have been (reverse-swing etc excepted). I don't know that someone like McGrath could choose which way the ball was going to seam - his seam position for both the ball that moves away and the ball that moves in is identical and it just depends on which way the ball happens to go when it hits the seam.

I remember Angus Fraser once saying his own stock ball was the off-cutter (ie seamer that moves in from the off) - "I try to bowl leg-cutters but usually they don't work and come out as off-cutters instead" - I thought that was quite revealing about the art.

Isn't that (part of) of that art of seam bowling? If you can produce balls that completely randomly cut 2 inches either way, you have a great weapon!

Even at my own crap level, I have bowled (or tried to bowl ) off-cutters that appeared to cut away a fraction from the batsman.

 

[zaremba]

Isn't that (part of) of that art of seam bowling? If you can produce balls that completely randomly cut 2 inches either way, you have a great weapon!

Oh yes, absolutely, and I'd always assumed that this is how a top seamer like McGrath operates.

If however you have control of which way it's going to seam then you can deliberately set up a batsman (3 which seam in followed by one that seams away, for instance) in the same way that a spinner can do.

Random variation would, to a large degree, do this anyway but if you are a "thinking" bowler - and McGrath is often credited with this - then to be able to choose precisely what the ball is going to do allows you to execute a plan with even more precision.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I know Andy Bichel used to hold a ball in a specific manner for it to hit the seam and move inwards, a la an off-cutter.

 

[Xuhaib]

Seam. I've maintained for a while now, though, that the batting techniques of the world are ripe for the plucking for someone who can swing the ball really well (wrote a CW article about it, in fact ). Dale Steyn is on the job at least.

And yeah, Ambi was pretty quick early days. Not an all-out speedster but probably a lick or two quicker than McGrath for a year or two longer. Ambi's outrageous seam movement made him look faster in retrospect than he was, I reckon.

this is why I think a bowler like Anderson is underachieving currently,

 

[GotSpin]

Seam. I've maintained for a while now, though, that the batting techniques of the world are ripe for the plucking for someone who can swing the ball really well (wrote a CW article about it, in fact ). Dale Steyn is on the job at least.

And yeah, Ambi was pretty quick early days. Not an all-out speedster but probably a lick or two quicker than McGrath for a year or two longer. Ambi's outrageous seam movement made him look faster in retrospect than he was, I reckon.

So I guess you believe that if a group of talented bowlers came through in the following years (from varying nations) we could see batting averages drop by the margins that they increased during the early 2000s?

 

[zaremba]

I know Andy Bichel used to hold a ball in a specific manner for it to hit the seam and move inwards, a la an off-cutter.

Interesting, thanks for that.

Why do the TV pundits never tell us any of this? It's a complete dereliction of duty if you ask me. This is something they can usefully inform us about but for whatever reason they just never bother.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Interesting, thanks for that.

Why do the TV pundits never tell us any of this? It's a complete dereliction of duty if you ask me. This is something they can usefully inform us about but for whatever reason they just never bother.

a) the number of batsmen in the commentary box.
b) fast bowlers like to keep their secrets amongst themselves; there can be a bit of a "once you've reached a certain level, they'll let you in on their secrets" about the best of them.

 

[zaremba]

a) the number of batsmen in the commentary box.
b) fast bowlers like to keep their secrets amongst themselves; there can be a bit of a "once you've reached a certain level, they'll let you in on their secrets" about the best of them.

Does Ian Pont still visit CW? If so I'd love to get his inside info on this sort of thing.