Cook Vs the WI quartet of the 80s

[Bun]

Look, they bowled turd, no doubt

The guy scored about 770 runs in an away series to Australia though. To call that trivial is just ignorant of Bun and fairly typical of his bitter outlook on any cricket that doesn't involve India.

What Cook did was trivial compared to what the WI 80s bowlers did. I think thats what he meant.

yeah. thanks shri. geraintbhai why the hate?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Umar Gul is hitting his peak now, regularly clocking it in the 90's, so him Asif and Amir would now make a great lineup

 

[Bun]

Why are Amir and Asif even being discussed. They're banned for cheating

so is warne




(from his wife's bedroom i.e )

 

[TumTum]

Depends on how you define a bowler's weakness. It is like saying that bowling the googly was Shane Warne's weakness. It was a weakness in a sense but Warne just didn't need it. While bowlers such as Mushtaq Ahmed, Abdul Qadir, and Kaneria put it to great use. So the inability to bowl certain types of deliveries I will not classify as a weakness.

You are saying that Warne didn't need to use the googly because he simply had many other options.

But Asif does need the ability to bowl short on pitches which are flat otherwise he is too predictable. They are 2 completely different cases, 1 just doesn't need it and the other does. So...

 

[Austerlitz]

One steyn alone is comparable to any one of garner marshall roberts and holding.
And he's talking about 4?
In a proper sporting pitch[not flatbed] let's see how he does vs steyn.....what's his record vs steyn?
I want to see the next SA eng test series if there is one next year for this.

Steyn is the only really GREAT fast bowler active atm.

In tier 2 u have guys liker zaheer,johnson,anderson,morkel.

Thats why i would rate batsman of 80s and 90s far more than others.

Greg chapell faced roberts and holding at their quickest.Also garner croft and ..did he play marshall?Faced Imran hadlee and kapil.Don't know if he faced willis,trueman.

Gavaskar faced the 2 west indies pace batteries plus lillie,thomson,imran,willis,botham,hadlee,qadir.
He had epic duels with marshall.

viv richards faced willis,lillie thomson,hogg,hughes,mcdermott,botham,imran,wasim.kapil,botham,hadlee,qadir.

Lara faced wasim,waqar at their peak plus mcgrath,warne,murali,[at their peaks].Probably brett lee too.kumble,shoaib and allan donald.

Tendulkar faced wasim,waqar,qadir,shoaib,warne,murali,walsh,ambrose,hughes,mcdermott,gillespie.[very underrated]
Lee.Steyn,Donald and mcgrath[at their peak]

Ponting faced kumble,murali,steyn,shoaib.
Also a little of wasim,waqar?Don't know if he faced donald in the later yrs or walsh ambrose in the fag end of the 90s.

Kallis has faced kumble,warne,mcgrath,lee,gillespie,murali,shoaib.


Steve waugh faced marshall,And ambrose and walsh at their deadliest.Also donald at his peak.Garner?Plus wasim,waqar,kumble and some of the others in the 90s and late 80s.

Now tell me who has cook faced comparable to any one of these greats to make a comment like this?That's the only question i have.He may be a very good player..but He doesn't have any experience with what really QUALITY bowling means.

 

[zaremba]

Seems a fair point for Cook to make. He might be right or he might be wrong, but it's never a bad thing to question the accuracy of our misty-eyed remembrance of things past. It must be pretty irksome for modern players to have their achievements constantly belittled by talk of how much tougher things were "in our day" which is precisely what the majority of commentators do (albeit with greater or lesser degrees of restraint and subtlety).

And basically his argument that performance levels in sport tend to improve over time is a very sound one. It's an uncomfortable truth to those of us who get nostalgic about the game (ie all of us).

In terms of the WI pace quartets I'm pretty sure that they would be seen as absolutely outstanding if they were playing today. But as for how quick they were, we can only guess, and many if our guesses are probably inaccurate.

 

[GotSpin]

I think the point being put forward by many others is that pace doesn't equal quality...So Cook dismissing the Windies quartet because they 'seemingly' didn't bowl that fast is a pretty poor opinion.

 

[TumTum]

I think the point being put forward by many others that pace doesn't equal quality...So Cook dismissing the Windies quartet because they 'seemingly' didn't bowl that fast is a pretty poor opinion.

Awta. I don't know much about cricket at that time, but it seems to me that those great bowlers had many other skills and raw pace alone was not the key to their success.

 

[zaremba]

I think the point being put forward by many others is that pace doesn't equal quality...So Cook dismissing the Windies quartet because they 'seemingly' didn't bowl that fast is a pretty poor opinion.

I haven't read the whole thread and didn't read Cook's comments all that closely but I don't think he was really saying that Fidelity Edwards was better than (say) Marshall or Roberts. As an experienced Test opener I think we can safely assume that he is very well aware of the difference between quick bowling and quality bowling.

 

[social]

Seems a fair point for Cook to make. He might be right or he might be wrong, but it's never a bad thing to question the accuracy of our misty-eyed remembrance of things past. It must be pretty irksome for modern players to have their achievements constantly belittled by talk of how much tougher things were "in our day" which is precisely what the majority of commentators do (albeit with greater or lesser degrees of restraint and subtlety).

And basically his argument that performance levels in sport tend to improve over time is a very sound one. It's an uncomfortable truth to those of us who get nostalgic about the game (ie all of us).

In terms of the WI pace quartets I'm pretty sure that they would be seen as absolutely outstanding if they were playing today. But as for how quick they were, we can only guess, and many if our guesses are probably inaccurate.

In the early 90s, Marshall played a few games of grade cricket in Sydney and I played had the dubious pleasure of batting against him

Marshall cleaned up our side 2 (then) current state batsmen whilst barely breaking a sweat and had a few yards on our former test opening bowler despite bowling off about 10 steps

Despite being at the end of his career, he was scary quick and easily faster than the likes of McDermott, Lawson etc who I'd faced during their peaks

Anyone who says their pace is overrated is kidding themselves

 

[zaremba]

Fidelity Edwards

Gotta love predictive text. Bloody iPhone

 

[smash84]

You are saying that Warne didn't need to use the googly because he simply had many other options.

But Asif does need the ability to bowl short on pitches which are flat otherwise he is too predictable. They are 2 completely different cases, 1 just doesn't need it and the other does. So...

No. You are not making sense. Why does anybody NEED the ability to bowl short on pitches ESPECIALLY when they are flat???? Why can't they do with inswinging yorkers (which are more effective)???

And my point is that if a bowler can get wickets without bowling short then why should he bowl short. I don't see why Asif NEEDS to bowl short in order to be effective???? Just as Warne didn't NEED to bowl googlies to be effective I don't see why Asif NEEDS to bowl short in order to be effective.

 

[smash84]

In the early 90s, Marshall played a few games of grade cricket in Sydney and I played had the dubious pleasure of batting against him

Marshall cleaned up our side 2 (then) current state batsmen whilst barely breaking a sweat and had a few yards on our former test opening bowler despite bowling off about 10 steps

Despite being at the end of his career, he was scary quick and easily faster than the likes of McDermott, Lawson etc who I'd faced during their peaks

Anyone who says their pace is overrated is kidding themselves

Wow awesome....Social.........your anecdotes are just bloody awesome.

Incidentally did you get the chance to play against Imran, Wasim, or Waqar?????

 

[GotSpin]

I haven't read the whole thread and didn't read Cook's comments all that closely but I don't think he was really saying that Fidelity Edwards was better than (say) Marshall or Roberts. As an experienced Test opener I think we can safely assume that he is very well aware of the difference between quick bowling and quality bowling.

IMO He was implying that the West Indies quartet were only scary/good because they bowled in an era with poor protective equipment and that they wouldn't have done so well today because bowlers who bowl fast are slightly more common

 

[TumTum]

No. You are not making sense. Why does anybody NEED the ability to bowl short on pitches ESPECIALLY when they are flat???? Why can't they do with inswinging yorkers (which are more effective)???

And my point is that if a bowler can get wickets without bowling short then why should he bowl short. I don't see why Asif NEEDS to bowl short in order to be effective???? Just as Warne didn't NEED to bowl googlies to be effective I don't see why Asif NEEDS to bowl short in order to be effective.

I think it's you that aren't making any sense.

You can't bowl inswinging yorkers all the time (heaps of reasons for this), especially at Asif's pace it wouldn't be that effective. Asif needs to mix his length up, otherwise the batsman just walk at him to counter the movement he gets.

I am saying that Asif struggles when the pitch is flat, so does any other bowler but in Asif's case it is even more so due to his inability to bowl short. So do you disagree with me on that point?

 

[smash84]

I am saying that Asif struggles when the pitch is flat, so does any other bowler but in Asif's case it is even more so due to his inability to bowl short. So do you disagree with me on that point?

Yes I do disagree.

As far as pitches go it would be even worse to bowl short on a flat pitch. I don't see how bowling short on flat pitches is helpful to the bowler???? I have seen Shoaib Akhtar in the side and SA scoring 413 for the first wicket on a flat pitch. Bowling short didn't help the supposedly quickest bowler in history. I don't see how bowling short is helpful to Asif other than adding variety to his repertoire which as I showed earlier is not needed.

 

[TumTum]

Yes I do disagree.

As far as pitches go it would be even worse to bowl short on a flat pitch. I don't see how bowling short on flat pitches is helpful to the bowler???? I have seen Shoaib Akhtar in the side and SA scoring 413 for the first wicket on a flat pitch. Bowling short didn't help the supposedly quickest bowler in history. I don't see how bowling short is helpful to Asif other than adding variety to his repertoire which as I showed earlier is not needed.

Yeah this is specifically for Asif though.

Reason is because his main strength is pitching it on a good-to-full length and getting the movement. If the pitch is flat though he doesn't get that movement. Batsman get some confidence and like to walk at him to counter his strength and from there dominate him because he is predictable. If he had the ability to bowl a good bouncer, the batsman would be less likely to walk down the pitch.

And I don't mean continuously bowling short, just as a surprise. Many medium pacers have this ability (Watson for example).

Also where have you shown that adding variety to his repertoire is not needed?

 

[Shri]

Gotta love predictive text. Bloody iPhone

 

[Bun]

I think the point being put forward by many others is that pace doesn't equal quality...So Cook dismissing the Windies quartet because they 'seemingly' didn't bowl that fast is a pretty poor opinion.

yes I agree with the above post

 

[smash84]

Yeah this is specifically for Asif though.

Reason is because his main strength is pitching it on a good-to-full length and getting the movement. If the pitch is flat though he doesn't get that movement. Batsman get some confidence and like to walk at him to counter his strength and from there dominate him because he is predictable. If he had the ability to bowl a good bouncer, the batsman would be less likely to walk down the pitch.

And I don't mean continuously bowling short, just as a surprise. Many medium pacers have this ability (Watson for example).

Also where have you shown that adding variety to his repertoire is not needed?

The Warne example. Warne was taking wickets without a googly and Asif was taking it without the bouncer.

Also what you say regarding Asif might actually be true of all medium fast bowlers (Watto being an exception). Medium fast bowlers are not supposed to be digging it in short. The ball just sits up for them and is ready to be hit.

So Asif doesn't need the bouncer so it is not really a weakness. I hope you get my point now.