Best ever medium pacer?

[Manee]

I think that it is near impossible to judge the pace of a late swing bowler (without a speed gun) to a range of anything under 10kph.

 

[Burgey]

Waqar may ave not been as quick as Thommo, but calling Thommo the quickest that international cricket have produced is a big deal. Roy Gilchrist was teribly quick. Mohammed Akram and Mohammed Zahid were also much quicket than Shoaib. My gut feeling says that Zahid may have been the quickest ever, because he was beating Lara with pace. naver mind his team mates. Very diifucult to find Thompson beating Richards with pace (Richards probably better against quicks than Lara).

If you get a chance to see some of the footage from 75-76, I think you'll find that Thommo in particular, and also to some extent Lillee, kept the lid on Viv pretty well. Not that thee's an abundance of footage around mind.
I think most of the Windies batsmen in that series said he was frighteningly quick that series.
FTR, I think Tony Cozier also said the fastest spell of bowling he ever saw was one which Thommo bowled in the Windies, iirc during the Packer years. At the time, I think WI had their WSC players, Australia did not (stand to be corrected on that).

Edit: I think it was this match:

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1970S/1977-78/AUS_IN_WI/AUS_WI_T2_17-19MAR1978.html

 

[Richard]

I think that it is near impossible to judge the pace of a late swing bowler (without a speed gun) to a range of anything under 10kph.

Late swing may exaggerate it, but that's broadly true of any bowler really. The eye does not have the power to make judgements of speed to a lower resolution than that.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Jimmy Anderson.

 

[Starfighter]

Neil Wagner.



Actually, no. Colin de Grandhomme.

 

[h_hurricane]

The most successful medium pacer ever (though not the best) is Anil Kumble. And it is likely to remain that way for a long long time.

 

[Line and Length]

Alec Bedser

 

[AndrewB]

If you get a chance to see some of the footage from 75-76, I think you'll find that Thommo in particular, and also to some extent Lillee, kept the lid on Viv pretty well. Not that thee's an abundance of footage around mind.

Not sure "kept the lid on" is the right phrase - he went for about 5.5 per 8-ball over in the series, though with a decent average of 28,65. He had figures like 10-0-69-1 and 11-1-62-5.
(Lillee's figures were similar; Walker and Gilmour kept it down to about 4 per 8-ball over).

(Edit - just spotted this is a post from 2008. I hope for a convincing rebuttal in 2032).

 

[Jack1]

In modern times Philander.

 

[Red]

The most successful medium pacer ever (though not the best) is Anil Kumble. And it is likely to remain that way for a long long time.

Except no one classifies leg spinners as medium pacers.

 

[the big bambino]

In modern times Philander.

Would agree. Close call with Asif on the count of quality but Vern wins because he could stay on the park. There seems a modern trend to upscale the pace of bowlers with the likes of Vern, Asif, Abbas and even Copeland called fast medium.

 

[Starfighter]

There seems a modern trend to upscale the pace of bowlers with the likes of Vern, Asif, Abbas and even Copeland called fast medium.

Not really. All would be considered fast-medium prior to the fifties (and probably as late as the seventies), at least Asif at his fastest (occasionally got it to the mid 130s) would have been considered fast. Alec Bedser, Maurice Tate etc. were considered fast-medium at the time.

If anything there's been the opposite trend.

 

[thierry henry]

Not really. All would be considered fast-medium prior to the fifties (and probably as late as the seventies), at least Asif at his fastest (occasionally got it to the mid 130s) would have been considered fast. Alec Bedser, Maurice Tate etc. were considered fast-medium at the time.

If anything there's been the opposite trend.

Exactly. There's no way guys like Philander, Asif, Wagner etc would be called "medium pacers" in bygone eras. These guys are genuine medium-fast bowlers the likes of which have been leading international attacks for years.

If anything, in bygone eras it was more common for an actual "medium-pacer" (i.e. CDG or slower) to be seen as a genuine bowling option and not a curiosity.

FTR Wagner doesn't even really belong in this conversation at all as he's mostly been a bog-standard 130-something fast-medium bowler, unfortunately the combination of slightly declining pace with age and belated widespread exposure on the Australian tour has led to this meme of him being "a medium pacer who bowls bouncers".

 

[Starfighter]

CdG would have been considered fast-medium pre-WWII as well. 'Medium-fast' wasn't a term used that commonly.

From what I've seen, generally it goes about medium > 120 > medium fast > 130 > fast medium > 140 > fast these days. Although medium-fast often seems to only apply to specialist bowlers, guys like Cronje and (God help us) Wade who can get it up to 130 stay stuck with medium.

Whereas prior to WWlI it looks more like medium > 112-116 (70 mph or so) > fast medium > 126-132 (80 mph or so) > fast to me, though that relies on my pace estimates being in the ballpark. And of course there is plenty of inconsistency then as well.

The major transition appears to have occurred in the fifties, so Alec Bedser enters the decade as 'fast-medium' (though only just by that point, and occasionally 'medium-fast') but Tom Cartwright leaves it as 'medium'. I don't know why although I think is something to do with the beginning of major pitch covering and the final decline of cut/spin (though it was declining since WWI) and rise of modern seam bowling.

 

[the big bambino]

Not really. All would be considered fast-medium prior to the fifties (and probably as late as the seventies), at least Asif at his fastest (occasionally got it to the mid 130s) would have been considered fast. Alec Bedser, Maurice Tate etc. were considered fast-medium at the time.

If anything there's been the opposite trend.

Ha hardly. Would find it difficult to believe Philander was 20 ks over, say Bedser or Cartwright. And Davis has speculated Tate's pace as about that of Kasper. And Copeland fast medium ... come on. I've also seen the term medium fast used commonly in trove articles from pre WWII. Not sure what the point is about Bedser entering an era at Fast medium and Cartwright leaving it at medium only to have guys like Copeland and Abbas get into this one as fast medium. They're just loose definitions.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Exactly. There's no way guys like Philander, Asif, Wagner etc would be called "medium pacers" in bygone eras. These guys are genuine medium-fast bowlers the likes of which have been leading international attacks for years.

If anything, in bygone eras it was more common for an actual "medium-pacer" (i.e. CDG or slower) to be seen as a genuine bowling option and not a curiosity.

FTR Wagner doesn't even really belong in this conversation at all as he's mostly been a bog-standard 130-something fast-medium bowler, unfortunately the combination of slightly declining pace with age and belated widespread exposure on the Australian tour has led to this meme of him being "a medium pacer who bowls bouncers".

I will take credit for influencing this

 

[Migara]

Alec Bedser held the wood over Don Bradman for a short period of time with his leg trap and generally dealt with the best batsman in most opposing sides very effectively. That's good enough for me.

Vaas doing it over with Lara over a decade should qualify too then.

 

[Starfighter]

Vaas doing it over with Lara over a decade should qualify too then.

One dismissal for 221 in five test matches does not count as 'having the wood' over anyone.

And before you mention it, yes he did dismiss him 3 times in 13 ODIs for 1, 0 an 2. I would hardly consider this exceptional.

 

[Starfighter]

Ha hardly. Would find it difficult to believe Philander was 20 ks over, say Bedser or Cartwright. And Davis has speculated Tate's pace as about that of Kasper. And Copeland fast medium ... come on. I've also seen the term medium fast used commonly in trove articles from pre WWII. Not sure what the point is about Bedser entering an era at Fast medium and Cartwright leaving it at medium only to have guys like Copeland and Abbas get into this one as fast medium. They're just loose definitions.

Davis can speculate how he wants on pace, but the actual footage shows something different. Plus you have the comparisons of observers. You do see medium fast, though it's hardly consistent, and for bowlers slower than, say, Abbas. Wiaden quite pointedly rejected the term an unneeded.

The point is that bowlers of Bedser's kind of pace used to be what was meant by fast medium, but bowlers of similar pace like Cartwright a decade later were now only medium. There was a change at some point. Calling guys like Abbas and Copeland fast-medium is actually more in line with the original use of the term and I don't see why it's objectionable.

 

[the big bambino]

Except your last sentence contradicts the point your are trying to conflate earlier. If someone like Copeland is fm when he’s around 115 - 120 then Bedser and Cartwright wouldn’t be much different. So have we gone slower faster slower over the years? Of course the term covers a fairly wide range and is loose. It’s just the perception of the writer not a general comment on speeds. And I repeat the distinctions in pace grades were in vogue earlier than you say. Davis backs his claim with field positioning. You on cricinfo profiles. You’re entitled but I’ll go with the former thanks. As far as bowling speeds go you have an opinion which is fine but subjective. I don’t thinks it’s much of an issue. Players with long careers rarely mention it. You’d think they would’ve noticed if there was much to notice.