Are medium-pacers useful in modern test cricket?

[Uppercut]

I mean real medium-pacers, not your Glenn McGrath/Jacques Kallis types, the Brendan Nash/Paul Collingwood/Andrew McDonald trundlers who the keepers will always stand up to. Do these guys have a realistic place in a bowling lineup? Thoughts.

 

[bryce]

Well given that McGrath was still a god late in his career bowling 125-130 i'd say that medium pacers can still be effective in Test cricket, they would just have to be ****in' good (not to mention be able to do a fair bit with the ball)

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't think their role has changed much, to be honest. Flat pitches have nullified the current lot somewhat but it's been rare that the journeyman meds bowler has been in the top-3 of a bowling line-up.

 

[bryce]

Kuleresakara(sp?) is pretty much a medium pacer isn't he?

 

[thierry henry]

Define medium-pacer

 

[Uppercut]

Nothing above 80mph.

 

[andruid]

Only with spectacular accuracy in swinging conditions.

 

[thierry henry]

Nothing above 80mph.

tbh, non-spinners who never hit 80mph rarely if ever bowl in tests anyway. McDonald, Kulasekara etc are all capable of bowling over 80mph.

The problem with this question imo is that "medium-pacers" usually bowl exactly the same pace as late-career McGrath/Pollock.

 

[Uppercut]

Or Chaminda Vaas.

I just raised the question because Andrew McDonald generally bowls under 130 Ks, but Australia seem to be including him as an integral part of a five-man attack rather than a part-timer.

 

[Nishan]

if they can swing the ball yes, Chaminda Vass is a good example of this

 

[Brett Dale]

Only if they are a good mover of the ball, if they can do nothing with it, there is not really a place for those types of bowlers I'm afraid.

 

[Sylvester]

Don't let McGrath see this thread he would hate being called a medium pacer! In saying that even late in his career his pace was above 130km/h which is the minimum before you start becoming easy pickings.

MacDonald has height so he was effective on the Sydney wicket where their was variable bounce, he will also be handy in the swinging conditions. The flat pitches is where he and other medium pacers struggle.

 

[HMas]

Define medium-pacer

Any indian fast bowler.

 

[NUFAN]

They certaintly are useful IF they can bat very well.

 

[Top_Cat]

They certaintly are useful IF they can bat very well.

Yeah. And tbh, it's been that way for a long time. It's tempting to think the lack of genuine medium pacers is a modern thing but it doesn't seem as if it is. Most guys who weren't express in the past and were front-line bowlers were still quicker than 80mph.

 

[trishan]

What about Hopes? Would you consider him a medium pacer? He was pretty successful against New Zealand but he did struggle against the South Africans.

Grant Elliot is another possible medium-pacer that impressed against Australia. He took a few wickets but it was his ability to keep it tight that I liked.

Remember Andrew Hall? He was surely a good medium pacer.

I think there is definitely room for medium pacers in the modern game.

 

[Top_Cat]

What about Hopes? Would you consider him a medium pacer? He was pretty successful against New Zealand but he did struggle against the South Africans.

Grant Elliot is another possible medium-pacer that impressed against Australia. He took a few wickets but it was his ability to keep it tight that I liked.

Remember Andrew Hall? He was surely a good medium pacer.

I think there is definitely room for medium pacers in the modern game.

All three can bat too and probably wouldn't be in their sides without that, though.

 

[Athlai]

What about Hopes? Would you consider him a medium pacer? He was pretty successful against New Zealand but he did struggle against the South Africans.

Grant Elliot is another possible medium-pacer that impressed against Australia. He took a few wickets but it was his ability to keep it tight that I liked.

Remember Andrew Hall? He was surely a good medium pacer.

I think there is definitely room for medium pacers in the modern game.

This is about Test cricket, medium pacers are fine at keeping it tight in limited overs but none of the guys you just spoke about are wicket taking options in Test match cricket.

 

[trishan]

This is about Test cricket, medium pacers are fine at keeping it tight in limited overs but none of the guys you just spoke about are wicket taking options in Test match cricket.

Ah right, didn't read the title correctly.

I can't really think of any effective medium pacers in Test cricket. It's either spin or pace.

I guess it's also a question of what you define as useful. If we accept that it is fast bowlers and spinners that take the wickets then medium pacers can fill in some overs in the middle of spells to give strike bowlers a rest. As it was mentioned, medium pacers become much more useful if they are also batting options.

So the likes of Hopes, Hall, Elliot can be considered useful but just not reliable wicket-takers.

 

[Athlai]

Oram, Vaas and McGrath are bowlers who have been good even at medium pace, but each has a lot to offer, be it steepling bounce, swing or accuracy.