• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ashwin vs Kumble

B

Bolo.

International Captain
Xix2565 said:
Because they're overloaded for pacers to end things quickly. Because of pitches being prepared that way. Some people fail to grasp this however.
Click to expand...
That's a big factor. But there are a bunch.

Swing is responsible for a ton of wickets in RSA.

Pretty much every team has had really good bowlers and iffy bats recently. RSA more so than anyone else, and they are 50% of innings in RSA.

Batting SRs have gone up a lot recently. This is particularly true of RSA bats. They were crazy slow at the start of Kumble's career, and are very fast now.
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
Bolo. said:
Swing is responsible for a ton of wickets in RSA
Click to expand...
Seam is far more potent than swing everywhere, including in SA. I really don't get this idea that people want to propagate about seam bowling not being a meaningful or impactful part of the modern game. It exists, it's real and it has a large impact. And seam bowling is directly influenced by the pitch, hence pitch prep being important here.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
Xix2565 said:
Seam is far more potent than swing everywhere, including in SA. I really don't get this idea that people want to propagate about seam bowling not being a meaningful or impactful part of the modern game. It exists, it's real and it has a large impact. And seam bowling is directly influenced by the pitch, hence pitch prep being important here.
Click to expand...
OFC seam is hugely important. I don't think I've ever seen anyone claim otherwise. People forget how big a factor swing is in RSA games though. We have a ton of posts in this thread talking about the decks, and I'm the only one talking about swing at all. See Steyn, who barely ever moved the ball of the deck, and has one hell of a home record.

Games would go on significantly longer in RSA without swing.
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
Bolo. said:
OFC seam is hugely important. I don't think I've ever seen anyone claim otherwise. People forget how big a factor swing is in RSA games though. We have a ton of posts in this thread talking about the decks, and I'm the only one talking about swing at all. See Steyn, who barely ever moved the ball of the deck, and has one hell of a home record.

Games would go on significantly longer in RSA without swing.
Click to expand...
No one forgets how big a factor swing is. In fact what happens more often is that every ball that has lateral deviation is classified under swing movement, regardless of it being right or wrong.

I mean if Philander is able to bowl seam in SA I fail to see how Steyn rarely did so. He definitely did so outside of SA on the occasional green deck he got elsewhere.

Well no, because seaming deliveries tend to take a lot of wickets regardless. Lateral movement at a point that batters can't adjust in time to beats lateral movement at a point that batters have some chances of adjusting to more often than not. It's also a silly point to make because swing is so ubiquitous. You can swing the ball anywhere regardless of the ball type and pitch because it's not dependent on the pitch at all.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
Xix2565 said:
No one forgets how big a factor swing is. In fact what happens more often is that every ball that has lateral deviation is classified under swing movement, regardless of it being right or wrong.

I mean if Philander is able to bowl seam in SA I fail to see how Steyn rarely did so. He definitely did so outside of SA on the occasional green deck he got elsewhere.

Well no, because seaming deliveries tend to take a lot of wickets regardless. Lateral movement at a point that batters can't adjust in time to beats lateral movement at a point that batters have some chances of adjusting to more often than not. It's also a silly point to make because swing is so ubiquitous. You can swing the ball anywhere regardless of the ball type and pitch because it's not dependent on the pitch at all.
Click to expand...
Philander was a seam bowler and Steyn was a swing bowler. Steyn didn't because he couldn't do it as well as swing. I think his seam presentation and wrist flick were not the best for seam. Sure, he got some wickets from movement off the deck. But probably less than any other bowler I've seen. Maybe 5% as a guess.

Everywhere seams and swings. Places seam and swing to varying extents. RSA has some of the highest levels of both. Some of the decks in Aus have historically been very similar to some decks in RSA. But when looking at comparable pitches, scoring runs against pace is a different prospect due to differing amounts of swing.

Yes, the amount of seam on offer is very important. But watch an England and AUS test and say that swing is uniform across countries. It's not a tenable position.
 
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
Steyn also bowled a generally fuller length than Philander to let the ball find any swing on offer. A fuller length automatically brings in a different dynamic in terms of release points and effort into the pitch. Philander thudded it in, Steyn kissed the surface, if that makes any sense. If Steyn was as successful as he obviously was in SA, it's an educated assertion that it swings in SA.
 
Last edited:
X

Xix2565

International Regular
Bolo. said:
Yes, the amount of seam on offer is very important. But watch an England and AUS test and say that swing is uniform across countries. It's not a tenable position.
Click to expand...
Could easily say the same about seam movement though. Especially when Broaderson shifted from swing bowlers towards seam bowling more, along with Woakes.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
Xix2565 said:
Could easily say the same about seam movement though. Especially when Broaderson shifted from swing bowlers towards seam bowling more, along with Woakes.
Click to expand...
There is nobody in this thread denying the importance of seam, or that it varies across countries.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Ashwin on spinning wickets has sharper spin and more tricks, and more nous to trap batsmen. Kumble relied on pace and worrying through the batsman.

Outside spinning wickets, Kumble had the bounce factor in his favor and was better under pressure and less likely to lose his radar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top