"Critically Acclaimed"

[Goughy]

I think that list just shows the futility of trying to separate "medium" pacers from "fast" pacers.

Seam-up is seam-up, and those bowling at 80mph can easily be as good and better than those bowling at 90.

The difference is that different conditions suit bowlers of different pace. A 75 mph bowler would want a different type of wicket to prosper than a 95 mph bowler.

To illustrate, Larwood always stated Bowes was too slow to be effective in Aus and needed the softer greener wickets of England whereas he wanted a track as hard as possible.

They are as seperate as any bowling type can be.

 

[Richard]

I think the only separation can be with regular seam up bowlers and those who regularly topped 150kph for a large portion of their careers, such as Akhtar, Lee, Thompson and Tait. Lee is probably lesser so in that category as he has had a long portion of his career at 140-150kph due to injuries but the other three can be separated from medium pace bowlers as the lion share of their wickets comes as a result of sheer pace (and other factors in minimum, such as slight swing).

Tyson pretty much unquestionably topped 150kph, and more, for a year or so, very possibly bowling for a few months faster than anyone else in history has ever bowled.

But I don't think it's wise to start talking about bowlers who topped 150kph when they weren't timed to have done so. Yes, of course it's as good as certain that Tyson, Thomson and others did. But it's also very possible that, for instance, Ray Lindwall and Dennis Lillee did. Yet few would mention them.

 

[Manee]

Tyson pretty much unquestionably topped 150kph, and more, for a year or so, very possibly bowling for a few months faster than anyone else in history has ever bowled.

But I don't think it's wise to start talking about bowlers who topped 150kph when they weren't timed to have done so. Yes, of course it's as good as certain that Tyson, Thomson and others did. But it's also very possible that, for instance, Ray Lindwall and Dennis Lillee did. Yet few would mention them.

I was careful to use 'such as'.

 

[Richard]

The difference is that different conditions suit bowlers of different pace. A 75 mph bowler would want a different type of wicket to prosper than a 95 mph bowler.

To illustrate, Larwood always stated Bowes was too slow to be effective in Aus and needed the softer greener wickets of England whereas he wanted a track as hard as possible.

They are as seperate as any bowling type can be.

I've never believed any bowler can be "too slow" for any type of pitch. The fact that spinners can bowl at 50mph and still be effective illustrates this.

Different conditions do indeed suit bowlers of different style - someone completely reliant on a seaming pitch, whether they bowl at 75mph or 90mph, will need softer, greener wickets (in whatever country) to prosper. One who does not rely solely on seam-movement and has other weapons in his arsenal (whether he bowls them at 75mph or 90) will be able to prosper on a wider range of wickets.

Of course, once you get too slow (eg, 70mph) as a seam-bowler who cannot use flight and loop, you're not very likely to be successful on any surface. There's a reason virtually no Test bowlers ever last long when they bowl at such a pace. But once you get into the late-70s in mph, there's no reason whatsoever to separate them IMO.

Apart from the fact that no two bowlers bowl the same speed constantly. Fast, fast-medium etc. can only ever be a cosmetic definition - totally different to right-arm\left-arm, seam\spin, out\not-out etc.

 

[Richard]

I was careful to use 'such as'.

Oh, certainly, wasn't criticising your lack of examples. Simply saying that someone who bowled 150kph+ is near enough impossible to know until very recently. So it's not wise to start subdividing bowlers up according to the pace they appeared to have bowled at, as that can easily be misrecognised, especially when your resolution is so small as 5mph or so. Nothing can tell a speed that acutely other than a speedgun.

 

[Goughy]

I've never believed any bowler can be "too slow" for any type of pitch. The fact that spinners can bowl at 50mph and still be effective illustrates this.
.

Rather than go though all this lets agree to differ otherwise Ill spent all night on here clogging the thread up.

Ill just say that there are tracks where medium pacers become like fodder as they ease onto the bat and an extra yard is needed. There are a long list of examples where the lack of a cutting edge in pace hurts a team on a certain wicket.

 

[Richard]

I don't disagree that there are tracks when medium-pacers (and medium-fast ones too) become fodder. Equally, of course, many of these would also see fast pacers become such.

I simply feel that a seamer is a seamer, and the difference is not sufficient between various paces of such bowlers to make them something which has to be entirely different.

For example: Mohammad Asif >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andre van Troost. Yet the latter was most certainly quicker.

 

[Goughy]

For example: Mohammad Asif >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andre van Troost. Yet the latter was most certainly quicker.

Shane Warne>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andre van Troost. Yet the latter was most certainly quicker.

The point has no relevance. Whether Asif is better or not they are/were very different types of bowlers and each would benefit from different conditions.

Pointless putting Paul Collingwood in the same bracket as Brett Lee just as it is putting Bill Bowes with Larwood. Its not about ability or success but that its a different art.

If you want to put all seamers together you had may as well just have 1 category 'bowlers'

 

[Richard]

Well, as you say - agree to disagree is probably the best course of action.

 

[Manee]

For example: Mohammad Asif >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andre van Troost.

I beg to differ

 

[funnygirl]

Dilip Vengsarkar .

 

[Richard]

Mark Waugh.

I was just looking around for a relatively recent thread that mentioned him, so as I could post this picture:

Incredible how he can be retired for 4 years, be having a swing on the beach, be captured by a simple still photograph - and still it looks damn superb.

 

[bagapath]

when you discuss critical acclaim for style you cant leave victor trumper out of any team. i wanted to include g.pollock too for style and substance together.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

David Gower.