• 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.

Fred Trueman vs Waqar Younis

Who is the better test bowler?


  • Total voters
    24

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
I highly doubt it really. The 3rd speed sounds much more reasonable to me than him bowling faster than Akhtar.
That was after Thommo’s shoulder injury and Thommo hadn’t played cricket in a year plus was full of alcohol. Anyway that one speed was definitely measured differently whereas the speed in 1975 research was measured of the hand. Just to be clear Thommo still stood ahead of the pack in 1979 as well even after all.
 

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
Imho, I found it hard to believe that the fastest bowler now is slower than someone who bowled 60 years ago.
All due to how bad the knowledge regarding fast bowling plus training is in India really. There should have been like 10 quicks right now from India bowling 100 Mph if the training plus the coaches had better knowledge regarding fast bowling.

Don’t see that happening anytime soon really regarding how the coaches are prioritizing to just bowl, bowl and bowl and have the fast bowler broke. You know there is something really wrong that the fastest quicks are from country with very small talent pool outdoing a country with such a massive pool.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
All due to how bad the knowledge regarding fast bowling plus training is in India really. There should have been like 10 quicks right now from India bowling 100 Mph if the training plus the coaches had better knowledge regarding fast bowling.

Don’t see that happening anytime soon really regarding how the coaches are prioritizing to just bowl, bowl and bowl and have the fast bowler broke. You know there is something really wrong that the fastest quicks are from country with very small talent pool outdoing a country with such a massive pool.
Mayank Yadav has been recorded bowling the 8th fastest ball already and Umran Mallik isn't much slower either. And not just from India, I think by the general rule of sports with changes in training, diet and scientific analysis; a bowler who bowled 50 years ago being faster than all seems a bit fishy to me.
 

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
Mayank Yadav has been recorded bowling the 8th fastest ball already and Umran Mallik isn't much slower either. And not just from India, I think by the general rule of sports with changes in training, diet and scientific analysis; a bowler who bowled 50 years ago being faster than all seems a bit fishy to me.
Long Jump, Javelin have records even pre-Thommo. If Thommo wasn’t bowling 100 mph , then how quick were the quicks from Indies plus Peak Lillee, Imran etc?
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
Long Jump, Javelin have records even pre-Thommo. If Thommo wasn’t bowling 100 mph , then how quick were the quicks from Indies plus Peak Lillee, Imran etc?
Those records are clearly quite rare and you I hope certainly won't deny that sports science plays a vital role in development of athletes. On the second question; Roberts, Holding, Lillee and co bowling 142-144 and Thommo close to 150 at times seems really reasonable to me. I mean, have you ever seen a pacer bowl 150 consistently in the longer format?
 

Patience and Accuracy+Gut

State Vice-Captain
Yeah, and you have to admit; it sounds fishy as ****.
You mentioned earlier that you think Holding, Roberts, Lillee were 142-144 and Thommo 150 at times. But from the reasearch Thommo was 10 kmph ahead of the next best, Roberts and 12 ahead of Holding. Purely from that alone would put Thommo well in the mid 150s. You would need to think those 3 guys were in high 130s to say Thommo wasn’t in 150s consistently. If that’s what you think, I have nothing to argue against.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
You mentioned earlier that you think Holding, Roberts, Lillee were 142-144 and Thommo 150 at times. But from the reasearch Thommo was 10 kmph ahead of the next best, Roberts and 12 ahead of Holding. Purely from that alone would put Thommo well in the mid 150s. You would need to think those 3 guys were in high 130s to say Thommo wasn’t in 150s consistently. If that’s what you think, I have nothing to argue against.
I simply don't think there's enough data to suggest Thomson was 10 kmph faster than the next fastest guy; I don't really find that much believable.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
I find the fact that Thommo might even mention an obviously spurious number like 175 kph the most fishy part. It sounds like bullshitting to hide the lack of evidence of superiority in the nascent Era of speed guns.

There's actually a perfect analogue for baseball in this, with Nolan Ryan claiming (also spurious, imo) that he pitched 108 mph, once again in the early days that speed guns existed. But at least that's a somewhat more plausible lie, as there is a pitcher with hard evidence who has gotten close (Aroldis Chapman hit 106).

Edit: Don't get me wrong, they're both really quick though, just not quite as quick as they claim.
 
Last edited:

Top