Future of fast bowling in India

[Richard]

Well by your argument I must be better than I thought. I occasionally take throw downs from the bowling machine on top setting (80-90mph these things are not that accurate) with just gloves and no pads and I am not a batsman.

However, when facing a quickie for real the ball comes far quicker and is genuinely quite scary at 85mph even with a helmet and other protective equipment.

Nothing to do with me being good (Im not) but to do with the bowling machine not replicating the speed accurately.

In fact, a bowling machine ball travels through the air slower than a 'real' ball and comes off the surface much slower. There is a huge difference in the speed by the time it reaches the batsman even if they both start at similar speeds.

I've not said it doesn't come off the surface slower, have I?
Look - what would be the point in the thing having speed-settings if they weren't accurate?
Obviously when facing a real bowler the reaction-time is considerably less due to any number of factors, but nonetheless the speed is the speed - and when the ball is full (as it always was - otherwise I might have no shoulder) the speed lost off the pitch is irrelevant.

 

[Richard]

Sreesanth. Absolutely fantastic young bowler. I have been raving about him on her since his debut and with him and Patel still learning and still improving then thats one hell of a combination

Where, exactly, did the "her" come from?

EDIT: Ah, sorry.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Where, exactly, did the "her" come from?

I think he's left the "e" off "here"

 

[Richard]

Dear Richard.

You owe me.

Love, Jack.

 

[Goughy]

Obviously when facing a real bowler the reaction-time is considerably less due to any number of factors, but nonetheless the speed is the speed - and when the ball is full (as it always was - otherwise I might have no shoulder) the speed lost off the pitch is irrelevant.

Erm..no it is not irrelevant. In fact its very relevant. A bowling machine ball is far slower. Argue about it if you must or have the last word but you are wrong about the machines

 

[Richard]

A bowling-machine might be slower than a real bowler, but the speeds marked on it would not be likely to be marked if they were not accurate.
Otherwise someone would find some way to sue someone for something, I absolutely gurantee it.
And please tell me - how is speed lost off the pitch (which I've said I fully agree is much more with a machine than a bowler) relevant to a very full ball?

 

[Goughy]

A bowling-machine might be slower than a real bowler, but the speeds marked on it would not be likely to be marked if they were not accurate.
Otherwise someone would find some way to sue someone for something, I absolutely gurantee it.
And please tell me - how is speed lost off the pitch (which I've said I fully agree is much more with a machine than a bowler) relevant to a very full ball?

Whatever. It is interesting how we were probed and asked about this as part of our training but we were obviously so wrong given the previous comments.

Trust me, a bowling machine ball is much slower than a real guy and is not that accurate in terms of speed.. Sue me or someone else if you want. End of story

 

[Richard]

I've not disputed that for a second.
I have, however, disputed that it's likely that a speed given on a scientifically-created machine is inaccurate.

 

[adharcric]

that =

a bowling machine ball ... is not that accurate in terms of speed

.

I've not disputed that for a second. I have, however, disputed that it's likely that a speed given on a scientifically-created machine is inaccurate.

a bowling machine ball = a scientifically-created machine
You dont dispute the fact that it's not accurate, but you do dispute the fact that it's inaccurate. Is there something between accurate and inaccurate?
Richard, aren't you contradicing yourself there?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Is it possible that the wheels are spinning at, for example, 80 mph, but the ball loses pace at a greater rate, for example, therefore not being as quick when you face it?

 

[Sir Redman]

Is it possible that the wheels are spinning at, for example, 80 mph, but the ball loses pace at a greater rate, for example, therefore not being as quick when you face it?

Probably right. A bowling machine ball is made of a different material and is a different shape (no seam, and I think they are only one piece?) to a cricket ball, so it follows that it will travel through the air in a different way. So even if the ball comes out of the machine at 80mph it will lose pace more quickly (presumably) than a cricket ball, and as a result will seem much slower if you're facing it.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Probably right. A bowling machine ball is made of a different material and is a different shape (no seam, and I think they are only one piece?) to a cricket ball, so it follows that it will travel through the air in a different way. So even if the ball comes out of the machine at 80mph it will lose pace more quickly (presumably) than a cricket ball, and as a result will seem much slower if you're facing it.

And also, they tend to sort of "float", or spin forwards like a spinner, rather than having the backward drag like when it comes out of the hand.

 

[quick4mindia]

that = .



a bowling machine ball = a scientifically-created machine
You dont dispute the fact that it's not accurate, but you do dispute the fact that it's inaccurate. Is there something between accurate and inaccurate?
Richard, aren't you contradicing yourself there?

Now I am thoroughly confused.
I have a simpler explanation (just had a hunch )
The quicker you want the machine to bowl the more energy it consumes (its an assumption again). So the machines fool you about the speed and keep your energy bills under limit and also successfully give you an illusion that u faced something of a 90 MPH delivery.
But i again say I have never used a Bowling machine

 

[Richard]

that = .



a bowling machine ball = a scientifically-created machine
You dont dispute the fact that it's not accurate, but you do dispute the fact that it's inaccurate. Is there something between accurate and inaccurate?
Richard, aren't you contradicing yourself there?

Not the ball, the machine.

 

[Richard]

Is it possible that the wheels are spinning at, for example, 80 mph, but the ball loses pace at a greater rate, for example, therefore not being as quick when you face it?

I presume so, but I also presume over 18 yards or so that difference will not make much of a dent on the reaction-time.

 

[quick4mindia]

I presume so, but I also presume over 18 yards or so that difference will not make much of a dent on the reaction-time.

Nothing can make me believe that the balls released at same pace two different ways will behave differently on its way irrespective of the pitch length.
And if you guys are right in saying that the balls bowled by machines appear to be much slower than that bowled by hands then you definitely have a case against the machine manufacturers for not acting in good faith.

 

[Goughy]

Nothing can make me believe that the balls released at same pace two different ways will behave differently on its way irrespective of the pitch length.

Ok..but it is a 'head in the sand' attitude you express. Apart from it being false, it would be completely illogical that 2 different type of balls released by 2 separate methods would act in the same way. The pace is the only constant and there are 2 variables that need to be factored in.

And if you guys are right in saying that the balls bowled by machines appear to be much slower than that bowled by hands then you definitely have a case against the machine manufacturers for not acting in good faith.

Bowling machine manufacturers use the pace settings as a guide. They are not, for example, held to the same standards as the manufacturers of medical equipment.

A bowling machine is a training tool and the speed is an approximation. The manufacturers make few claims that the speed is scientifically accurate to within 1kph or anything and cannot be sued if a ball set at 135 kph comes out at 125 kph (this does happen).

 

[kvemuri]

Nehra certainly had loads of potential. The thing is, fitness is monitored much better today with regimens, support staffs and what not, so the likelihood of bowlers losing their pace due to poor fitness (Nehra's case) isn't as likely.

I'd say Zaheer is a finished case, he's had so many chances and has wasted them with poor fitness and attitude. Nehra is 27 and if his fitness is back, he could figure slightly. Balaji is almost 25 so age-wise he's fine, but his lack of pace will be more of an issue now than it was when there were no Sreesanth/Munaf/VRV types clocking 140.

Balaji doesn't have the pace, but as he showed in 2004 he can be accurate, if he can develop consistency (also fitness) then with Munaf, Sreesanth, Pathan and the likes of VRV, Abid etc can provide a nice tandem.

 

[viktor]

Also, Balaji struck me as a smart bowler. He susses out the conditions and bowls accordingly. Once he is fit, and shows some form in the Ranjis, he should figure pretty high in the list.
VRV was pretty umimpressive from whatever I saw of him and Abid, I don't believe anybody has seen.

 

[adharcric]

Balaji doesn't have the pace, but as he showed in 2004 he can be accurate, if he can develop consistency (also fitness) then with Munaf, Sreesanth, Pathan and the likes of VRV, Abid etc can provide a nice tandem.

Right, he's basically a Sreesanth with 10 kph less, a little more swing (but less control over it) and no yorker. Definitely an intelligent bowler (as Viktor says above).