Height vs pace: which is more important for pace bowler success?

[Starfighter]

Wasn't Roberts supposedly 155kmph? Snow wasn't exactly express either AFAIK....

151



The Cricinfo page that incorrectly states Roberts' speed as 159 something (citing the source above, Lillee's The Art of Fast Bowling) says Snow was measured at 139-ish in 1976, but I've been unable to verify any measurements happened at all that year (though the figures must have come from somewhere) and he was well past his best. I think he could have pushed well into the 140s at his best but not the 150s.

OTOH @SJS quoted Lillee from a slightly later book as saying: "Snow was the first fast bowler I came across whom I would regard as express. I was young and impressionable at the time, but I had a good eye and I knew “quick” when I saw it. I would have hated to live on the difference in pace between Snow and Andy Roberts", so you can take that.

Also I'm not sure Thomson was 1.88. In some photos he looks taller than Lillee, in others shorter.

 

[shortpitched713]

Speed guns are not reliable, they've semi-openly admitted they rig them in response to the state of play

src: in Ross Taylors bio he talks about chatting with a guy in broadcasting who showed him how they get an estimated speed range and pick a speed out of that range out from vibes

That sounds... strange.

The speed guns I've seen used for baseball just do one thing... spit out a number (at an early point after release). Certainly we'd have access to the same tech for cricket.

Maybe it's just that no one gives as much of a **** about speed in cricket. Which is definitely understandable, as attempting to maintain flat out pace can be a counterproductive venture for multiple reasons.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

They have a range of numbers and the TV guys just pick the one that suits their narrative the most.

(it's all made up)

 

[shortpitched713]

They have a range of numbers and the TV guys just pick the one that suits their narrative the most.

(it's all made up)

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean the speed gun isn't reliable. That depends on the actual magnitude of the range.

And why wouldn't they just pick the median of that range for the speed of an individual delivery?

The whole exercise feels so.. strange.

 

[Bolo.]

Indian and Australian guns both tend to typically measure a few kilometers faster for the RSA bowlers than they record in RSA. They also tend to produce more outliers on extreme pace.

BBL did admit to having multiple speed readinds and going with the fastest one for ratings IIRC. I'm up for correction on the fine points of this.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

That sounds... strange.

The speed guns I've seen used for baseball just do one thing... spit out a number (at an early point after release). Certainly we'd have access to the same tech for cricket.

Maybe it's just that no one gives as much of a **** about speed in cricket. Which is definitely understandable, as attempting to maintain flat out pace can be a counterproductive venture for multiple reasons.

cricket is a sport that does almost everything non-optimally for arbitrary reasons. Adding this to that list is not a stretch.

 

[Starfighter]

That sounds... strange.

The speed guns I've seen used for baseball just do one thing... spit out a number (at an early point after release). Certainly we'd have access to the same tech for cricket.

Maybe it's just that no one gives as much of a **** about speed in cricket. Which is definitely understandable, as attempting to maintain flat out pace can be a counterproductive venture for multiple reasons.

I suspect it's more likely Taylor was getting hold of the wrong end of the stick or talking outright BS.

 

[kevinw]

Chris Tremlett was 6ft 7in and bowled around 80mph, but looked frightening to face.

 

[thierry henry]

Also I'm not sure Thomson was 1.88. In some photos he looks taller than Lillee, in others shorter.

Yeah I thought/think he was slightly shorter than Lillee. A little under 6'. 188cm is a pretty major exaggeration.

 

[Flem274*]

The shorter you are, the faster you need to be.

Unless you are Kemar Roach or Neil Wagner.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

I suspect it's more likely Taylor was getting hold of the wrong end of the stick or talking outright BS.

He's right, sorry.

 

[shortpitched713]

Actually there is a reason that I found that cricket speed guns could be less reliable than in baseball, at least plausibly.

A speedgun measures speed along the vector that it is pointed, so it needs to be pointed as straight in the direction of delivery (or pointing towards direction it's coming, as possible to get the most accurate reading.

For baseball, the batter stands 60' from the backstop behind him, and another 60' to the mound, for a total of 120 feet distance. The speed gun measurement is conveniently taken at a straight line from the backstop pointed straight at the pitcher.

For cricket, the equivalent spot is from the sightscreen either behind the bowler or the batsman, which is going to be at least a minimum of 200 feet away. That difference in distance + the fact that it's probably harder to orient it straight down the delivery vector (unless you poke a hole through the sightscreen, which I don't think they do, I think the gun is usually just mounted on top of it), might be the reason that cricket readings could be less reliable, and vary from ground to ground depending on pitch and speed gun mounting/setup considerations.

If I'm understanding the tech correctly, it just seems easier logistically to get an accurate and precise reading with a speed gun in baseball than in cricket, but there would be ways to work around it. (Place it on the stumps, or in umpires hat).

 

[honestbharani]

It also always reads the pitched up balls faster but in reality, the bowler may have bowled it with just as much, if not more, effort.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

151

View attachment 38926

The Cricinfo page that incorrectly states Roberts' speed as 159 something (citing the source above, Lillee's The Art of Fast Bowling) says Snow was measured at 139-ish in 1976, but I've been unable to verify any measurements happened at all that year (though the figures must have come from somewhere) and he was well past his best. I think he could have pushed well into the 140s at his best but not the 150s.

OTOH @SJS quoted Lillee from a slightly later book as saying: "Snow was the first fast bowler I came across whom I would regard as express. I was young and impressionable at the time, but I had a good eye and I knew “quick” when I saw it. I would have hated to live on the difference in pace between Snow and Andy Roberts", so you can take that.

Also I'm not sure Thomson was 1.88. In some photos he looks taller than Lillee, in others shorter.

Thommo clear ahead of the pack. Guy is a big exaggerator but most probably the fastest ever. His action does seem to be the best for generating raw pace.