Richard said:
And Flintoff and Jones are swing-bowlers who merely happen to be quick as well. If they simply bowled fast and didn't swing it they'd be useless. In fact, both did used to be quick without movement, and both were utterly rubbish until very recently. It's only this summer last that they've both been good bowlers.
Harmison, who does rely on pace alone, is a rubbish bowler, and has played no real part in the most recent successes. He's had 2 good Tests in his last 14 (Bangladesh not included, of course), 1 of which was lost.
At least they had pace. That made their swing bowling more effective. Compare that with someone like Craig White or Martin Bicknell, or any of the Indian swing bowlers, who get decent swing but can't pose any threat due to their lack of pace. Harmison may be 'rubbish', but still, as a part of a bowling combination, he complements the seam/swing brigade well. While he dos the bust-up act and bowls like a cannon, Hoggard does it easy, moving the ball. Jones can move the ball off the pitch at a good pace, while Flintoff is more of a deck-hitting bowler with a lot of pace. Now that's a combination that can work. Not three Indian medium-pacers who get some degree of movement but can't rattle the batting side.
Richard said:
There are very few 90mph bowlers in any sides ATM - aside from the English three mentioned above, Shoaib, Lee and Bond are the only three around at the moment. Sri Lanka, with Malinga, haven't noticed anything - and Shoaib again is not a good bowler because of his pace, it's because of his swing (mainly reverse). Lee is just rubbish and hasn't been in the team when 3 genuinely good seamers have been in nick, and Bond has barely played anyway and has really only influenced 1 Test out of his 8.
Malinga's built like a little breadstick, so don't expect too much from him- he's not even as fast, and can't maintain that pace. There's a major difference between reverse-swing at an easy pace and Shoaib's explosive pace supplemented by reverse-swing. He may not get as much movement as you would find in England's county matches, but it still works.
The Aussie attack have taken 20 wickets cheaply very often when Lee's been bowling, and they're a powerful ODI bowling unit, when he's a relatively permanent fixture. Lee has had a good Ashes series, but there's not been enough support. Bond ripped through a seven (or eight) strong Indian batting lineup, taking six for not too many.
Richard said:
Quite simply, unless the fast men get the figures, they haven't contributed.
I can't really recall too many occasions India have crumbled against express pace in itself.
There have been no fast men to get the figures. We've seen Brett Lee, Allan Donald, Dilhara Fernando, Nantie Hayward and Shane Bond unsettle many Indian teams.
If so, that's a crying shame - and it has to be asked, why does not someone with a World-renowned reputation for coaching and scouting quality seam-bowlers not get involved? Someone like Ian Bishop, Andy Roberts, Bob Cottam or Allan Donald
I really don't know; maybe a case of indifference. Or perhaps these old experts think pace counts for nothing, only seam and swing matters. Of course, it's never worked.
L, the fact that you mention him and that he's still considered the best left arm bowler in Pakistan indicates the sorry tale of Pak fast bowling.Khalil was pasted to all part of the ground when that joker played against India.Ever wondered why Akram spend time with IKP and Zaheer Khan but refuse to meet loonies like Khalil and Irshaad???
