Srinath in tests: 1996-2002

[Pratters]

Yes, but the article notes that the same view was held of Mcgrath when he was timed and it came out at 140kph - showing that, as Michael Atherton once remarked, "the speed gun does not do him justice". I must note that this has little to do with the talent argument, but I found your quote that Mcgrath and Srinath was of similar pace, as inaccurate.

Well if McGrath was indeed slower than Srinath at his fastest, I am very surprised. Speedometers weren't used early in McGrath's career during actual games, so one can never be sure really.

 

[Richard]

McGrath and Srinath are essentially the same age (Srinath is 5 months older) and I'd say it's fair to say that at equal points in their career Srinath was always faster. Unfortunately, both were the best part of 30 by the time speedguns were perfected (the first time both bowled in front of one was the Super Six of the 1999 World Cup). 27-29 is generally the sort of time when a bowler can expect to be at his peak pace-wise, and some can maintain it for longer. In the 1999 World Cup Srinath was comfortably the second-fastest bowler on view after Shoaib Akhtar; McGrath's fastest balls were certainly quick, but he was consistently in the mid-80s while Srinath went over 90 almost as often as not. How they compared in the 1995-1998 period will never really be known. McGrath was not, I don't think, thought to be that quick when he very first emerged; Srinath, UIMM, was. This is not neccessarily reliable - as Manee notes, the speed a batsman thinks a bowler is bowling at and the speed he is are not always the same thing. I imagine McGrath probably lost more pace off the pitch than Srinath (in fact I know that the fact that he lost a decent bit off the pitch helped him catch rather than miss the edge more often than so many) so even though he was better he may have seemed slower even if they were actually releasing at similar speeds.

So in the 1999 World Cup, McGrath was certainly fast enough to classify as rather than fast-medium, but only in the lower ranks of fast; Srinath was fast and very fast. Srinath was still bowling in the 140s in the early-2000s; McGrath was not (IIRR he was actually bowling slower than Greg Blewett - who was far quicker than his run-up suggested - at one point). But McGrath lasted until 2006/07, while Srinath was basically done by 2002. Even though Srinath could bowl quicker than McGrath, he was not able to bowl for anywhere near so long.

 

[Pratters]

McGrath and Srinath are essentially the same age (Srinath is 5 months older) and I'd say it's fair to say that at equal points in their career Srinath was always faster.

I am talking about when McGrath first burst on to the scene in 1995-96. Every one knows the speeds in 1999.

Also, I don't see how you can make such an assumption that Srinath was always faster. That's ridiculous.

 

[Richard]

LOL WTF? Talent does not equal speed.

Ability to propel the ball at high speed (say, 90mph) is one of many talents that aid a bowler's effectiveness. But it's less important than some others, and also less important than some things which can be learned almost in their entirity (ie, how to bowl with a good action which both presents the seam well and avoids stress on joints and the like thus preventing injury).

 

[Richard]

I am talking about when McGrath first burst on to the scene Richard.

Also, I don't see how you can make such an assumption that Srinath was always faster. That's ridiculous.

And as we've both noted, unfortunately no-one can ever be quite sure about that because there were no in-match speedometers until 1998, and the first outside England was not until 1999/2000.

I posted what might be reasonable suspicions; that McGrath was relatively sedate when he first emerged then cranked things up shortly afterwards, while Srinath (who debuted at a younger age than McGrath and an age when almost all bowlers are below the top pace they manage in their career) was always very quick.

But these can only ever be suspicions - no-one will know for sure. All we know is their comparative speeds 1999-2002/03 - and as I say in these terms Srinath was always on top. I think it amounts to not-unreasonable suspicion that a bowler who was a little quicker (say 5 kph or so) at 29 was also so at 24-25, but it is not something that can be certain. They may have been the same pace, or Srinath's hedgemony may have been still greater.

Every one knows the speeds in 1999 FFS.

I'm not sure everyone does at all. Sure, you might, but I've heard plenty of people who don't even realise the speedster was in use in the 1999 Super Six (and semis, and final).

 

[Manee]

I'm not sure everyone does at all. Sure, you might, but I've heard plenty of people who don't even realise the speedster was in use in the 1999 Super Six (and semis, and final).

Such as me, for one.

 

[Manee]

Ability to propel the ball at high speed (say, 90mph) is one of many talents that aid a bowler's effectiveness. But it's less important than some others, and also less important than some things which can be learned almost in their entirity (ie, how to bowl with a good action which both presents the seam well and avoids stress on joints and the like thus preventing injury).

I do feel that very few bowlers make a considerable alteration to their bowling action, in the modern age, especially one which causes significant improvement to their success at international level.

 

[Richard]

TBH there aren't that many down the years that I can think of who did. Two of the only ones to come to my mind are Neil Foster and Shane Watson - look at their actions in the first part of their career and the second and you'd be hard-pressed to recognise it was the same bowler. Tino Best briefly tried to do the same thing but soon reverted back to old habits.

 

[Manee]

TBH there aren't that many down the years that I can think of who did. Two of the only ones to come to my mind are Neil Foster and Shane Watson - look at their actions in the first part of their career and the second and you'd be hard-pressed to recognise it was the same bowler. Tino Best briefly tried to do the same thing but soon reverted back to old habits.

Yes. Watson springs to mind - I do like his new action, it is so coached that it is beautiful in its own way.

 

[sunilreddy]

1st Test: India v South Africa at Ahmedabad, Nov 20-23, 1996 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Srinath's best test performance ever

 

[0RI0N]

1st Test: India v South Africa at Ahmedabad, Nov 20-23, 1996 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Srinath's best test performance ever

er N0.
vs Pakistan at the Gardens 1999.
Only denied by Saeed n Shoaib specials.

 

[Richard]

1st Test: India v South Africa at Ahmedabad, Nov 20-23, 1996 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Srinath's best test performance ever

"Most pivotal" would perhaps be more appropriate.

 

[Flem274*]

Talent depends on who is commentating.

Loved hearing the English comms. feel brave enough to patronise the Aussies in the warm up before the Ashes, calling them a "solid unit" and "gritty and hard working". I had to check we weren't up for a tour over there.

Oh, and anyone that bowls over 140 is automatically more talented than someone who doesn't. Likewise, batsmen that hit big sixes lare more talented than the brainy nudgers and nurdlers like Colly and Elliott.

I'll stop grinding my dumb commentator axe now.

 

[Top_Cat]

Why I feel Srinath and Gillespie were more talented than McGrath

McGrath didn't have that many special deliveries. Even when he bowled on the spot, he didn't trouble the batsmen like Srinath or Gillespie troubled the batsmen when they bowled on the spot.

McGrath was always an accurate bowler but as time went on and his speed reduced, he improved his accuracy, also limiting the types of deliveries he bowled. He did all this with great discipline. I would call Allan Donald and Curtly Ambrose as bowlers who were really that talented. McGrath was talented for sure but not a great deal when compared to other great bowlers of his generation or in one particular case, a mediocre bowler who didn't achieve his potential in Jawagal Srinath.

And this is where the disagreement is. I saw McGrath even before he was playing for NSW and the idea that he somehow lacked natural talent as a bowler strikes me as lacking insight for what constitutes a top-level bowler.

 

[Burgey]

Personally, I was always pretty worried when Srinath was bowling vs Australia. Just got the impression he was capable of upsetting the apple cart from time to time. It didn't always happen, but as a spectator I certainly always respected his ability.

 

[Xuhaib]

Personally, I was always pretty worried when Srinath was bowling vs Australia. Just got the impression he was capable of upsetting the apple cart from time to time. It didn't always happen, but as a spectator I certainly always respected his ability.

this.

but unlike Wasim,Waqar,Ambose,Donald,McGrath it did not feel you were watching someone special. He was more in the Vass,Gillispie area atleast for me.

 

[thierry henry]

My lasting memory of Srinath is that, in two (it may even have been 3?) ODIs in 2002/03 (when we were flogging India) he clean-bowled Chris Cairns with almost identical deliveries, perfect leg-cutters that hit the top of off. By all accounts it took him a decade to work out how to bowl that sort of ball though.

 

[Richard]

Most people go through entire careers without even looking like perfecting that ball. It's the most difficult and most rewarding of all deliveries. Plenty know they haven't got a hope of perfecting it so don't even waste their effort trying; some try and fail.

I guess that's kinda what P means when he's on about Srinath being more talented than some. Certainly Srinath had some rare talents that some better bowlers did not have, even if others had more important (and in fact equally rare) ones. Even Allan Donald did not bowl the leg-cutter as well as Srinath did later in his career, and in every other respect Donald was the complete bowler - and of course a massively superior bowler to Srinath.

 

[Burgey]

this.

but unlike Wasim,Waqar,Ambose,Donald,McGrath it did not feel you were watching someone special. He was more in the Vass,Gillispie area atleast for me.

Spot on.

 

[Pratters]

I guess that's kinda what P means when he's on about Srinath being more talented than some. Certainly Srinath had some rare talents that some better bowlers did not have, even if others had more important (and in fact equally rare) ones. Even Allan Donald did not bowl the leg-cutter as well as Srinath did later in his career, and in every other respect Donald was the complete bowler - and of course a massively superior bowler to Srinath.

Srinath had talent to take wickets at a fast rate when he brought his A game to the park. He averages 20 in tests India won during his career. This in a career which was dominated by home victories dominated by Anil Kumble. Problem was, he rarely brought his A game to the park as witnessed by his mediocre career record.