The Fast Bowler's fast Bowlers

[SJS]

3. JEFF THOMSON

I don't think a fellow of Jeff Thomson's make-up is about to admit to the ravages of old age. When he was left out of the Australian programme in the 1983-84 summer and passed over again for the tour of West Indies, Thomson accepted it with his usual grace.

"It's a bloody joke", said Thomson after the team to the West Indies was announced. "I ought to be in that team. Somebody ought to ask the West Indians whether they like facing me."

Thommo went on to say that he thought he was as quick as ever and bowling as well as ever. But like it or not, Thomson wasn't even the standby bowler for the West Indies tour. That honour went to Rod McCurdy, a relatively unknown Victorian.

Still, its far too earkly to be writing Thommo's obituary. I speak with a bit of austhority here because a lot of people were prepared to write mine a long while before I was prepared to tuck myself in to the coffin.

Even if he can't force his way back into the Australian side. - and the young Australians are forming a queue behind Geoff lawson, Rodney Hogg, Karl Rackemann and Co. - "two up" still has a great deal to contribute to Queensland in their quest for the elusive Sheffield Shield. In fact, if Western Australia hadn't met Thommo's Queenslanders in the 1983-84 final- and if I hadn't been WA captain in my last first class appearance, I'd have been hoping like hell for him.

Jeff Thomson and I are mates for many years and I like to bring that our partnership as the opening attack brought a little joy to Australians.

Looking back I guess Jeff was the only Australian fast bowler to whom I ever played second fiddle. At his peak, he was the most explosive, lethal and unplayable bowler I have ever seen. His ball pitched just short of a length would rear so sharply that even the lofty Adam's apple of beanpole Tony Greig was in constant danger. His bouncer was downright fearsome. And his yorker, the ball he fondly described as his "sandshow crusher" - was legendary. It was, as commentators are wont to say, a "brute of a ball".

Thomson's biggest attribute in those devastating seasons was his shock value. His unorthodox 'sling' action - the amble up to the bowling crease, then the whiplash delivery - made him unpredictable and so often unplayable.

Sure he could spray them about. But thats what made his so dangerous. One wide down the leg side, one wide of the off stump, the next one plum in line and beating thye batsman pointless.

I think the Australian selectors gave Thommo a pretty raw deal throughout the 1983-84 summer. Surely he was worth at least one international game somewhere along the line. Then again, from a purely selfish viewpoint, if he'd been in, I might have been out - and for me anyway that would never have done.

I'll tell you what though, if I had been selecting the Australian party to tour the West Indies, Jeff Thomson would have been on my short list.​

 

[Richard]

4. MICHAEL HOLDING

For a fast bowler Michel Holding is so gentle and unwarlike. You start to get all fired up and Michael just stands there and smiles. Many have probably looked for a way to dislike him, but it's impossible.

I remember the day short-pitched deliveries twice struck gutsy little West Australian and Test opener Bruce Laird in the groin. After the second shattering blow to Laird's testicles, Holding came down the pitch to make sure the batsman was okay. When he saw that Bruce was more determined than ever, Holding drawled, "Sorry Bruce but have you had any children?" "Yes two" said Bruce, grim faced. "That's good"said Michael as he walked away smiling.

But while Holding brings sportsmanship and integrity to the art of fast bowling, he is one of the most feared pace bowlers of my time. Batsmen all over the world have for many years been ducking his bouncers like baddies dodging bullets in a Wayne western movie.

Holding is not a physically imposing specimen. In fact, he is quite thin. He does stand 6-ft 4-in and I will never forget his long and rhythmical run up to the wicket. He glided to the wicket and then got it all together in this lovely, unhurried action which propelled the ball at a most frightening pace. He was as smooth as glass.

His two main weapons (pace apart) when he was only bowling express, were his yorker and bouncer. He delivered these two balls as well as anyone I have seen.

Time has certainly taken the edge off his pace. In fact, in the 1983-84 summer, he bowled off the short run - and he wasn't any less lethal. He was still quick enough to make most batsmen hurry their shots, but he was also beginning to develop some subtlety to his bowling. Holding has now learnt to move the ball around. Hell, what next?​

What a fabulous picture.

 

[Burgey]

I think it's the same one from the front cover of Holding's book (at least, it's on the edition I've got iirc).

 

[aussie tragic]

3. JEFF THOMSON

Looking back I guess Jeff was the only Australian fast bowler to whom I ever played second fiddle. At his peak, he was the most explosive, lethal and unplayable bowler I have ever seen. His ball pitched just short of a length would rear so sharply that even the lofty Adam's apple of beanpole Tony Greig was in constant danger. His bouncer was downright fearsome. And his yorker, the ball he fondly described as his "sandshoe crusher" - was legendary. It was, as commentators are wont to say, a "brute of a ball".

[/COLOR][/FONT]​

What higher praise can you get than that...I think Thommo may be significantly underated by anyone who saw him after his shoulder injury...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Snow will be #1 for mine.

 

[Richard]

What higher praise can you get than that...I think Thommo may be significantly underated by anyone who saw him after his shoulder injury...

Think anyone who knows their cricket history doesn't underestimate his impact '74/75-'77 at all. He was lethal.

What's interesting is that Thomson had more good times after his shoulder injury of '76/77 - bowled pretty decently over here in '77 on his comeback. It was post-WSC that he started to struggle, and even then he had one last hurrah in '82/83. Real shame, obviously, that he came over here in '85, as it was a shame the idiot played that Test in '72/73 with a broken-foot. But knock those 3 Tests off, then split his career into pre-WSC and post-WSC and I think you get a pretty decent impression of how deadly then decent he was.

 

[Goughy]

Snow was the ultimate Daisy

Thats why other quicks rank him higher than his stats may otherwise suggest.

When he wanted to be he was almost on another level to others. Rapid and strong-willed. However, didnt have the mindset to do it every game.

When fired up though he made other quicks jealous.

 

[JBH001]

Always been an admirer of Snow. And he is always in my all time England XI.

Although, he was a bowler who needed a good captain. I reckon Hutton or May would have done well by him.

PS. Does CW have a Private Message capacity? If so, how do I access it? Thanks.

 

[archie mac]

Always been an admirer of Snow. And he is always in my all time England XI.

Although, he was a bowler who needed a good captain. I reckon Hutton or May would have done well by him.

PS. Does CW have a Private Message capacity? If so, how do I access it? Thanks.

No

Although if you contact Richard he knows more emails then most on this site

 

[SJS]

Okay gentlemen, here we are :-

The SECOND BEST fast bowler Dennis Lillee saw (till about 1983-84) was

2. JOHN SNOW

John Snow once wrote of himself ……. I am a boy who weaves webs of fairytales …….” It was from a published book of Snow’s poems when the tearaway England fast bowler was at the peak of his power. Well, I don’t know about fairytales but he was surely one of the game’s ornery characters when you put a cricket bat in his hand.

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. Snow was a bowler who could attack, or defend… depending on instructions. He rarely gave anything away. He fired the ball monotonously in just short of a length, inevitably coming up under the batsman’s ribcage. His bouncer matched his mean attitude too. It came off a ball which really wasn’t much shorter than his usual delivery.

While Snow could swing the ball away (and I don’t think he ever had the in-swinger) his best delivery was an off cutter. Another thing that seemed missing from the Snow kit-bag was a good Yorker, but perhaps with so much expertise in all other departments, he simply didn’t need it.

When Snow came to Australia in World Series Cricket days, he was really a spent force. He spent most of his time up country playing in the Cavaliers team. Of course, he joined the WSC after spending a couple of seasons in the wilderness as far as the England side was concerned, for reasons I always thought to be disciplinary. Maybe he flouted authority once too often.

If that was the reason then the English authority did its country great dis-service by forcing him into what amounted to premature retirement from Test Cricket. Snow was one of the finest fast bowlers of our time. Any batsman who faced him anywhere in the world will vouch for that. ​

 

[archie mac]

This is great stuff SJS, but don't forget to check into the SJS trivia thread

 

[SJS]

And the finest fast bowler, according to no less a person than one considered by many as a strong contender for the finest of all time title himself, was

Anderson Montgomery Everton Roberts

(having been fortunate enough to have seen Roberts in his prime I cannot find any fault whatsoever with the choice. I just wonder why I keep forgetting it sometimes )

Andy Roberts has always been something of a mystery man. He has a slight, wispy beard, an intimidating stare and an imposing physique - 5ft 10ins and 186 lbs. of steel set in concrete. As a bowler, handy Andy was never as effortless as Michael Holding, but he never executed his deliveries so well that he always seemed to have something in reserve.

Like many of the fast bowlers of my time, Roberts is now "getting on". Certainly he's over 30 - a fast bowlers demarcation line - and he was conspicuous by his absence in the West Indian team which toured Australia for the 1983-84 one day series. It was suggested that they could have been saving Andy for one last big assault on the Australian team on their West Indies tour, but as it turned out, he was simply crowded out by the outstanding crop of younger quickies in the Caribbean.

Andy tops my list because I consider him the most complete fast bowler I have ever seen. He had everything. He was mean in his approach to the batsmen. He would give them his Rasputin stare if he scored off his bowling.

He was also fast, damn fast. He might have replaced his fast ball with a little more guile as he got older, but in his early days he was frighteningly quick. His line and length were immaculate and his variation was brilliant. He had in-swing, out swing, a magnificient off-cutter and a superb yorker. He also had a great bouncer...... or, should I say, a great couple of bouncers.

Roberts has a quick bouncer. The second, was noticeably slower, devised to decieve the batsmen - and with great effect. The old one-two was a lethal combination.

I believe Andy Roberts was a vital part of the West Indies' renaissance in world cricket. He gave them determination. For a time, West Indies had the reputation of collapsing under pressure - it certainly happened often enough when they played us. But all that changed. They became mean and tough. I am convinced Andy had a lot to do with that change in attitude.

​

 

[SJS]

Before we find anothe list of rankings, I would like to list the fastbowlers covered in some famous books on great bowlers. One of my favourites is John Arlott edited "Cricket - The Great Bowlers"

It lists ten bowlers three of whom, Grimmett, O'Rielly and Laker, are spinners. The other seven, in the order of their careers (writers names in brackets) are :-

1. SF Barnes (Neville Cardus)
2. Maurice Tate (AA Thomson)
3. Harold Larwood (Bill Bowes)
4. Ray Lindwall (Ray Robinson)
5. Alec Bedser (John Woodcock)
6. Fred Trueman (Frank Tyson)
7. Brian Statham (Frank Tyson)

I will post here excerpts from these great articles to give a flavour of these truly great bowlers.

SF BARNES

​

In Australia 1911-12, Warner was taken ill and JWHT Douglas took over the captaincy, lost the toss, led his men onto the field and took the new ball himself (with left handed Frank Foster). Barnes was shocked. Australia scored 447 and 308 (JWHT opened in the second innings too) and won the test comfortably. We take up the story in the second test.

This times Douglas tossed the new ball to Barnes. Australia having won the toss once more.......

Barnes demolished the strong first line of Australian batsmanship by overthrowing Bardsley, Kelleway, Hill and Armstrong in five overs for one run only. At lunch Australia had somehow aquired 32 for 4; after an hour and ten minutes of ruthless, smooth, rhythmic action, Barnes had bowled 9 overs: 6 maidens : 3 runs : for 4 wickets.

After lunch Hobbs caught Minnett off Barnes whose figures now staggered Australia from Freemantle to darwin: 11 overs: 7 maidens: 6 runs: 5 wickets. The astounding fact of this renowned piece of bowling is that Barnes was suffering from dizziness, actually saying to his captain that he would have to 'chuck it - I can hardly see the other end'.

In the second inings he had to be content with 3 for 96 but England won indeed as England won all of the remaining matches of the rubber. Barnes had let Douglas know, in no uncertain way who had claim to sharing the new ball with Foster.​

In the series Barnes took 34 wickets at 22.88. In those last 4 tests when he bowled with the new ball and which England won, it was 30 wickets at 19.97 each !

In a talk with Arlott, Barnes tried to recall the occasion and each ball he faced on his miraculous morning at Melbourne. The pitch was full of runs. The first Australian batsman to go was Bardsley.

"The ball swung into him and hit his toe, then onto the wicket; he was a left hander"

The Clem Hill another left hander.

"I bowled him the same ball which got Bardsley, He played it. Next ball I bowled him a leg break - to a right hander - one coming in to him. And he played that. Then I sent him one on his leg stump and it hit the off.... Hill paid me a compliment; he said he'd never had such an over in his life...."

Years after, Clem Hill himself described to me that over Barnes had bowled to him.

"I was first wicket down after Bardsley had gone for 0. I got four, probably from Frank Foster, but between him and Barnes there was pretty little choice/ On the whole I wanted to get away from Barnes. I played three different balls. Three balls to play in a split second - a straight 'un, an inswinger and a break back! Then came along one which was straight half way, not more than medium pace. It swerved to my legs, perfect for tickling round the corner for a single. But the ruddy thing broke across after pitching, quick off the ground and took my off stump!"

Charles Macartney maintained that at Leeds, in July 1909 Barnes bowled Victor Trumper, in Australia's second innings, "with the sort of a ball one sees when he's tight! I was at the other end. I should know!"

The remarkable fact is that, after the minatory appearance in Test matches by Barnes in Australia, 1901-02, and after a single appearance for England at Sheffield in the 1902 rubber, lost by England by 143 runs, Barnes did not again play for England till the 1907-08 rubber in australia. I have been unable to find out why, in 1902, Barnes was left out of the tragically decicive test at Old Trafford (engraved on the heart of poor Fred Tate).

In the preceding test at Sheffield, Barnes had taken six for 49 in Australia's first inings and one for 50 in the second. Barnes told me that at the agonising end of the Old Trafford game, which presented the 'Ashes' to Australia by 3 runs, he was sitting in the professional balcony in company with George Hirst, who was also not chosen to play.

Barnes, believe it or not, was ...cast out after taking seven wickets for 99. Moreover, Warner and Lord's left him out of the England team that toured Australia in 1903-04, also he was not called on to bowl in the rubber here in 1905!

Round about 1902, Wisden severely criticising Barnes as bowler, declared that he had no "off break". Barnes decades later told Duckworth that the reason why he was not called upon to join Warner's team was "because they said I could not bowl an off-break".

Anyhow, after the team's names had been published...Barnes, playing for Lancashire at Lord's, "whipped one down just outside Mr. Warner's off stump which broke in (from the off) and knocked over his leg-stump". How like the man, always ready to administer the rod of correction.

I reckon that it was during the years 1907 to 1912 that Barnes was bringing to technical control his greatest weapon. I called it the 'Barnes ball' forty years ago - the ball pitching between leg and middle stumps and turning across to, and near or on, the off stump. He added to this most dangerous of all the bowlers weapons a spin swerve.

I remember talking in the early 1920's to Noble...he told me that he obtained his out-swing by spin, and could, after the bal had pitched, cause it to break back from the off.

In his day, a new ball was available only (once) at the beginning of an innings. Barnes admitted to Oldfield that he got the idea of the Barnes ball from close observation of Noble's bowling during the 1901-02 rubber. For years, Barnes privately practiced the technique necessary to master this out-swing that came back at the batsman. According to JT Tyldesley, Barnes did not command his 'trump card' while playing for Lancashire between 1902 an 1903, but depended on length, off spin and a direction which created the illusion that the ball was swinging away. As late as the Australian rubber v England of 1907-1908, Barnes on occasion, when the wicket was helpful and two batsmen were solidly anchored, actually resorted to bowling round the wicket, aided and abetted by four short legs.

.... Of all the great cricketers I have spoken to with any free and intimate exchange of views, Barnes was the most inscrutable. He could not explain his own devices. To quote from the interview with John Arlott :

"Now, the legend is that even on perfect wickets you bowled a leg break. What about this particular ball?"

"Well, I don't know. It came along with the others"

"How did you bowl it?"

"For a fast ball, a fast leg-break was exactly the same as bowling an off-break."

"Did you spin it off the third finger?"

Yes. Every ball I bowled I had to spin - fast slow or medium."

As illuminating as a dark lantern !!

It is, I gather from the evidence of a number of experts, including Mr Ian Peebles, at any rate clear that Barnes executed his leg break without turning the wrist, an action which gives some notice to the batsman. Apparently Barnes manipulated the leg-turn by leverage of the third finger - as most leg spinners do, though most of them need to turn the wrist over (too)....We can easily understand that Barnes had most batsmen guessing concerning the direction of his spin, if the wrist and palm of his hand were pointing down the wicket with no hint of a wrist turn over for the leg-break.

Those born too late to see Barnes bowl might conceivably get some idea of his attack if they have watched Maurice Tate and Alec Bedser. I refer only to the actual bowling not to the actions directing and controlling it. Mentally mingle the best of Tate and Bedser: length, pace, swing, then add a tincture of O'Reilly, then maybe, some notion, some adumbration, will emerge or loom of Barnes in full spate.

But the delivery, the run to the crease and the physical motion of Tate Bedser and O'Reilly were, in each case, arduous compared to the flowing action of Barnes; a dozen strides, upright, apparently weightless, a gradual gathering of velocity, without jerk or obvious strain, then the rhythmical not dramatic, upward leap.

"When I delivered the ball," said Barnes."I wanted to look eight feet"

AC MacLaren, who fielded first slip to Barnes, assured me that Barnes rarely ever sent down a loose one. "If ever he looked scorable it was when giving curve through the air to his leg-break".
​

 

[bagapath]

really appreciate your efforts SJS. these are superb articles on some great players of thte past. love them.

in botham's earlier auti bio (don't tell kath) i think he selected lillee and ambrose in his xi (no marshall for sure. beefy says amby was tougher to face). i dont know if he selected holding as the third pacer. qadir was the spinner of his choice. it was written before warne became the greatest of the era.

miandad's xi had lillee, hadlee and holding, i think.

 

[SJS]

really appreciate your efforts SJS. these are superb articles on some great players of thte past. love them.

in botham's earlier auti bio (don't tell kath) i think he selected lillee and ambrose in his xi (no marshall for sure. beefy says amby was tougher to face). i dont know if he selected holding as the third pacer. qadir was the spinner of his choice. it was written before warne became the greatest of the era.

miandad's xi had lillee, hadlee and holding, i think.

Thanks mate.

I hope you did not miss THIS fabulous piece on a visit to Larwwod in Sydney.

 

[Richard]

in botham's earlier auti bio (don't tell kath) i think he selected lillee and ambrose in his xi (no marshall for sure. beefy says amby was tougher to face).

That's odd, given he faced Ambrose in, what, 2 Tests, Tests he shouldn't have played.

 

[bagapath]

thanks once again. yes, you're right. it is one of the best cricket articles i 've read. i owe you a drink.

 

[Richard]

PS. Does CW have a Private Message capacity? If so, how do I access it? Thanks.

No

Although if you contact Richard he knows more emails then most on this site

Wouldn't presume to think I know even close to all the "main" members emails, but any time you want a word I'm available via RJED2@AOL.com Anthony.

 

[funnygirl]

Andy Roberts.Great choice.No one can blame Lillee for rating the master craftsman at number 1.i thought it would have been Holding followed by Roberts .

 

[SJS]

thanks once again. yes, you're right. it is one of the best cricket articles i 've read. i owe you a drink.

We'll keep it for a rainy day