Instagram


Indoor Big Bash

Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

Results 1 to 74 of 74
  1. #1
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    How did the fast bowlers of 1920s-40s manage to bowl so many overs?

    Have seem multiple claims that pacers of 1930s and 1940s could bowl 90 mph. They were strong, worked in mines and there is no other explanation why they couldn't bowl fast.

    Yet, bowlers could easily bowl 100 overs in a day and this one takes cake

    I'm afraid I can't have more than an educated guess at these answers, as Wisden doesn't divulge how many overs were bowled each day, and the reports in the Times, which I have unearthed, don't give the bowling figures at the end of the day. Anyway, after India were all out for 203 in 68.1 overs on the first day at Old Trafford in 1936, England reached 173 for 2, and carried that to 571 for 8 the next day before declaring. In all, England faced 142 overs and scored (according to Wisden at an average rate of 91 runs per hour. The innings lasted six and a quarter hours, so the Indians were bowling more than 22 overs an hour! India, left about two and a quarter hours to bat, reached 190 for 0 by the end of the second day - on which a record 588 runs were scored all told, from what I should think was about 125 overs - and finished with 390 for 5 from 115 overs. As for Don Bradman at Headingley in 1930, Australia were all out about half an hour before lunch on the second day... for 566, with England having bowled 158 overs in about seven and a half hours - so on the first day, when Australia scored 458 for 3 (Bradman 309 not out of his eventual 334), they would also have faced around 125 overs.
    22 overs an hours. 125 overs in a day.

    Whether it took place or not, it had little effect on Bradman. By lunch he was 105 not out, joining his famous fellow New South Welshmen Victor Trumper and Charlie Macartney as batsmen to have scored a hundred before lunch on the first day of a Test match. It would be 46 years before the Australian trio would be joined by Majid Khan. Obviously the times were different back in 1930. In the two hours leading to lunch, as many as 46 overs were sent down.
    How did fast bowlers who could bowl as quick as modern bowlers were able to send down overs at such fast rate which even spinners struggle to achieve now.

    And after bowling so many overs quickly how did they manage to bowl almost 30 overs extra on consistent basis.

    Modern day bowlers barely touch 15 overs an hour rate.



  2. #2
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They didn't have long run ups and got on with it no time wasting no celebrations for a wicket etc.
    Spinners were more prominent bowled more overs as there were less fast bowlers which tells you to succeed playing well against spin was a given.

  3. #3
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    6,612
    Mentioned
    261 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    They were trundlers.


    A skilled hawk conceals its talons.

  4. #4
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Venue
    Karachi
    Runs
    19,257
    Mentioned
    1050 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)
    never read them being 90mph bowlers

    to me they appear to be Grade A trundlers


    #MPGA

  5. #5
    Debut
    Dec 2013
    Venue
    SMCHS, Karachi, Pakistan
    Runs
    8,911
    Mentioned
    600 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    They weren't necessarily bowling 'fast'. If you read cricket history from any given accounts, it was only after the 1960s i.e. that cricket became somewhat modern and in line with what we see today.

    Pre WWII was essentially the minnowesque era of the game.

  6. #6
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wahab Riaz shows more pace equals more success.

  7. #7
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief Destroyer View Post
    They were trundlers.
    Has any trundlers bowled at such rates in modern game?

    This has been difficult even for spinners. Trundling can't explain this alone.



  8. #8
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    3,873
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    Has any trundlers bowled at such rates in modern game?

    This has been difficult even for spinners. Trundling can't explain this alone.
    You see spinners bowling 40 overs sometimes in modern game.

    After seeing footage of the 50's and 60's, it is clear none of the bowlers bowled over 130. Most were 110kmph trundlers. Thats almost Anil Kumble pace and Kumble used to bowl tons of overs during his day.

  9. #9
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Larwood Trueman Tyson and others bowling 70mph? Looks over 80mph or did they have the physique of women cricketers and struggled to breach 70mph.

  10. #10
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    11,582
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Perhaps the current lot of fast bowlers should skip the gym and get down the mines.

  11. #11
    Debut
    Jan 2014
    Runs
    7,596
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Whether they were 140kph bowlers or even 100kph, the bowled ridiculous amounts of overs and for that they must be commended. The best probably bowled up to 130kph I reckon while hovering around 120kph while the mediocre and ok ones bowled probably 110/120kph. Still takes stupid levels of fitness.

    Probably something to do with most bowlers spending time in Gyms, rather than out there doing functional activities. The harsher the environment, the stronger the athlete.

  12. #12
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    Have seem multiple claims that pacers of 1930s and 1940s could bowl 90 mph. They were strong, worked in mines and there is no other explanation why they couldn't bowl fast.

    Yet, bowlers could easily bowl 100 overs in a day and this one takes cake



    22 overs an hours. 125 overs in a day.



    How did fast bowlers who could bowl as quick as modern bowlers were able to send down overs at such fast rate which even spinners struggle to achieve now.

    And after bowling so many overs quickly how did they manage to bowl almost 30 overs extra on consistent basis.

    Modern day bowlers barely touch 15 overs an hour rate.
    Actually 96mph .... and not 90 mph according to @TalhaSyed in the other thread

  13. #13
    Debut
    Aug 2006
    Venue
    Scot-la-la-land
    Runs
    9,976
    Mentioned
    1530 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tusker View Post
    Actually 96mph .... and not 90 mph according to @TalhaSyed in the other thread
    How fast was he?
    Speed cameras were decades away from being invented, but researchers somehow worked out a way to register Larwood's bowling at 96mph. Jeff Thomson holds the record at 99.7mph.
    http://www.espncricinfo.com/bodyline...ry/316343.html

    An article very appropriately titled "A dummy's guide to Bodyline"

    Oh yea - the other thread in which you came up with the bogus theory of how in your opinion batsmen today face the same conditions as batsmen from Don's era (with a few minor, non-significant perks for todays batsmen), and the only reason Don was able to score at an average almost twice the rest is because Don - and Don alone - faced trundlers and bowlers who bowled with their feet and what not.

    Yea man - I remember that thread

  14. #14
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Haz95 View Post
    Whether they were 140kph bowlers or even 100kph, the bowled ridiculous amounts of overs and for that they must be commended. The best probably bowled up to 130kph I reckon while hovering around 120kph while the mediocre and ok ones bowled probably 110/120kph. Still takes stupid levels of fitness.

    Probably something to do with most bowlers spending time in Gyms, rather than out there doing functional activities. The harsher the environment, the stronger the athlete.
    Bowling 120 overs can be attributed to strength and stamina, but how do you explain bowling 46 overs in 2 hours? Those are rates of spinners and not even medium pacers today.



  15. #15
    Debut
    Jan 2014
    Runs
    7,596
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    Bowling 120 overs can be attributed to strength and stamina, but how do you explain bowling 46 overs in 2 hours? Those are rates of spinners and not even medium pacers today.
    A good question to be honest @MMHS would probably know.

    Perhaps cricket was so defensively played then that they'd probably block and collect most deliveries. I'm not too sure tbh.

  16. #16
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    Bowling 120 overs can be attributed to strength and stamina, but how do you explain bowling 46 overs in 2 hours? Those are rates of spinners and not even medium pacers today.
    Pretty sure that we will get told how working in the mines makes you super human. Stay tuned for the comedy show.

  17. #17
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Haz95 View Post
    A good question to be honest @MMHS would probably know.

    Perhaps cricket was so defensively played then that they'd probably block and collect most deliveries. I'm not too sure tbh.
    Code:
    Decade	Players	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	5	10
    1870s	37	3	59	4758	1837	101	7/55	13/110	18.18	2.31	47.1	6	1
    1880s	112	29	500	48342	17618	915	8/11	15/28	19.25	2.18	52.8	58	13
    1890s	149	32	571	62052	26149	1038	9/28	15/45	25.19	2.52	59.7	64	15
    1900s	103	41	774	73940	33133	1333	8/31	15/99	24.85	2.68	55.4	87	13
    1910s	98	29	585	51945	24591	914	9/103	17/159	26.90	2.84	56.8	53	11
    1920s	172	51	948	114614	48620	1462	9/121	13/236	33.25	2.54	78.3	68	11
    1930s	294	89	1679	189322	81544	2536	8/43	15/104	32.15	2.58	74.6	114	23
    1940s	180	45	909	107012	44926	1271	7/38	11/31	35.34	2.51	84.1	58	6
    1950s	351	164	3095	374366	137508	4818	10/53	19/90	28.54	2.20	77.7	233	33
    1960s	347	186	3892	448076	178064	5546	8/38	12/101	32.10	2.38	80.7	216	23
    1970s	321	198	3974	446566	188130	5896	9/86	16/137	31.90	2.52	75.7	228	31
    1980s	382	266	4805	528477	239888	7474	9/52	16/136	32.09	2.72	70.7	346	55
    1990s	500	347	6556	700101	321529	10204	10/74	16/220	31.51	2.75	68.6	425	55
    2000s	586	464	9038	916337	472755	13863	9/51	15/217	34.10	3.09	66.0	522	79
    2010s	473	324	6456	646072	336750	10031	9/127	14/184	33.57	3.12	64.4	409	57
    Bowlers were more economical in 50s, 60s and 70s



  18. #18
    Debut
    Mar 2014
    Venue
    In your dil, but not in your dimaag.
    Runs
    9,520
    Mentioned
    861 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Certain fast bowlers of previous eras are looked at like ancient Greek legends. Kabi lagta hai cricket ke bowlers nahi, per Zeus aur Hercules bowling karte the.


    Swing it like Akram, whack it like Afridi, live it like Inti.

  19. #19
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Haz95 View Post
    A good question to be honest @MMHS would probably know.

    Perhaps cricket was so defensively played then that they'd probably block and collect most deliveries. I'm not too sure tbh.
    I have given my answers many times for this one - Larwood & Tyson were Cyborgs like T800, T850 or T1000, or even may be T3, who knows, sent from future. So, if you live that long (Inshallah), by 2035, you should see fast bowlers bowling at 170km speed for 35 overs in a day of 125 overs in 6 hours with 10 steps run-up & 2.5 minutes in between overs.

    Blocking doesn't cost much time, because even today Jadeja, Sakib, Moeen or even Amir, BK, Stokes can finish a maiden over within 2 to 3 minutes - it's the change of overs & fall of wickets that cost time - we are struggling to manage 90 overs (90 change overs) & 7 wickets in 6.5 hours these days; but Larwood, Tyson, Lindwall, Trumann ...... managed that with 12 wickets & 125 changeovers in 6 hours keeping that windmill speed - that's talent and supremacy of human body, which has gone to ladies (no disrespect) level in 50 just years of evolution, explaining Charles Darwin's theory in fast track mood. May be after WW3 with nukes and chemical weapons, when human race will again go back to mining & agriculture age, fast bowlers will reach that physical supremacy - hope I can survive that war to see it with my own eyes.

  20. #20
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Spinners bowled more and apart from Larwood other medium to medium fast bowlers had shorter run ups.

  21. #21
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    Code:
    Decade	Players	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	5	10
    1870s	37	3	59	4758	1837	101	7/55	13/110	18.18	2.31	47.1	6	1
    1880s	112	29	500	48342	17618	915	8/11	15/28	19.25	2.18	52.8	58	13
    1890s	149	32	571	62052	26149	1038	9/28	15/45	25.19	2.52	59.7	64	15
    1900s	103	41	774	73940	33133	1333	8/31	15/99	24.85	2.68	55.4	87	13
    1910s	98	29	585	51945	24591	914	9/103	17/159	26.90	2.84	56.8	53	11
    1920s	172	51	948	114614	48620	1462	9/121	13/236	33.25	2.54	78.3	68	11
    1930s	294	89	1679	189322	81544	2536	8/43	15/104	32.15	2.58	74.6	114	23
    1940s	180	45	909	107012	44926	1271	7/38	11/31	35.34	2.51	84.1	58	6
    1950s	351	164	3095	374366	137508	4818	10/53	19/90	28.54	2.20	77.7	233	33
    1960s	347	186	3892	448076	178064	5546	8/38	12/101	32.10	2.38	80.7	216	23
    1970s	321	198	3974	446566	188130	5896	9/86	16/137	31.90	2.52	75.7	228	31
    1980s	382	266	4805	528477	239888	7474	9/52	16/136	32.09	2.72	70.7	346	55
    1990s	500	347	6556	700101	321529	10204	10/74	16/220	31.51	2.75	68.6	425	55
    2000s	586	464	9038	916337	472755	13863	9/51	15/217	34.10	3.09	66.0	522	79
    2010s	473	324	6456	646072	336750	10031	9/127	14/184	33.57	3.12	64.4	409	57
    Bowlers were more economical in 50s, 60s and 70s
    Thanks, I knew it long, long before but didn't have the exact numbers. However, I knew it, as I mentioned many, many times from the God like status of Gary Sobers - he played the game as attractively as Sanga or Tamim or Stokes when Barringtons & Cowdreys used to bat at 1.7 RR ..... on top of that, he could bowl, express that swings at 115km ................

  22. #22
    Debut
    Jan 2014
    Runs
    7,596
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    I have given my answers many times for this one - Larwood & Tyson were Cyborgs like T800, T850 or T1000, or even may be T3, who knows, sent from future. So, if you live that long (Inshallah), by 2035, you should see fast bowlers bowling at 170km speed for 35 overs in a day of 125 overs in 6 hours with 10 steps run-up & 2.5 minutes in between overs.

    Blocking doesn't cost much time, because even today Jadeja, Sakib, Moeen or even Amir, BK, Stokes can finish a maiden over within 2 to 3 minutes - it's the change of overs & fall of wickets that cost time - we are struggling to manage 90 overs (90 change overs) & 7 wickets in 6.5 hours these days; but Larwood, Tyson, Lindwall, Trumann ...... managed that with 12 wickets & 125 changeovers in 6 hours keeping that windmill speed - that's talent and supremacy of human body, which has gone to ladies (no disrespect) level in 50 just years of evolution, explaining Charles Darwin's theory in fast track mood. May be after WW3 with nukes and chemical weapons, when human race will again go back to mining & agriculture age, fast bowlers will reach that physical supremacy - hope I can survive that war to see it with my own eyes.
    Haha, if bowlers 70 years ago bowled 120kph thunderbolts, I reckon 70 years from now we may see 180kph warm up deliveries :o

    Altho in seriousness, I 100% Agree, I don't see anyone reaching fitness/physical level of some of the 'dinosaurs'...

    I've said it before many times but there's reason why these 'uneducated villagers' who grow their own foods, grow up in tough environments are usually the best athletes. Compare The Windians, the Afghans, the Pakistanis (usually agricultural/hardupbringing brought up citizens) for example to the more supposedly 'advanced' athletes who break down every other day. If cricket was truly more professional, advanced and what other usual garbage the youtube experts claim, then why are cricketers fragile and brittle as heck today?

    GMOs, food pumped up with steroids, chemicalised stuff being fed and not giving true nutritional content. All stuff people quickly praise the benefits, not realising the long term disadvantages. On top of that growing up in gyms and easy environments...

  23. #23
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Spinners bowled more and apart from Larwood other medium to medium fast bowlers had shorter run ups.
    Are you sure about this one? You can easily check this from CricInfo, by clicking the match scores of Tests before 1970s ....... many of them were Time less and played for 6 days or 600+ overs; shared in between 4/5 bowlers.

    Shorter run up I agree - they were super natural, hence could generate Shoaib like pace at 12 yards run-up, well almost Shobaib like - definitely it felt Sohaib like.............

  24. #24
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There were no 90mph+ bowlers Larwood could bowl 80-85mph on average while the ones with shorter run up 75-80mph.
    They only played tests no ODI T20 and not all that many in a calendar year not exactly superhuman bodies are needed to bowl more overs with less cricket being played.

  25. #25
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    There were no 90mph+ bowlers Larwood could bowl 80-85mph on average while the ones with shorter run up 75-80mph.
    They only played tests no ODI T20 and not all that many in a calendar year not exactly superhuman bodies are needed to bowl more overs with less cricket being played.
    Are you sure in this one as well? Have you checked the number of overs average bowlers bowled in First Class cricket those days? For example, Larwood, in his 14 years career, bowled 58K+ balls in FC cricket - that's 4K+ per years, or 600+ over/year. And this is entire career - if I take pick 6 years, this figure will reach 1200 overs+ He played 40+ FC matches in his peak 6/7 years and bowled 30+ overs/match in 5 months County - that's 2 3 day matches of 300+ overs almost every week ...... on top of that bowling at nets. If I go to his Partner Bill Voce, this figure goes to 85K+ balls in 18 years career (which lost 7 years for war) - that's 800+ overs/year in an average and around 1500 overs in peak years. In other way, 14K+ overs in 400+ FC matches, that's 35 overs/match, in a 40+ matches in County season over 5 months - my weak maths tells around 1500 overs only in match condition.

    And they bowled fast, hostile, aggressive ... like hurricane, torpedo, wind ..... that's why I am convinced that Cyborgs do exist..

  26. #26
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They didn't ball fast like Shoaib or Lee the shorter run ups that Tate Voce Bedser had meant they could bowl long spells at medium to medium fast.

  27. #27
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    They didn't ball fast like Shoaib or Lee the shorter run ups that Tate Voce Bedser had meant they could bowl long spells at medium to medium fast.
    Tag me buddy, I won't eat you alive.

    They indeed could bowl long spells - for example, Mahmood Ali broke down on 1st over, then Khan Mohammad (Or Parvez Sazzad, don't catch me on this - won't go to CI for this one) within couple of hours - so Fazal Mahmood had to bowl 85 overs in one innings, almost entire non stop from one end while Kardar rotated his other 3 bowlers including himself and another part-timer from other end (he himself bowled 35+ overs) ..... and history records that Sir Gary master a hostile, menacing Fazal Mahmood on his glorious way to 365*, on a mine field where PAK of 1957 lost by innings (& his greatness took WI to 790/3 dec.).

    My question is what you call medium to medium fast - my memory tells that through out 90s, Javagal Srinath was called at most fast medium ....... and I have seen that guy clocking 147.3KM in 1999 WC, when he was 30+, comfortably slower than what he was in that 1992-93 SAF tour ............. being fast, hostile, typhoon, hurricane, body line it's relative, you know - what is fact is at similar time, 1936 Jese Oewns completing same distance of 100 metres that our SAF champion does better today in 2017. Only if sprint was subjective - like instead of seconds, it's about how you resemble with a black panther, spitting mamba, wounded cougar ....... ..... who is Bolt?

    That great war changed everything in world - it started to man up from there on, before that it didn't move in 2000 years much than what it has in last 70 years. Enjoy the game & enjoy the history - Bradman, Pele, Nicklus, Owens, Truman, Laver .......... are great, because they were by far better among their peers and indeed greatest of their game; lets keep it there.

  28. #28
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    Tag me buddy, I won't eat you alive.

    They indeed could bowl long spells - for example, Mahmood Ali broke down on 1st over, then Khan Mohammad (Or Parvez Sazzad, don't catch me on this - won't go to CI for this one) within couple of hours - so Fazal Mahmood had to bowl 85 overs in one innings, almost entire non stop from one end while Kardar rotated his other 3 bowlers including himself and another part-timer from other end (he himself bowled 35+ overs) ..... and history records that Sir Gary master a hostile, menacing Fazal Mahmood on his glorious way to 365*, on a mine field where PAK of 1957 lost by innings (& his greatness took WI to 790/3 dec.).

    My question is what you call medium to medium fast - my memory tells that through out 90s, Javagal Srinath was called at most fast medium ....... and I have seen that guy clocking 147.3KM in 1999 WC, when he was 30+, comfortably slower than what he was in that 1992-93 SAF tour ............. being fast, hostile, typhoon, hurricane, body line it's relative, you know - what is fact is at similar time, 1936 Jese Oewns completing same distance of 100 metres that our SAF champion does better today in 2017. Only if sprint was subjective - like instead of seconds, it's about how you resemble with a black panther, spitting mamba, wounded cougar ....... ..... who is Bolt?

    That great war changed everything in world - it started to man up from there on, before that it didn't move in 2000 years much than what it has in last 70 years. Enjoy the game & enjoy the history - Bradman, Pele, Nicklus, Owens, Truman, Laver .......... are great, because they were by far better among their peers and indeed greatest of their game; lets keep it there.
    That was Sobers breakthrough innings interestingly he had struggled before against the bowlers that were there when Bradman was around.
    No one with any common sense thinks it was a minefield it was a flat pancake to score triple centuries requires flat wickets.
    Jesse Owens record of around 10.3 is 0.7 slower than Bolt at 9.6 is not even a good comparison. Comparing properly means Bradman running 100m at 5.5 almost twice as quick that's why he's so fascinating nobody has dominated quite like him.
    There have been goal a game strikers like Pele in recent times Tiger would've caught Nicklaus major achievements if not for loss of form and off field distractions somebody possibly will in future but Bradman stands alone can anyone even manage a 90+ average in FC cricket in future?

  29. #29
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    That was Sobers breakthrough innings interestingly he had struggled before against the bowlers that were there when Bradman was around.
    No one with any common sense thinks it was a minefield it was a flat pancake to score triple centuries requires flat wickets.
    Jesse Owens record of around 10.3 is 0.7 slower than Bolt at 9.6 is not even a good comparison. Comparing properly means Bradman running 100m at 5.5 almost twice as quick that's why he's so fascinating nobody has dominated quite like him.
    There have been goal a game strikers like Pele in recent times Tiger would've caught Nicklaus major achievements if not for loss of form and off field distractions somebody possibly will in future but Bradman stands alone can anyone even manage a 90+ average in FC cricket in future?
    That only tells, how niche a game cricket is - played & probably known only in few areas that British went. Even in 1930s, had there been other major cricket nations - either that average of 99 won't be there or there would have been few others. Among major sports, cricket has advanced the most since it's earlier days - I have seen Tennis, Soccer, NBA & NHL archives from 50s, 40s, 30s - compared to that of the same from 80s to 2010s doesn't look that drastic change - compare to cricket of 70s-80s vs cricket of 20s-50s, the physique of cricketers and the speed of overall game, you should have a laugh at it.

  30. #30
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    That only tells, how niche a game cricket is - played & probably known only in few areas that British went. Even in 1930s, had there been other major cricket nations - either that average of 99 won't be there or there would have been few others. Among major sports, cricket has advanced the most since it's earlier days - I have seen Tennis, Soccer, NBA & NHL archives from 50s, 40s, 30s - compared to that of the same from 80s to 2010s doesn't look that drastic change - compare to cricket of 70s-80s vs cricket of 20s-50s, the physique of cricketers and the speed of overall game, you should have a laugh at it.
    Only fast bowlers really have tall athletic better physiques some batsmen play well with pot bellies less lean than older batsmen and Shane Warne was in worse shape than O'reilly the great leg spinner of Bradmans time.

  31. #31
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t_UIvmzFRvs

    A clip of a test match in 1937 somehow I can't see much difference between players of then than now some look is better shape.

  32. #32
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Only fast bowlers really have tall athletic better physiques some batsmen play well with pot bellies less lean than older batsmen and Shane Warne was in worse shape than O'reilly the great leg spinner of Bradmans time.
    That's exceptions, even today there is Cosgrove & Lehman. But, in general the fitness level was much inferior. Also, from that clip, have you noticed the bowling action - how do you expect fast bowling speed from that action? Also, I actually don't agree that players (fast bowlers) used to put extra effort in Test matches and took it easy in FC cricket - in that case batsmen should have far better FC stats than Test, but it's not the case with most players including Bradman.

  33. #33
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Runs
    1,173
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    That's exceptions, even today there is Cosgrove & Lehman. But, in general the fitness level was much inferior. Also, from that clip, have you noticed the bowling action - how do you expect fast bowling speed from that action? Also, I actually don't agree that players (fast bowlers) used to put extra effort in Test matches and took it easy in FC cricket - in that case batsmen should have far better FC stats than Test, but it's not the case with most players including Bradman.
    If you notice the clip the keeper is standing 10~12 paces behind the stumps, even that is generous considering sometimes it's half of that, as compared to twice or more of that distance for Lee & Akhtar. Were the latter two twice as fast - no, well then we have solved our mystery question finally!

  34. #34
    Debut
    Dec 2015
    Runs
    4,966
    Mentioned
    207 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    I think the captains did not bother about the field settings in those days. Bowlers had short run-ups. Batsmen did not hit many sixes.

  35. #35
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Odd_One View Post
    I think the captains did not bother about the field settings in those days. Bowlers had short run-ups. Batsmen did not hit many sixes.
    Rate of hitting sixes has gone up marginally from 7 sixes in 2 matches to 8 in 2 matches.



  36. #36
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    21,395
    Mentioned
    546 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    West Indies slowed the over rates right down in the 1970s. Prior to that, you could get 100+ overs in easily, and more with the spinners on. In 1983 England and NZ agreed to bowl at least 96 in a day, and that was with Bob Willis's forty-yard run-up!

    But the fielding standards have improved out of all recognition. Nobody expected Larwood to go tearing round the boundary and make a headlong dive to turn four into three. He would let it go for four. In fact Jardine would not let his big gun chase the ball in case of injury. That's why bowlers could bowl more overs then - they kept their energy for bowling.

  37. #37
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    West Indies slowed the over rates right down in the 1970s. Prior to that, you could get 100+ overs in easily, and more with the spinners on. In 1983 England and NZ agreed to bowl at least 96 in a day, and that was with Bob Willis's forty-yard run-up!

    But the fielding standards have improved out of all recognition. Nobody expected Larwood to go tearing round the boundary and make a headlong dive to turn four into three. He would let it go for four. In fact Jardine would not let his big gun chase the ball in case of injury. That's why bowlers could bowl more overs then - they kept their energy for bowling.
    When West Indies started that bowling with 4 pacers, they were down to 75-80 overs in a day with bowlers taking longer time between balls and overs.

    But how do you explain the increased over rates before 1960s? Even if you say that they were able to preserve energy by not fielding the ball, how did they manage high over rates? Was the ground smaller during those days?



  38. #38
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by R0H1T View Post
    If you notice the clip the keeper is standing 10~12 paces behind the stumps, even that is generous considering sometimes it's half of that, as compared to twice or more of that distance for Lee & Akhtar. Were the latter two twice as fast - no, well then we have solved our mystery question finally!
    I think, there is a critical limit - many, many bowlers can reach 120KM, but it starts to narrow down drastically the higher you reach the pyramid. That was the case even in 1920s as well, may be that 120KM started at 110KM - Counties full of 110-120KM medium pacers. In between there were few who could reach 125KM+ and their heroics were blown out of proportion. One reason being the reaction of batsmen against anything over 120KM, another one expectation - today, we have seen 150KM+ speed, therefore anyone below 140KM is basically medium fast or at best fast medium; but I am sure even in 1900s, they has some sort of measurement done on the then fast bowlers like Knox or Richardson - may be manually, with stop watch and measuring tapes, which must have higher degree of error on individual incidence, but if you take the average of such 10-12 balls, that error should be reduced significantly.

    After that, more or less the perceived "fast" speed came to a level, which encouraged BBC's Test match special commentators to say - "Here comes, Harold Larwood, England's express man, bowling at a devastating speed of 70 miles per hour ..........."

  39. #39
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    When West Indies started that bowling with 4 pacers, they were down to 75-80 overs in a day with bowlers taking longer time between balls and overs.

    But how do you explain the increased over rates before 1960s? Even if you say that they were able to preserve energy by not fielding the ball, how did they manage high over rates? Was the ground smaller during those days?
    Or may be Red Bull was cheap - it gives wings ............. to the batsmen coming back to pavilion & going into bat - 10/12 times in a day - it takes average 2 minutes now from reaching out to taking guards; to the umpires who would have changed position 125 times in a 6 hours day, to the slip cordon & WK who would move at least 50 metres after every over (OK, 25 metres if spinners are on) and to the fast men who would fly for 12 yards to bowl like windmill, then complete follow through, gather the ball, rub it while walking back to bowling mark and fly back again........ 35% of 125 overs (I take 2 spinners bowled twice the number of overs than average 2.5 or 3 pacers) , that's at least around 45 X 6 = 270 times.

    I love fantasy, but I have a bad habit of checking beyond obvious.

  40. #40
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    21,395
    Mentioned
    546 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    When West Indies started that bowling with 4 pacers, they were down to 75-80 overs in a day with bowlers taking longer time between balls and overs.

    But how do you explain the increased over rates before 1960s? Even if you say that they were able to preserve energy by not fielding the ball, how did they manage high over rates? Was the ground smaller during those days?
    I think they just didn't waste time. If the ball went past the bat it was quickly thrown to slip, point, cover back to the bowler, and he had to be at his mark again. These days, they waste time even with the spinners on.

  41. #41
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Runs
    3,384
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Interesting question and I don't think I have found a satisfactory answer to that.

  42. #42
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Larwood was a 80mph+ bowler for sure most others were 75-80mph there was a lack of 90Mph+ bowlers which can be used against the that era but not much else swing seam spin all were in full operation in those days aswell.

  43. #43
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Larwood was a 80mph+ bowler for sure most others were 75-80mph there was a lack of 90Mph+ bowlers which can be used against the that era but not much else swing seam spin all were in full operation in those days aswell.

    This time I do agree - 80mph means, 128.4km, so yes - in his first spell Larwood indeed reached 129+ occasionally, that's about a bit faster than Robin Singh or our kid Soumya. That makes others like what Gillespie or Makhya or Razzaq felt like after Lee, Donald or Shoaib.

    Regarding swing, seem & others - Test cricket started exactly the same year Wimbledon started 1876 ..... and both were complicated by professional & amature concept. After glorious 60 years of development, Britain had their last Tennis superstar - Fred Perry, who happens to dominate the game almost at similar time when Larwood was blasting great batting technicians.

    British media rated him among all time tennis greats. Now, there are few clips still available in YouTube of Fred Perry winning 1937 Wimbledon - if ATG Fred Perry's Tennis of 1937 doesn't make you laugh then indeed I'll have to accept those swing, seem strories.
    Last edited by MMHS; 12th August 2017 at 22:18.

  44. #44
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    British media rated him among all time tennis greats. Now, there are few clips still available in YouTube of Fred Perry winning 1937 Wimbledon - if ATG Fred Perry's Tennis of 1937 doesn't make you laugh then indeed I'll have to accept those swing, seem strories.
    Thanks for that ...


    Sydney Bangalore Manchester Centurion Durban Jo'burg Mohali Colombo Dhaka Adelaide Kolkata

  45. #45
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Runs
    1,173
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tusker View Post
    Thanks for that ...
    The key word is - control, Holding, Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, Mcgrath, Warne, Murali had excellent control. This is what separates ATG from good bowlers from that era also I dare anyone to show me 100 bouncers, around 80mph, head high aimed at the batter outside of bodyline.

    This as opposed to about 50~100 that the Windies pacers would bowl in a test.
    Last edited by R0H1T; 13th August 2017 at 15:12.

  46. #46
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tusker View Post
    Thanks for that ...
    No disrespect to anyone, but we have to be realistic & logical here.

    Cricket & Tennis started similar time at International level, though Tennis actually is an older game in modern format, (thanks to the Brits, more preciously Victorian age) and by 1900s it was well established global sports, much more than cricket (French Open started in 1891, last of the 4 majors Austral Open in 1905). And, both games are similar in one aspect - both bat-ball game, it needs hand-eye coordination, footwork, reflex & timing.

    Tennis reached it's first golden era between the 2 wars - Borotra, Lacoste, Cochet, Tilden, Budge, Riggs, Crawford and off course Fred Perry - let's keep Ladies of those days out of this discussion. Still, I don't want to disrespect anyone, but truth is this guys won't win a single game against the lovely young lady Muguruza, who won the last Wimbledon. May be, some points from unforced errors or double faults, but forget the Williams brothers , it's bang 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 against any other top 10 Ladies now days - wood, metal, titanium, optic fibre .... raquet doesn't matter here, as long as both are playing with same.

    Now, as I said Tennis is a global game unlike cricket - it's not a niche game like Cricket, which actually is followed only in few countries where British went - Tennis is the most popular global racquet/bat-ball sports where every first world/developed country has focused for centuries - apart from the Brits (& it's colonies), the Yanks & Canadians were there always, French were even better at times, Germans, Russians, East Europeans, Latins .... everyone had Tennis among their top 2/3 games .......... and the money was there in 1930s as well, much more than cricket, professionals were there, top amateurs were paid higher than Pros like cricket and there were global tournaments, where top tennis stars used to play year long cycle, there were professional coaches - still, if this the height of transition in just 50 years, then why should I take that Cricket is the only sports where those days players had superior or equal skills & techniques? Why shouldn't I believe that it'll be similar in contest between Muguruza - Perry or Pom Ladies vs All-conquering Brandmas' team?

    It won't be that one sided for sure - one reason is that, Tennis was an established Ladies game even in 1880s, while Ladies cricket seriously started in last 40-50 years, and Cricket is never perceived as a ladies game, just like Soccer won't ever be a popular ladies game. But, still that question is valid.

    As I said many times - that great war changed the world by couple of millennium. Colonial ruling started to end, middle class started to dominate consumer market, national policies started serve mass and world sports went into a new dimension - competition, rather than spirit. Sports became a profession than passion, and it moved from the pass time recreation of elites (or soldiers), to a serious career for middle class. That took every game to a multiple level jump in quality, professionalism, skill, endurance ....... money.

    First sports that was hit by this new world was obviously soccer - Germans won the WC within 8 years of demolition of Berlin, Japanese hosted Olympic in 18 years of Hiroshima - that was the standard set - you have to run for your life, not for your fun. Gradually other major sports went to that route - enough is enough, players are to entertain for money, not to fulfill their passion, so there should be quality enough for a value for money. In that regard, Jack Nicklus, Arnold Palmar in Golf, Rod Laver in tennis, Ali in Boxing .... were the first batch of modern world sportsman. Cricket, obviously being a niche sports, took further time to reach that stage.

    I never disrespect any former greats, and you ask me - Jack Hobbs is the 1st man in any of my Test XI, Bradman'll always bat at the most coveted no. 3 spot while Sobers at the premium All-rounder's spot on No. 6 - and I'll never argue on their greatness - but it becomes nauseating to compare speed, technique, skills .... because before 70s, or late 60s, I give a damn ..... on what they did there. I study cricket from 1876, as part of a history - also, it's number, so a 170* out of 353 is equally great in 1876 or 1976 or a 35-12-91-8 is always great against anyone, any era - I am happy to keep it that way.

  47. #47
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well I can explain it simply using few examples of players who overlapped eras.
    One being Fred Trueman whose performance against players from 40s and 50s isn't superior to 60s and 70s Sobers is similar in this regard so I would be interested to know when a great change happened and Bradmans amateur era became a professional one of high standards.
    Fred Perry is not the best ever tennis player not even close his achievements are not well beyond his peers and the standard is clearly different and improved when we look at tennis.

  48. #48
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Well I can explain it simply using few examples of players who overlapped eras.
    One being Fred Trueman whose performance against players from 40s and 50s isn't superior to 60s and 70s Sobers is similar in this regard so I would be interested to know when a great change happened and Bradmans amateur era became a professional one of high standards.
    There is no magic date. I would say the transition began in the 70s,

    Fred Perry is not the best ever tennis player not even close his achievements are not well beyond his peers and the standard is clearly different and improved when we look at tennis.
    This guy was ranked in the top 5. You don't have to compare with even the men's top players. @MMHS is comparing him to current womens players.

    Same goes for gymnastics and many other athletic sports. The difference is very large.

  49. #49
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sobers averaged early 30s from 1954-57 struggling against the likes of Laker in England who averaged over 50 in a series against Bradman in 48 (A 40
    year old Bradman)
    From 58-74 he averaged close to 60 people can make their own mind up if this era was really amateur or not.

  50. #50
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Sobers averaged early 30s from 1954-57 struggling against the likes of Laker in England who averaged over 50 in a series against Bradman in 48 (A 40
    year old Bradman)
    From 58-74 he averaged close to 60 people can make their own mind up if this era was really amateur or not.
    So according to you standards have been falling since 50s?

  51. #51
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tusker View Post
    So according to you standards have been falling since 50s?
    No they have improved to an extent if you consider ATGs and fast bowlers are quicker now then before otherwise average players are not much better than players from Bradmans and Sobers era.

  52. #52
    Debut
    May 2012
    Runs
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Look at it this way. If two Jadejas are bowling from both ends, with most of the deliveries being defended by batsman, they can easily bowl 20 overs in an hour. That would come to 120 overs in 6 hours.

    That must be the case during 1920s-1940s. Look at Bert Oldfield's wicketkeeping stats as evidence. His career spanned between 1920 and 1937 and he managed 52 stumpings in 54 matches, almost one stumping a game. Out of his 130 dismissals, 78 were catches and 52 stumpings, that is a ratio of 3 catches: 2 stumpings. The top wicketkeepers in the later eras mostly had a catching - stumping ratio of around 4:1 or 5:1, thereby proving the pre-eminence of spin in that era. In fact, Oldfield's best performance is 5 dismissals in a match, in which he caught one and stumped four.

  53. #53
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chakarbakar View Post
    Look at it this way. If two Jadejas are bowling from both ends, with most of the deliveries being defended by batsman, they can easily bowl 20 overs in an hour. That would come to 120 overs in 6 hours.

    That must be the case during 1920s-1940s. Look at Bert Oldfield's wicketkeeping stats as evidence. His career spanned between 1920 and 1937 and he managed 52 stumpings in 54 matches, almost one stumping a game. Out of his 130 dismissals, 78 were catches and 52 stumpings, that is a ratio of 3 catches: 2 stumpings. The top wicketkeepers in the later eras mostly had a catching - stumping ratio of around 4:1 or 5:1, thereby proving the pre-eminence of spin in that era. In fact, Oldfield's best performance is 5 dismissals in a match, in which he caught one and stumped four.

    No bro - I have walked in that avenue as well.

    CricInfo is going through a transition, therefore now you can't see the Day end scores for Test matches, but I can take 2 examples to discuss -

    1. Leeds, 1930 : http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1...ralia-3rd-Test

    DG Bradman played a great knock and he scored a triple hundred in a day - roughly he was not out on 312* after day one. He was out at team total of 508 next day, so AUS's total after Day 1 must have been close to 450. They batted for for 168 overs for 566 runs, that's about 3.36/over. Since Bradman batted for whole of Day 1 (he came to bat in 2nd over), and batted aggressively, I take that ~450 on day 1 came at a much faster rate - say 3.8 ..... so, it's around 120 Overs on Day 1 - I give a benefit of doubt - 114 overs. Those days, there was no make up time, so that 114 overs are in bang 6 hours, yanike 360 minutes.

    Now, if you check the bowling charts, that 168 overs were bowled by
    Larwood 33 overs, Tate 39 overs, Geary 35 overs, Dick Tydesley 33 overs, Hammond 17 overs, Leyland 11 overs

    CI records Larwood - Right arm fast, Tate - Right arm medium fast, Geary - Right arm fast medium, Hammond - right arm medium fast, Tydesley - leg spin, Leyland - SLAO.

    Now, for the sake of saying - Tydesley & Leyland bowled all 44 overs on Day 1 and it too 2 hours (22/hour), still rest 70 overs were bowled like typhoon, hurricane, wind ...... in 4 hours ........


    2. SCG 1932-33, 5th Test - http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1...gland-5th-Test

    AUS was all-out on Day 1 and ENG actually had a little batting, but not sure. So, let's take 108 overs on Day 1

    Now, the bowling chart tells -

    Larwood 32.2, Voce 24, Go Allen 25, Hammond 8, Verity 17 & Wayett 2 overs. Now, you already know Larwood was express, CI records Voce Left arm fast medium, Sir GO Allen right Arm fast & Bob Wayett right arm medium ..... So, if I take Hammond, Wayett & Verity bowled 25 overs in an hour - still those FAST men bowled 81'2 overs in 5 hours, in a day when 10 wickets went down.


    I can do this for at least 5 more Tests - and this isn't included any rain interruption - considering full 6 hours play (Remember, no make up time - no overs to start at the strike of 5PM). You know, that spinner bowling most overs funda I covered in my initial post that (2 spinners bowling twice then 3 or 2.5 pacers - fact actually is that two spinners used to bowl over 25 overs/hour - highest I have read, is 58 overs in 2 hours by 2 spinners in tandem) - still couldn't find the answer - hence I can only find justification in that Red Bull gives wings & cyborg theory .....

    PS: I can perfectly explain Bert Olfield's stumping figures, but let's not go there, enough for today. I have seen Mongia standing on wicket for Robin Singh, Ajay Jadeja & Ganguly - depending on how well you can sell the express pace of naughty Jaddu, Ganguly & Singh, your script to glorify Mongia will be ornamented thereafter.

  54. #54
    Debut
    Apr 2017
    Venue
    Canada
    Runs
    123
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief Destroyer View Post
    They were trundlers.
    Still, you have to have a very good stamina regardless of if a bowler is trundler or not to bowl that many overs. Certainly, the players were not physically capable as the cricket boys are these days. Certainly they did not hit the gym every day like they do today. Certainly, all these gadgets/software did not exist back then. It's actually a good Question the OP has presented to us.

  55. #55
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    No they have improved to an extent if you consider ATGs and fast bowlers are quicker now then before otherwise average players are not much better than players from Bradmans and Sobers era.
    Johnson, Sami, Wahab, Broad, Shami, Yadav, Malinga, Flintoff etc etc are all avg or better than avg players and by no means greats of the game ... who from Bradmans time could match the pace and menace of some these guys ?


    Sydney Bangalore Manchester Centurion Durban Jo'burg Mohali Colombo Dhaka Adelaide Kolkata

  56. #56
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tusker View Post
    Johnson, Sami, Wahab, Broad, Shami, Yadav, Malinga, Flintoff etc etc are all avg or better than avg players and by no means greats of the game ... who from Bradmans time could match the pace and menace of some these guys ?
    By doing these pace 90mph argument people lose credibility pace is not everything hence why Sami and Wahab are half the bowlers of Asif who barely bowled above 80mph same with Lee who averaged 10 poinsts more than McGrath a medium pacer compared to Lee.
    The next one is well Bradman didn't play on Indian turners well he did play Laker on turning wickets and made his average go from a career of 21 to 50+ in one series.
    Last edited by Abdullah719; 14th August 2017 at 16:09.

  57. #57
    Debut
    Mar 2008
    Venue
    India
    Runs
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Before discussing fast over rates, please keep it in mind that six balls per overs was not the standard throughout history. When test cricket began in 1877-78, one over used to have four deliveries. From 1889 onwards, one over used to have five deliveries. From 1900 onwards, six deliveries began to constitute one over in England.

    Australia, New Zealand and South Africa on the other hand had eight ball overs too for a few years. Australia in fact had 8 ball overs from 1936-37 till 1978-79. Even Pakistan began to have 8 ball overs from 1974-75 till 1977-78, but then they reverted back to six balls an over.
    Last edited by squarecut; 14th August 2017 at 13:50.

  58. #58
    Debut
    Mar 2008
    Venue
    India
    Runs
    394
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Also, in the earlier days of test cricket, if you hit a shot that is now considered a six, the batsman used to get five runs and not six. One would get six only if the ball was hit out of the park.

  59. #59
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    By doing these pace 90mph argument people lose credibility pace is not everything hence why Sami and Wahab are half the bowlers of Asif who barely bowled above 80mph same with Lee who averaged 10 poinsts more than McGrath a medium pacer compared to Lee.
    The next one is well Bradman didn't play on Indian turners well he did play Laker on turning wickets and made his average go from a career of 21 to 50+ in one series.
    How many 110-120 kph great pacers are there in history of game?
    Last edited by Abdullah719; 14th August 2017 at 16:10.



  60. #60
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Runs
    1,173
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    How many 110-120 kph great pacers are there in history of game?
    Let's give the oldies a bit more credit, 100~130 kph.

  61. #61
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Runs
    1,173
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chakarbakar View Post
    Look at it this way. If two Jadejas are bowling from both ends, with most of the deliveries being defended by batsman, they can easily bowl 20 overs in an hour. That would come to 120 overs in 6 hours.

    That must be the case during 1920s-1940s. Look at Bert Oldfield's wicketkeeping stats as evidence. His career spanned between 1920 and 1937 and he managed 52 stumpings in 54 matches, almost one stumping a game. Out of his 130 dismissals, 78 were catches and 52 stumpings, that is a ratio of 3 catches: 2 stumpings. The top wicketkeepers in the later eras mostly had a catching - stumping ratio of around 4:1 or 5:1, thereby proving the pre-eminence of spin in that era. In fact, Oldfield's best performance is 5 dismissals in a match, in which he caught one and stumped four.
    Well tbf if there's two Jadejas at both ends & all the batters do is block then we can easily have 180 overs in a day, unless one of them dies of a heatstroke. OR that there weren't many genuine pacers back then, so from your own links in the other thread, one trundler opening the bowling with WK standing up ~
    Last edited by R0H1T; 14th August 2017 at 14:02.

  62. #62
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    How many 110-120 kph great pacers are there in history of game?
    Every great fast bowlers before WW2 - world didn't see 125km+ pacer before Larwood, 135KM+ pacer before Tyson, 145KM+ pacer before Lillee .............

  63. #63
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by R0H1T View Post
    Well tbf if there's two Jadejas at both ends & all the batters do is block then we can easily have 180 overs in a day, unless one of them dies of a heatstroke. OR that there weren't many genuine pacers back then, so from your own links in the other thread, one trundler opening the bowling with WK standing up ~
    But, does the table in Post #17 tells that during that era, everyone was blocking whole day - only few hunks were men, rest were .......?

  64. #64
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    81
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hammond wasn't medium fast military medium with a short run up of the others only Larwood has a decent run up that's why he could reach mid 80s peak pace Tate Bedser few other couldn't 80mph max.
    Looks like time wasn't wasted and they just got on with it.

  65. #65
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    Hammond wasn't medium fast military medium with a short run up of the others only Larwood has a decent run up that's why he could reach mid 80s peak pace Tate Bedser few other couldn't 80mph max.
    Looks like time wasn't wasted and they just got on with it.
    Even when time isn't wasted this type of effort happens once or twice in a day, not whole day. Then it is really difficult even for spinners. 120 overs takes lot of energy even from the slow bowlers. Looks like bowlers rarely touched 80mph and bowled mainly between 70-75mph and during 3rd session pacers could well be down to 65-70mph



  66. #66
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cric1234 View Post
    By doing these pace 90mph argument people lose credibility pace is not everything hence why Sami and Wahab are half the bowlers of Asif who barely bowled above 80mph same with Lee who averaged 10 poinsts more than McGrath a medium pacer compared to Lee.
    The next one is well Bradman didn't play on Indian turners well he did play Laker on turning wickets and made his average go from a career of 21 to 50+ in one series.
    What do you mean pace is not everything ... do you even realize how menacing Johnson was when he got it right ? Do you realize that McGrath could bowl 140K's and generally bowled in the mid 130Ks ( not in the 110K range as you would like to think) ? Without that minimum basic speed no fast bowler will succeed today.

    Which Bowler today bowls 110-120Ks if it is sooo effective ?

    And yeah damn right it is very hard to play in India ... Australia have lost 11 out of the last 12 Tests the played in India and that is primarily because of spin.


    Sydney Bangalore Manchester Centurion Durban Jo'burg Mohali Colombo Dhaka Adelaide Kolkata

  67. #67
    Debut
    Jan 2013
    Runs
    10,853
    Mentioned
    1371 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMHS View Post
    Every great fast bowlers before WW2 - world didn't see 125km+ pacer before Larwood, 135KM+ pacer before Tyson, 145KM+ pacer before Lillee .............
    Add 10K and I will agree with you on all three counts.

    I'll even acknowledge that I think Tyson only reached speeds over 140 by chucking.

    My guesses are:

    First to bowl 140K: Larwood
    First to "bowl" 150K: Tyson (but only in the 130s with a clean action.
    First to bowl 155K: Roberts or Lillee
    First to bowl 160K: Thomson, who was probably around 0.5K slower than Shoaib Akhtar.

  68. #68
    Debut
    Jun 2013
    Runs
    2,570
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Junaids View Post
    Add 10K and I will agree with you on all three counts.

    I'll even acknowledge that I think Tyson only reached speeds over 140 by chucking.

    My guesses are:

    First to bowl 140K: Larwood
    First to "bowl" 150K: Tyson (but only in the 130s with a clean action.
    First to bowl 155K: Roberts or Lillee
    First to bowl 160K: Thomson, who was probably around 0.5K slower than Shoaib Akhtar.
    And we are back to square one as I had suspected ... thank lord that you don't think Thommo and others bowled 170K +

    Anyhow from the footage available of Tyson there is not one ball that he chucked.


    Sydney Bangalore Manchester Centurion Durban Jo'burg Mohali Colombo Dhaka Adelaide Kolkata

  69. #69
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Junaids View Post
    Add 10K and I will agree with you on all three counts.

    I'll even acknowledge that I think Tyson only reached speeds over 140 by chucking.

    My guesses are:

    First to bowl 140K: Larwood
    First to "bowl" 150K: Tyson (but only in the 130s with a clean action.
    First to bowl 155K: Roberts or Lillee
    First to bowl 160K: Thomson, who was probably around 0.5K slower than Shoaib Akhtar.
    Partially I do agree with you as well - I kept the upper limit of Lillie & Roberts open, so yes 155km, may be.

    Rest we can agree to disagree - still don't understand with sort of run up & action, how bowlers can reach 130km and manage average speed of 120KM+ for 35 overs in a day.

  70. #70
    Debut
    Jan 2017
    Runs
    517
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They were bowling at 105 km/h, it's not that hard. Afridi and Kumble bowls at that pace

  71. #71
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Junaids View Post
    Add 10K and I will agree with you on all three counts.

    I'll even acknowledge that I think Tyson only reached speeds over 140 by chucking.

    My guesses are:

    First to bowl 140K: Larwood
    First to "bowl" 150K: Tyson (but only in the 130s with a clean action.

    First to bowl 155K: Roberts or Lillee
    First to bowl 160K: Thomson, who was probably around 0.5K slower than Shoaib Akhtar.
    And they were superhumans.

    At best they ocassionally touched 80 mph. Not more than that.



  72. #72
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    1926 Ashes

    England v Australia at Oval

    England scored 280 runs in 96 overs.

    At the end of day 1 Aus were 60-4. Aus scored at 2 rpo in that inning. England probably bowled 25 overs on day 1. That gives you more than 120 overs in a day 1 with innings break.

    Aus were bowled out for 300 in 152 overs and Eng were 49-0 on day 2. So total 247 overs were already bowled in 2 days. Aus probably bowled 15-20 overs more. Including innings break that is equivalent to 270 overs in 2 days.

    If day 1 had 120 overs, they bowled approx 145 overs on day 2. There was a day break between each test day. Even with that if bowlers are asked to bowled 140-145 overs in a day we won't see even Shoaib bowling at 140 in last session.

    It would lot of bowling from spinners to complete 140 overs in a day. But somehow pacers like Larwood and Tate managed to bowl 45% of overs of Aus inning. No way they were bowling at pacer more than Ganguly or Afridi pace even in first session to bowl that much unless they were super human.



  73. #73
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Runs
    3,290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you see the number of balls bowled by Larwood in each season, it's similar to figures by spinners (Bishan Singh Bedi in 3rd and 4th coulmn) than to a pacer Mcgrath (5th and 6th)














































































































































































































































































































































    Season Balls Season Balls Season Balls
    1924 156 1961-62 143 1992-93 1296
    1925 2863 1962-63 492 1993-94 1808
    1926 5846 1963-64 883 1993-94 871
    1927 3776 1964-65 1604 1994-95 1012
    1928 5009 1965-66 1312 1994-95 1308
    1928-29 2726 1966-67 2143 1994-95 669
    1929 5220 1967 2943 1995 42
    1930 3726 1967 414 1995-96 2674
    1931 3909 1967-68 1419 1996-97 1379
    1932 5198 1967-68 402 1996-97 318
    1932-33 1689 1967-68 992 1996-97 924
    1933 60 1968-69 2562 1997 2182
    1934 3069 1968-69 440 1997-98 1124
    1935 5571 1969-70 4598 1998-99 1180
    1936 4075 1970-71 2196 1998-99 1330
    1936-37 264 1970-71 3044 1998-99 893
    1937 4156 1971 3623 1999 617
    1938 714 1971-72 332 1999-00 902
    1971-72 2251 1999-00 519
    1972 3966 1999-00 1482
    1972-73 4037 2000 2494
    1973 5186 2000-01 1247
    1973-74 1954 2000-01 1010
    1974 6513 2001 1409
    1974-75 3602 2001-02 2045
    1975 4640 2001-02 753
    1975-76 2183 2002-03 974
    1975-76 1172 2002-03 236
    1975-76 1826 2002-03 216
    1976 3389 2002-03 582
    1976-77 5385 2003 331
    1977 4003 2003-04 169
    1977-78 2591 2004 604
    1977-78 679 2004 486
    1978-79 1410 2004-05 1045
    1978-79 1330 2004-05 974
    1979 2267 2004-05 758
    1979-80 1038 2005 804
    1980-81 758 2005-06 1837
    1981-82 593 2006-07 1255



  74. #74
    Debut
    Apr 2011
    Venue
    Toronto (Dhaka)
    Runs
    15,903
    Mentioned
    1035 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AlizeeFan View Post
    1926 Ashes

    England v Australia at Oval

    England scored 280 runs in 96 overs.

    At the end of day 1 Aus were 60-4. Aus scored at 2 rpo in that inning. England probably bowled 25 overs on day 1. That gives you more than 120 overs in a day 1 with innings break.

    Aus were bowled out for 300 in 152 overs and Eng were 49-0 on day 2. So total 247 overs were already bowled in 2 days. Aus probably bowled 15-20 overs more. Including innings break that is equivalent to 270 overs in 2 days.

    If day 1 had 120 overs, they bowled approx 145 overs on day 2. There was a day break between each test day. Even with that if bowlers are asked to bowled 140-145 overs in a day we won't see even Shoaib bowling at 140 in last session.

    It would lot of bowling from spinners to complete 140 overs in a day. But somehow pacers like Larwood and Tate managed to bowl 45% of overs of Aus inning. No way they were bowling at pacer more than Ganguly or Afridi pace even in first session to bowl that much unless they were super human.
    Add 20 wickets with that - Oval is the largest ground in world outside Australia & it'll take double can of Red Bull, if you are to reach middle from pavilion, take guard & get ready for 110km thunderbolt inside 1 minutes - so, out of 720 minutes in 2 days, 20 saved with the help of Red Bull .....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •