Which bowler could've got wickets on this pitch?

[Ayubi]

Ok so Shoaib didn't pick up wickets but overall his bowling was very impressive. He genuinely troubled both batsmen with his pace & was twice as economical as any other bowler from either side.

I reckon had the game not been so stop & start he would've got some rhythm going & taken some wickets.

I really doubt there is any other bowler in world cricket who would've got off lightly on this pitch. I know people will immediately mention McGrath & Pollock but I fail to see how anyone who bowls in the late 70s could have made a difference regardless of how accurate they are.

Your thoughts?

[inzidabest]

Brett Lee

[Pace]

Wasim, Waqar and Imran. They have time and again proven over the span of there careers that they have the ability to take the pitch out of the equation. If asked to pick out of the three I would pick Wasim, he had the ability to move the ball using his fingers and wrist when conventional bowlers could not get a hint of movement or swing.

[z10]

murali would have exploited the turn on the first day better then Harbhajan

[Mercenary]

Arafat/Waqar type bowlers who bowl very full and yorker length deliveries at 90mph+

In the analysis they said that yorker length balls were barely scored off

[Empirebuiltolast]

McGrath And Wasim And Waqar

[lahori]

No Warnee?

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by lahori2 No Warnee?

against India?

He would have been the only Pak bowler to get a century!

[inzidabest]

Originally Posted by Mercenary against India? He would have been the only Pak bowler to get a century!

First choice should be Bret Lee. He would have definitely picked up wickets here.

[Pathan007]

Warne is cr@p against India. just look at his record against them. horrible to say the least

[waquas_uk]

wasim

[mooz]

pathan and kumble

[Sheikh_Ji]

Wasim and Waqar....

[Pathan007]

only if Ganguly had bowled 20+overs. he would've certaily gotten a 5fer out of it.

[z10]

Originally Posted by mooz pathan and kumble

evidently

[cricket_crazy]

Had India not been the opponent, these present bowlers: Murali, Kumble, Warne, Shoaib Akhtar, and perhaps Danish may have won the match for their country.

[Aurangzeb]

wasim comes to mind as he could swing the ball regardless of conditions...

[nafajafam]

Only if a batsman made a mistake.

[Ayubi]

Out of today's bowlers. Murali & Warne may have got wickets...point is bowlers need time to test the patience of the batsman & out think them, which is a luxury they didn't get in this match.

Brett Lee neither has the variety nor the accuracy to have been a threat on this pitch!

[IMMY69]

people seem to forget that even wasim and waqar have been thrashed around the park on a few occassions and on the lahore track i really cant see anyone doing well...specially pacers...i agree that murali would have been a threat and perhaps also warne however if ever you fancied smashing warne around it would have been on this lahore track...

in short...6 bowlers from pakistan and 4 from india were completely inocuous and that just goes to show how dead this track is and how futile this thread is!

[Baron]

Originally Posted by IMMY69 people seem to forget that even wasim and waqar have been thrashed around the park on a few occassions and on the lahore track i really cant see anyone doing well...specially pacers...i agree that murali would have been a threat and perhaps also warne however if ever you fancied smashing warne around it would have been on this lahore track... in short...6 bowlers from pakistan and 4 from india were completely inocuous and that just goes to show how dead this track is and how futile this thread is!

Not necessarily. Just because these bowlers didnt have much of an impact, it doesnt mean every bowler in the world or ever wouldnt have got any wickets. If you really look at both the attacks, you wouldnt classify any of the bowlers as legendary or great. I've seen Warne do something on pitches that have provided NO assistance whatsoever.

People like Wasim, Imran or Kapil Dev are genuinely legendary and have taken wickets on any pitch and on any day. But saying that, it would be difficult to assertain whether anyone would have bowled the indians out twice as none of the other batsmen were bowled at or tested.

[Pakola]

Seriously guys, i really think yasir arafat could have done the trick here. The kid sticks to his fuller length with conviction and ULTIMATELY its gonna swing a bit. Besides, his length will force sehwag to use something other than the cut. And if u bowl a 90mph yorker at least once an over or once in 2 overs, you're eventually gonna get some result. I really like arafat much more than asif. The pakpassion interview also made mention of his tremendous athletecism. Im sure he length would have got some results.

[Geordie Ahmed]

Wasim Akram

[Usman Chadda]

Originally Posted by Pakola Seriously guys, i really think yasir arafat could have done the trick here. The kid sticks to his fuller length with conviction and ULTIMATELY its gonna swing a bit. Besides, his length will force sehwag to use something other than the cut. And if u bowl a 90mph yorker at least once an over or once in 2 overs, you're eventually gonna get some result. I really like arafat much more than asif. The pakpassion interview also made mention of his tremendous athletecism. Im sure he length would have got some results.

Inshallah the selectors will open there eyes and pick a decent squad for the next test. I dont want Sami in the team anymore. Umar Gul should be given a go.

[Asim2Good]

Glen Mcgrath

[HAFRIDI]

Kapil Dev

[IMMY69]

Originally Posted by Baron Not necessarily. Just because these bowlers didnt have much of an impact, it doesnt mean every bowler in the world or ever wouldnt have got any wickets. If you really look at both the attacks, you wouldnt classify any of the bowlers as legendary or great. I've seen Warne do something on pitches that have provided NO assistance whatsoever. People like Wasim, Imran or Kapil Dev are genuinely legendary and have taken wickets on any pitch and on any day. But saying that, it would be difficult to assertain whether anyone would have bowled the indians out twice as none of the other batsmen were bowled at or tested.

you missed my point...which is that on this partricular dead track you cant pick any one bowler to do really well...and when i mean well i mean take a hat ful of wickets...it would take a monumental effort from someone..when you see the highlights and the way sehwag was hitting on the up and playing late cuts/glides to third man from 90 mph deliveries it puts everything into perspective...

it is impossible to say that this bowler or that bowler could have done well because in the history of cricket each and every legendary bowler at some time or another has been thrashed around...and mostly not on such good wickets for batting...so that facts suggest that no bowler would have done really well on this track...

furthermore fact that 10 bowlers from either side looked totally inocious also points to the absolute dead nature of the wicket...imran khan himself said thaty in 1978 in lahore the wicket was as flat as this one and he got thrashed around...

[Baron]

Originally Posted by IMMY69 you missed my point...which is that on this partricular dead track you cant pick any one bowler to do really well...and when i mean well i mean take a hat ful of wickets...it would take a monumental effort from someone..when you see the highlights and the way sehwag was hitting on the up and playing late cuts/glides to third man from 90 mph deliveries it puts everything into perspective... it is impossible to say that this bowler or that bowler could have done well because in the history of cricket each and every legendary bowler at some time or another has been thrashed around...and mostly not on such good wickets for batting...so that facts suggest that no bowler would have done really well on this track... furthermore fact that 10 bowlers from either side looked totally inocious also points to the absolute dead nature of the wicket...imran khan himself said thaty in 1978 in lahore the wicket was as flat as this one and he got thrashed around...

Yeh true, i agree with what you say and most bowlers would have been thrashed around, but my reasoning is that other bowlers would have done better than pick up 1 wicket for over 400. Somehow i cant imagine Wasim,Waqar and Saqi going at a rate they went for. They probably would have been 400/4 at least.

[Ayubi]

Originally Posted by Baron People like Wasim, Imran or Kapil Dev are genuinely legendary and have taken wickets on any pitch and on any day. But saying that, it would be difficult to assertain whether anyone would have bowled the indians out twice as none of the other batsmen were bowled at or tested.

Please tell me you're joking

[Baron]

Originally Posted by Ayubi Please tell me you're joking

Come on, dont tell me you think Kapil Dev wasnt good? He isnt one of my favorite cricketers but you gotta give the man dues, he was a wily ol bowler and good on these subcontinent pitches. He is one of the all time best all-rounders.

[Ayubi]

Originally Posted by Baron Come on, dont tell me you think Kapil Dev wasnt good? He isnt one of my favorite cricketers but you gotta give the man dues, he was a wily ol bowler and good on these subcontinent pitches. He is one of the all time best all-rounders.

Sorry to disappoint you but he was none of those things

[Baron]

Originally Posted by Ayubi Sorry to disappoint you but he was none of those things

Now now Asif, i too am a Pak fan but you cant ignore the fact he was a proven match winner. Come and embrace Kapil

[Ayubi]

Originally Posted by Baron Now now Asif, i too am a Pak fan but you cant ignore the fact he was a proven match winner. Come and embrace Kapil

La haula wa la quwwata illah billa

Asif.....now there's a proven match winner!

[Jameel]

Kapil Dev may have been a "matchwinner" but to put him in the same sentence as Imran or Wasim is an insult to these true legends. He isn't fit to tie their boots.

[Toony™®]

I am surprised of some of the bowling...not enough full deliveries were being bowled.
Even Pathan bowled alot fuller!


Australia beat India in India bcos the aussies bowled a nagging line and experimented very little.

McGrath probably could of got wickets!

[usman7]

Mohammad Zahid!!

[IMMY69]

Originally Posted by usman7 Mohammad Zahid!!

Now that you mention zahid lets go back to the infamous draw against aussies in pakistan when zahid and shoiab were arguably at their quickets, certainly zahid was, and mark taylor scored 330 odd runs not out! paks replied by scoring big runs too and match was a very high scoring bore draw!

[Waqar's inswinging yorker]

Originally Posted by Jameel Kapil Dev may have been a "matchwinner" but to put him in the same sentence as Imran or Wasim is an insult to these true legends. He isn't fit to tie their boots.

[IMMY69]

Originally Posted by toonboy_awaisyboy™ I am surprised of some of the bowling...not enough full deliveries were being bowled. Even Pathan bowled alot fuller! Australia beat India in India bcos the aussies bowled a nagging line and experimented very little. McGrath probably could of got wickets!

I think after first 4 overs, having no mid on and mid off, soon put paid to bowling a fuller length....ok we may have had a massive total but on that track inzy should have realised that having three slips was going to be fruitless and having mid on/mid off would have allowed for his bowlers to bowl a full length...hindsight is a great thing!!!!

[billyoem]

Originally Posted by Ayubi Ok so Shoaib didn't pick up wickets but overall his bowling was very impressive. He genuinely troubled both batsmen with his pace & was twice as economical as any other bowler from either side. I reckon had the game not been so stop & start he would've got some rhythm going & taken some wickets. I really doubt there is any other bowler in world cricket who would've got off lightly on this pitch. I know people will immediately mention McGrath & Pollock but I fail to see how anyone who bowls in the late 70s could have made a difference regardless of how accurate they are. Your thoughts?

Pakistan need a 'Merv Hughes' type bowler who will keep trying different things.
He always managed to get wickets on dead flat tracks.
I don't care what anyone says, but pakistan bowlers cannot just blame the pitch.
You have to give the Indians some credit.
They batted in poor conditions at times,and pakistan bowlers did not bowl enough good yorkers to troble them.

[Baron]

Originally Posted by Jameel Kapil Dev may have been a "matchwinner" but to put him in the same sentence as Imran or Wasim is an insult to these true legends. He isn't fit to tie their boots.

The point was who would do the best on these type of tracks and Kapil Dev has proven over his career that he could get wickets on the subcontinent. Never did i say that Kapil Dev was as good as Wasim or Imran, quite on the contrary, they were better bowlers.

[zaf1986]

Sure Kapil Dev was nowhere near as good as Imran, I'm sure most teams would these days would have anyone half as good as him in their Test team. He was a fine allrounder, and probably a better allrounder (not bowler) than Wasim Akram.

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by Ayubi Sorry to disappoint you but he was none of those things

You don't get 4000 runs and 400 wickets being ordinary. Credit where credit is due.

[Logic]

A tall bowler with some ackward bounce ummmmm may be Ambrose or Joel Garner from WI. From Pakistan i think Wasim could have got wicket, not because he could be able to produce some swing on this pitch but because of his killer instinct and ability to bowl a longer spell (due to his wonderful bowling action...... that Mighty Shoulder... ) Others might have struggled to bowl long spells like Waqar or Imran but Akram was different

[Amjid Javed]

The great late malcom marshall i blv would have taken wickets on such a surface

[octavian]

Imran Khan... without any doubt. more so, cuz we were playing india

All you needed to do was to tell him that the wicket is sooo flat that you can not anyone out on this surface.

and after.. just sit back and see what he does

[Usman]

Waqar Younis, Just read this:

The Faisalabad dead rubber turned out to be a shoot-out between Chris Pringle and Waqar Younis. Pringle, who later admitted to tampering with the ball because he was sure Pakistan were doing it, took 7 for 52 as Pakistan collapsed for 102. Waqar returned the favour with 7 for 76 but New Zealand acquired a 115-run lead. Shoaib Mohammad's 142 in the second innings helped Pakistan wipe off the deficit and set a target of 243. Aaqib Javed ensured that New Zealand's top-order struggled and Waqar blasted the lower-middle order to finish with 12 wickets and give Pakistan victory by 65 runs.

[octavian]

Originally Posted by Usman Waqar Younis, Just read this: The Faisalabad dead rubber turned out to be a shoot-out between Chris Pringle and Waqar Younis. Pringle, who later admitted to tampering with the ball because he was sure Pakistan were doing it, took 7 for 52 as Pakistan collapsed for 102. Waqar returned the favour with 7 for 76 but New Zealand acquired a 115-run lead. Shoaib Mohammad's 142 in the second innings helped Pakistan wipe off the deficit and set a target of 243. Aaqib Javed ensured that New Zealand's top-order struggled and Waqar blasted the lower-middle order to finish with 12 wickets and give Pakistan victory by 65 runs.

that doesn't mean that the pitch was dead.

[Amjid Javed]

Originally Posted by octavian that doesn't mean that the pitch was dead.

[Saj]

Tough question this one !

In my opinion not too many bowlers would have done much on this wicket. No spin, no reverse swing, no orthodox swing, no seam movement, no uneven bounce, no lift from a length - I would say however though Muralitharan and perhaps Waqar at his peak.

[waqar_ahmad]

certainly not brett lee. he is not that good. I think wasim, waqar, simon jones and murali

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by octavian that doesn't mean that the pitch was dead.

True.

But Faisalabad has traditionally been on the slow side, and Waqar has a fanastic record there (I believe he took 13 wickets in that match).