View Single Post
Old April 22, 2015, 03:19 AM
al-Sagar's Avatar
al-Sagar al-Sagar is offline
Cricket Savant
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: The Quiet Place
Favorite Player: Curtly Ambrose
Posts: 26,458

Originally Posted by tiger1000
Thats just plain stupid, maybe if you said below 130..

Line and length is way more important that speed, Pollock and McGrath could not swing it and bowled around 130..they got a bit of seam off the pitch and bowled great line and length..Just look how great they were

Another more realistic example, Zaheer Khan, Early on in his career he used to bowl 137kph+, but during his prime from about 05-08, He was a much better bowler, he never swung it that much either, only in certain conditions did he swing it, and in India bowl did little, yet he was great using line and length

Look at Bresnan, dropped now, but for his he'll be our best test bowler, Couldn't swing it, no great bounce, just line and length at about 83mph/135kph - he was a really good reliable bowler

Broad - no great speed, for about 5 years now bowling at an average of about 83mph, Cant swing it great amount, recently bowling a bit quicker but average was 84mph vs WI

I can go on - you don't need to be 140+

If he can get a bit of seam off the pitch with good line and length, he can be a very good bowler even bowling at 130-138


'domestic stats don't speak much' - Agree on that, 'On Mustafizur...Never seen him play, has anyone?

Yes all those bowlers don't depend on pace.. They rely on line and length consistency and seam and swing.

But if needed they can bend their back and take the batsman on the backfoot. Or initially in their career they used to be speed stars. This creates a doubt in mind of batsman to come in the front foot and convert the short of good length balls into half volleys.

Remember syed rasel.. He had great control of line length and seam. But never had the ability to bend the back and keep the batsman on back foot. Which is important these days.
The OffStump
Reply With Quote