Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Forum News and Suggestions => Custom Bats Blog => Topic started by: The 22nd Yard on August 21, 2013, 11:33:33 AM
-
A look at some of the young, up and coming pace-men in the County Championship.
http://wp.me/p380Xy-aw (http://wp.me/p380Xy-aw)
Please comment if I have missed anyone out, maybe even some bowlers in Premier Leagues that have not yet been noticed by counties...
-
Dude, half of the ones you've mentioned are barely above medium pace! And its hard to see how Brooks and Rankin qualify as up and coming...
If you are looking for bowlers under 25, Toby Roland-Jones, Moin Ashraf, Matt Dunn, Chris Jordan, Luke Fletcher, Mike Read...
-
Wouldn't exactly call Fletcher or brooks "quick"
At test match level pace means nothing unless you can put it in the right areas... Impressed with Overton, ive watched him a few times this season and he bowls great areas.
Mills is probably the quickest from what ive seen.
As for Jack Brooks... couldn't put up with his constant changing of head bands
-
You forgot Chris Wood & Dave Griffiths ;)
-
a blog on fast bowlers and chris woakes is pictured ???
-
a blog on fast bowlers and chris woakes is pictured ???
He bowled a decent lick today at times, up to 88mph and consistent 85mph which is pretty sharp.
-
david willy up and coming bowler for northants
-
Actually, if we're talking serious wheels, Liam Plunkett has been the quickest thing in the championship this season, bowled with some serious gas.
-
so basically the article isn't very good, because its missed out alot of players, and included some that shouldnt really be mentioned
-
that and its not that well written/structured/argued to boot.
-
I have to agree with most of the points being raised here, for example Brooks, yeah he's decent, but he's 29
-
I have to agree with most of the points being raised here, for example Brooks, yeah he's decent, but he's 29
and doesn't get in Yorkshire's best side...
-
This is obviously my opinion of the players I've seen over the season so I expected to miss a few out, Plunkett wasn't included as he has already played a Test match whereas Rankin and Brooks are still aiming for their first caps.
-
One of the quickest I have seen in a while is Tyrone mills at Essex. Left arm 19 yrs old and very very quick
-
One of the quickest I have seen in a while is Tyrone mills at Essex. Left arm 19 yrs old and very very quick
Tymal will love that!
-
Tymal will love that!
Once I wrote it I thought it looked wrong, well doubt ill be facing him anytime soon :(
-
Haha I wouldn't worry the commentators always get it wrong too, he has learnt to laugh too
-
Here's something to ponder. Before central contracts and when they had the great overseas players here like Ambrose Walsh Donald and the English players we're gough, Malcolm etc 80-85mph was very medium paced I was late 70s 80 on a good day along with a few others and we were trundlers. You had to swing it or do something. From what I see now mid 80s is quick. Now it's relative to what you play against. If your a club player that facing mid 60s every week late 70s is going to seem a bit sharp. One of my early games was against mr Donald and I was out my league he broke my finger second ball and I stood there thinking he can kill me at will and I have no say in the matter.
Now as far as TV pace is concerned I heard a rumor that 4 or 5 years ago to try and hype up the cricket on TV sky were tweeking the speed guns up to make it seem quicker and more interesting and that was from a reliable source.
It's all relative but I do personally feel that we are going through an era of lower pace and it happens, but I think if you can produce a few Anderson's which England used to be renowned for ie swing bowlers we would not do bad at all. Talk to a lot of ex pros and they will tell you there are different types of quick.
-
Talk to a lot of ex pros and they will tell you there are different types of quick.
The old adage 'he bowls a heavy ball' has some relevance here. Anderson and Bres are pretty similar on the speed gun. Everyone you talk to says Bres bowls a heavier ball.
-
That's exactly it Jake ... I'm sure some bowlers appear fast to some batsmen but not others ... and blogs are personal views to generate debate.
-
Now as far as TV pace is concerned I heard a rumor that 4 or 5 years ago to try and hype up the cricket on TV sky were tweeking the speed guns up to make it seem quicker and more interesting and that was from a reliable source.
Thats not a rumour Paul - Sky themselves admitted that there had been issues with the speed guns that they used from 2003-2011 which was why certain bowlers were suddenly a whole lot slower come the start of the 2012 season. I think with Tim Bresnan the difference was an average of about 5mph...
-
The old adage 'he bowls a heavy ball' has some relevance here. Anderson and Bres are pretty similar on the speed gun. Everyone you talk to says Bres bowls a heavier ball.
There are numerous factors relevant - bec ause after all, whether the bowler is 80 or 90 mph, your reaction time is a fraction of a second. Height is one - because it is harder to judge how a tall bowler will get the ball to rear up than it is to line up a skiddy bowler - and another is action. Some bowlers are easy for their pace because the ball is visible throughout their run up and comes at you in more or less of a straight line, giving the mind plenty of opportunity to process it, whereas others come from odd places (Lasith Malinga, step to the front of the class) or have the advantage of surprise by keeping the ball out of sight until late on (Malcolm Marshall did this very well)
-
Give me 80mph but dead straight any day over 65,70mph and swinging round corners :(
-
Also the very nature of speed guns means that tall fast bowlers register slower speeds than shorter quicks.
Not the same if you faced them.
League cricket is blighted by evil dibbly doblers who are miserly and occaisionally do a little bit with the ball bowling at a horrible length, just made to make batsmen look stupid. I think they should be banned (except if they are playing for my team)
-
Yup! Dibble is definately your nemesis! :)
-
Give me 80mph but dead straight any day over 65,70mph and swinging round corners :(
agreed - my nephew is a classic case in point - speed gun says 85 (occasionally a bit more) but, as its gun barrel straight, he got nowhere much with it...
-
Also the very nature of speed guns means that tall fast bowlers register slower speeds than shorter quicks.
Not the same if you faced them.
League cricket is blighted by evil dibbly doblers who are miserly and occaisionally do a little bit with the ball bowling at a horrible length, just made to make batsmen look stupid. I think they should be banned (except if they are playing for my team)
Yes yes yes, ban silly dobblers. Horrible bowlers
-
agreed - my nephew is a classic case in point - speed gun says 85 (occasionally a bit more) but, as its gun barrel straight, he got nowhere much with it...
We have a guy who can scare people for fun especially on a few of the hard true tracks we have in our league but he gets no where near as many wickets as our seasoned opening bowler who is probable about 70 tops but can swing in both ways at will.
-
Speed doesnt really matter. Taking wickets does
-
Speed doesnt really matter. Taking wickets does
I think any batsmen would take someone sharp but straight over someone 65-70 who has control of the ball and moves it at will
-
We have a guy who can scare people for fun especially on a few of the hard true tracks we have in our league but he gets no where near as many wickets as our seasoned opening bowler who is probable about 70 tops but can swing in both ways at will.
Yeah, it was that kind of situation - he got the ball through sharp as but didn't really have many ways of taking a wicket - the tracks were too bouncy for him to get many bowled or LBW, slips at club level were not good enough to hold the fast edges and balls that hit the middle were gone. Even when he stepped up to County 2s he was the quickest things there, but would regularly take 0-40 or 1-60 when other seamers took 4-50...
-
Playing mainly in the 4s, I exclusively play against dibbly dobbers. Only time I like facing them iswhen the ball and pitch are dead as a dodo and they can't do anything with it...
-
Yeah, it was that kind of situation - he got the ball through sharp as but didn't really have many ways of taking a wicket - the tracks were too bouncy for him to get many bowled or LBW, slips at club level were not good enough to hold the fast edges and balls that hit the middle were gone. Even when he stepped up to County 2s he was the quickest things there, but would regularly take 0-40 or 1-60 when other seamers took 4-50...
That's the difference isn't it when it becomes professional. You have guys bowling at pace who are able to swing it both ways. So for example when I was at derby we had Devon Malcolm open up 87mph plus mid 90s when it was his day and when on song he swung it away late. Other end would be daffy or corky mid to late 80s swinging it both ways then a variation of first change bowlers from there who would be medium pace 80mph swing bowlers with a spinner in there. On top of that you have fielders that take the half chance at pace. So along with other counties who had the likes of Donald, Walsh Ambrose, pollock, younis Yorkshire had white Gough silverwood, Hoggard Hamilton this is where you saw the seasoned batters being able to build an innings against pace and swing which is where the game has changed a lot. People struggle a lot now to build an innings when the ball swings or moves around but they feel run rates are important, personally I feel its harder trying to get the runs with the tailenders than the top order doing it. Reverse swing has changed things as well it's become quite an art form now there were only a few that could really do it well at that time, Yorkshire were good at it, waqar younis obviously. The game has changed from when I was playing but for the better? I don't know its different both have their plus points and both negative but the principles are the same as the game hasn't changed just people's perception of it and how it's played.
-
I think professional cricket is a different world. At local and even some decent league level you can have guys who make you hop about a bit, but if they make the step up you see them rated as 'medium'. What will also mash your spuds is that when they've played at that level looking every inch the 10 or 11 bat, if they drop back you simply can't bowl to them. One guy who had gone back to minor counties after an injury had finished his first class career reckoned his matches were some of the most boring ever because a lot had played at higher level and at the very least could block all day right down the order. The only chance of a result was a dodgy wicket or if one of the teams had a decent leg spinner.
-
and doesn't get in Yorkshire's best side...
Ryan Sidebottom was Yorkshire's quickest bowler when I saw them. Plunkett wasn't playing.
-
I think professional cricket is a different world.
For sure.
-
Ryan Sidebottom was Yorkshire's quickest bowler when I saw them. Plunkett wasn't playing.
Side bottom Hoggard were medium quick really and good bowlers as they swung it at 85mph
-
Ryan Sidebottom was Yorkshire's quickest bowler when I saw them. Plunkett wasn't playing.
Who was?
I ask because every time I've seen Sidey this year he has been military medium at best - hell, even Patto looked quicker than him at Lords!
-
That's the difference isn't it when it becomes professional. You have guys bowling at pace who are able to swing it both ways. So for example when I was at derby we had Devon Malcolm open up 87mph plus mid 90s when it was his day and when on song he swung it away late. Other end would be daffy or corky mid to late 80s swinging it both ways then a variation of first change bowlers from there who would be medium pace 80mph swing bowlers with a spinner in there. On top of that you have fielders that take the half chance at pace. So along with other counties who had the likes of Donald, Walsh Ambrose, pollock, younis Yorkshire had white Gough silverwood, Hoggard Hamilton this is where you saw the seasoned batters being able to build an innings against pace and swing which is where the game has changed a lot. People struggle a lot now to build an innings when the ball swings or moves around but they feel run rates are important, personally I feel its harder trying to get the runs with the tailenders than the top order doing it. Reverse swing has changed things as well it's become quite an art form now there were only a few that could really do it well at that time, Yorkshire were good at it, waqar younis obviously. The game has changed from when I was playing but for the better? I don't know its different both have their plus points and both negative but the principles are the same as the game hasn't changed just people's perception of it and how it's played.
I don't think that the standard of bowling is manifestly worse now than it was in those days, save that there are not the same number of high quality overseas quicks available to bolster the lower counties attacks, which means that the top English quicks tend to gravitate toward the top 14 or so sides. But there is a big difference in the way batsmen approach the game - my Dad and Godfather often argue at length that this has been an ongoing process since the 50s and the end of covered pitches in the 70s, but I think it is as much a sign of the times changing.
Your post got me thinking back to a Championship game I saw in 2000 in which you played...
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/69/69688.html (http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/69/69688.html)
Although the result was probably more to my liking than yours I don't think you'll mind me sharing the card given you got runs and wickets! An odd game - Yorkshire had way more firepower than Derby with five home grown Test quicks in the side...
-
More thoughts on that golden generation of Yorkshire bowlers - at one point we could field Gough, Silverwood, Hoggard, White, Hamilton and have Sidebottom, Kirby and Hutchison (the last being one of English cricket's great lost talents) in reserve! Wonderful side...
-
Steve Titchard - thought he was a run machine for Lancs for a while, but I didn't think he did it when he moved on.
And Aldo - you got done by Vaughny! No shame there!
-
Who was?
I ask because every time I've seen Sidey this year he has been military medium at best - hell, even Patto looked quicker than him at Lords!
It was the game at The Oval. He looked quite sharp for an old 'un. As quick as I ever remember him being, in fact.
-
It was the game at The Oval. He looked quite sharp for an old 'un. As quick as I ever remember him being, in fact.
I think Sibley's blockathon and the general lack of interest from Patto and Brooks might have made him look faster than he actually was!!! Only saw day three but he looked fairly pedestrian to me.
-
Steve Titchard - thought he was a run machine for Lancs for a while, but I didn't think he did it when he moved on.
And Aldo - you got done by Vaughny! No shame there!
Actually, to be fair to Paul he was much the best of the Derbyshire bowlers. Vaughan was good in that knock - Lehmann arguably better!
-
I think Sibley's blockathon and the general lack of interest from Patto and Brooks might have made him look faster than he actually was!!! Only saw day three but he looked fairly pedestrian to me.
I was there every day apart from day three! He'd eaten his Ready Brek those days. ;)
Incidentally, he was using Slazenger bats? I thought he had a deal with Redwood this season?
-
Incidentally, he was using Slazenger bats? I thought he had a deal with Redwood this season?
Gonna say pass. I don't think I saw him bat all year!