The cricket thread

NorthernGooner

It's all about rhythm and making  it all flow.
  Lol Larwood was 5'7" and about 11 stone.
  There hasn't been a quicker English bowler. 
  Most umpires in his day said you couldn't hear him until he was in his delivery stride.  

Stuckfast

Frank Tyson is said to have been the quickest English fast bowler, at least for a couple of years. There is some footage of him on YouTube, he had one of those actions you never see these days.

Heartfeltdawn

NorthernGooner said:

It's all about rhythm and making  it all flow.
  Lol Larwood was 5'7" and about 11 stone.
  There hasn't been a quicker English bowler. 
  Most umpires in his day said you couldn't hear him until he was in his delivery stride.  

Messrs Tyson and Kortright would like to have a word  

I love watching those quicks from yesteryear who had the foot drag going on. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqjHhnCMCAs

However when it comes to judging the quickest, the change in the no-ball rule undoubtedly disadvantaged the quicks. Very interesting article on the evolution of bowling actions because of the change here with a GIF showing how far ahead of the front foot crease Lindwall bowled from (entirely legally, I hasten to add). 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-05/no-ball-rule-hurting-australias-pace-bowlers/8092284

crunchman

Benaud said that Tyson was the quickest he ever saw - and that includes Thommo and all the great West Indians.

Larwood was also very quick.  Some who saw them both bowl said he was similar pace to Tyson, although Bradman was on the record as saying Tyson was the quickest he had seen.  I think that comment was before Thomson and the Windies greats though.

There was an attempt to time how long the ball took to reach the batsman on old film of Larwood and Tyson that put them both around 100mph, but you can't be sure of the frame rate.

This article says that Tyson was measured at 89mph off no run up:

https://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/frank-tyson-one-of-the-fastest-ever-334137

It's difficult to be certain, but both were very quick.  If you see pictures of the bodyline series, the slips were very deep, and the keeper isn't in shot on a lot of the film of Larwood bowling.

Of the more recent fast bowlers, I read or heard one of the pundits (maybe Brian Johnston or Jack Bannister) say that Holding was the fastest for sustained pace.  They said that Thomson or Akhtar might have been a little quicker at their peak, when they were in rhythm, but they couldn't sustain it like Holding.

While he might have been fractionally slower than the very fastest, overall Marshall is best I've seen.  He was very quick, but he was also very skilful.  I still remember that time at Headingley when he bowled England out with a cast on his hand.  I don't really remember Lillee at his peak.  I was 12 in 1981, but the main thing I remember about that Ashes series was Botham, and the Willis 8-43.  Looking back at the stats, Lillee took 39 wickets at 22, but I didn't really appreciate how good he was at the time.

All of those bowlers were seriously quick though.  They were all capable of working over the best batsmen.

crunchman

Just seen this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/aug/20/fast-bowlers-england-cricket-new-peak-plateau-ashes

guitars4you

Good article on R5 the other day with Aggers about fast bowling - After a visit to Loughborough Uni and all the scientific aspects of the body and how it can help - Both with speed and less injuries

One interesting aspect was when you put down the landing leg at the crease, you effectively put 3 times your body weight on to the knee cap - hence why so many carry injuries - Obviously Mark Wood is a prime candidate today for trying to stay fit

Heartfeltdawn

crunchman said:

Of the more recent fast bowlers, I read or heard one of the pundits (maybe Brian Johnston or Jack Bannister) say that Holding was the fastest for sustained pace.  They said that Thomson or Akhtar might have been a little quicker at their peak, when they were in rhythm, but they couldn't sustain it like Holding.

While he might have been fractionally slower than the very fastest, overall Marshall is best I've seen.  He was very quick, but he was also very skilful.  I still remember that time at Headingley when he bowled England out with a cast on his hand.  I don't really remember Lillee at his peak.  I was 12 in 1981, but the main thing I remember about that Ashes series was Botham, and the Willis 8-43.  Looking back at the stats, Lillee took 39 wickets at 22, but I didn't really appreciate how good he was at the time.

All of those bowlers were seriously quick though.  They were all capable of working over the best batsmen.

If Akhtar had any sort of decent fitness programme going, he might well have been the quickest around. Perhaps the quickest ever to undergo liposuction though...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/liposuction-rules-shoaib-out-of-tour-20091120-gdtt4b.html

The press are in a bit of a pace obsession right now. Lillee was indeed wonderful in 1981 but Alderman still got more wickets than him with a slower pace but more swing and seam movement. 

RandallFlagg

The weather for Headingley looks generally fair but looks like more chance of showers on Thursday now that there was a few days ago. Fingers crossed. It would be good to see match not interrupted by rain. I'm sure @guitars4you would prefer a dry seat as well!

I expect day 1 of Old Trafford to have hail or sleet, I'm taking my wellies.

guitars4you

RandallFlagg said:

The weather for Headingley looks generally fair but looks like more chance of showers on Thursday now that there was a few days ago. Fingers crossed. It would be good to see match not interrupted by rain. I'm sure @guitars4you would prefer a dry seat as well!

I expect day 1 of Old Trafford to have hail or sleet, I'm taking my wellies.

I recall a Sunday League game back in the 70's - The old 40 over format - Between Lancs and Derbys at Buxton - Cancelled due to sleet/snow

NorthernGooner

Heartfeltdawn said:

NorthernGooner said:

It's all about rhythm and making  it all flow.
  Lol Larwood was 5'7" and about 11 stone.
  There hasn't been a quicker English bowler. 
  Most umpires in his day said you couldn't hear him until he was in his delivery stride.  

Messrs Tyson and Kortright would like to have a word  

I love watching those quicks from yesteryear who had the foot drag going on. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqjHhnCMCAs

However when it comes to judging the quickest, the change in the no-ball rule undoubtedly disadvantaged the quicks. Very interesting article on the evolution of bowling actions because of the change here with a GIF showing how far ahead of the front foot crease Lindwall bowled from (entirely legally, I hasten to add). 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-05/no-ball-rule-hurting-australias-pace-bowlers/8092284

My grandfather was a Nottingham man born and bred and had worked at Trent Bridge relaying the square in the '30's.
He was Larwood mad.
He told me the story that when Notts were bowling at Trent Bridge and Arthur Carr the skipper  needed Harold to bowl after
 lunch he made him have three pints of bitter and a massive plate of beef sandwiches for lunch.
No  noncy electrolyte drinks thank you.
 He then presumably had a rub down with a copy of the Sporting Life. 
I thought this was all bollocks, but there is a reference to it in Duncan Hamiltons's very good biography of Lol.
Recommended reading. 

guitars4you

guitars4you said:

RandallFlagg said:

The weather for Headingley looks generally fair but looks like more chance of showers on Thursday now that there was a few days ago. Fingers crossed. It would be good to see match not interrupted by rain. I'm sure @guitars4you would prefer a dry seat as well!

I expect day 1 of Old Trafford to have hail or sleet, I'm taking my wellies.

I recall a Sunday League game back in the 70's - The old 40 over format - Between Lancs and Derbys at Buxton - Cancelled due to sleet/snow

 - just found the pic for this - June as well - 2015 - I thought it was a Sunday 1 one day match - Turned out to be a regular county match

crunchman

Was thinking a bit more about this speed thing, and one thing to remember is that bowlers speeds do vary.  Look at Broad's speed.  He's tweaked something in his action over the winter and he's bowling significantly quicker this year.

How did Marshall's speed when he toured here in 1984 compare with his speed when he toured in 1988?  It depends at what point in the career you are looking.  Lillee probably wasn't quite as fast later in his career as he was early on, but he was a better bowler.  You can probably say the same about Hadlee.

Ultimately, I'm not sure that it matters too much whether one of these guys bowled at 94mph, and another one at 96mph.  Or whether the same bowler bowled at 94mph one day, and 96mph another.

As @Heartfeltdawn said above, pace isn't everything.  I'd rather have Richard Hadlee in my side than Thomson or Akhtar, or some of the other names that have been mentioned.

Heartfeltdawn

guitars4you said:

Good article on R5 the other day with Aggers about fast bowling - After a visit to Loughborough Uni and all the scientific aspects of the body and how it can help - Both with speed and less injuries

One interesting aspect was when you put down the landing leg at the crease, you effectively put 3 times your body weight on to the knee cap - hence why so many carry injuries - Obviously Mark Wood is a prime candidate today for trying to stay fit

It's more than that in some cases and the impact has been known for some time. I remember an article in the Cricketer going years back now where the force going through the front leg was compared to a car hitting a wall at near 80mph. The bowler analysed was Tim Munton of Warwickshire and England. Talk of front leg load was also going around after David Lawrence's horrible injury in New Zealand. 

Personally I think there is a problem with cricket training focusing too much on strength to increase bowling speeds. Look at how the typical centre forward in football has changed to something leaner and then compare the physique of quick guys like Olly Stone or Stuart Meaker compared to Jofra Archer now or Michael Holding. I recall Simon Jones talking about his rehab over the years and he said thathe put on too much bulk, totally the wrong way to go when you have a dodgy knee. 

Heartfeltdawn

NorthernGooner said:

My grandfather was a Nottingham man born and bred and had worked at Trent Bridge relaying the square in the '30's.
He was Larwood mad.
He told me the story that when Notts were bowling at Trent Bridge and Arthur Carr the skipper  needed Harold to bowl after
 lunch he made him have three pints of bitter and a massive plate of beef sandwiches for lunch.
No  noncy electrolyte drinks thank you.
 He then presumably had a rub down with a copy of the Sporting Life. 
I thought this was all bollocks, but there is a reference to it in Duncan Hamiltons's very good biography of Lol.
Recommended reading. 

Seconded. I was in Poundland a couple of years ago buying cheap chocolate for the kids and looked into the book aisle. There in a sea of Strictly ghostwritten autobiographies and some Katie Price tat was Hamiltons book for a quid. Straight into the hand and very much enjoyed it. Wisdens obituary of Larwood mentions his love of beer and tabs. 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/154190.html

Heartfeltdawn

crunchman said:

Was thinking a bit more about this speed thing, and one thing to remember is that bowlers speeds do vary.  Look at Broad's speed.  He's tweaked something in his action over the winter and he's bowling significantly quicker this year.

How did Marshall's speed when he toured here in 1984 compare with his speed when he toured in 1988?  It depends at what point in the career you are looking.  Lillee probably wasn't quite as fast later in his career as he was early on, but he was a better bowler.  You can probably say the same about Hadlee.

Ultimately, I'm not sure that it matters too much whether one of these guys bowled at 94mph, and another one at 96mph.  Or whether the same bowler bowled at 94mph one day, and 96mph another.

As @Heartfeltdawn said above, pace isn't everything.  I'd rather have Richard Hadlee in my side than Thomson or Akhtar, or some of the other names that have been mentioned.

Broad talks of his remodelling process in this MoS article:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-6585463/Stuart-Broad-listened-Sir-Richard-Hadlee-Jimmy-Anderson.html

The Hadlee influence is clear on him as his length has been much fuller than usual this year, something he's said he's been working on. It's interesting that Broad says how the spin-friendly scenes of Sri Lanka allowed him to find free time to work on his action. In the past, there was a far less congested international calender so changes in action and general work on bowling could be done far easier and within county matches. When you see the like of Olly Stone break down in the winter, come back into a Test match, and barely bowl outside of that Test match, then it's fair to say that the hours of gym work and rehab hasn't made him fit for bowling regularly. 

Hadlee certainly was quicker in the early days as was Lillee. The earliest footage I can find on Youtube of Paddles comes from the March 1974 Test at Christchurch against Australia. Still got the little shuffle but the action is very unrefined compared to how he finished. 



Most quick bowlers have a very short 'top pace' era. Most lose it through injury (perhaps most obviously Jeff Thompson), some though lost it through overwork. The smart bowlers are the ones who adapt to injury and the passing of time. People like McGrath, Ambrose and Walsh, all the usual. Fred trueman went through it and learnt about swing. 

Heartfeltdawn

And the last on Hadlee for now. He got to 200 wickets in his 44th Test at an average of 25.82 and a strike rate of 56. He was halfway through his 32nd year when he achieved the double ton mark. 

In the 42 Tests that followed, he snared 231 wickets at 19.25 at a strike rate of 45.7. 

Well worth a watch. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpzvw7Y3KzE

scrumhalf

Fred Trueman used to go on about a fast bowler needing a large backside (whether that was required for talking through or not he didn't say). He also said that the best way to get fit for fast bowling was by bowling fast.

jpfamps

Heartfeltdawn said:

crunchman said:

Of the more recent fast bowlers, I read or heard one of the pundits (maybe Brian Johnston or Jack Bannister) say that Holding was the fastest for sustained pace.  They said that Thomson or Akhtar might have been a little quicker at their peak, when they were in rhythm, but they couldn't sustain it like Holding.

While he might have been fractionally slower than the very fastest, overall Marshall is best I've seen.  He was very quick, but he was also very skilful.  I still remember that time at Headingley when he bowled England out with a cast on his hand.  I don't really remember Lillee at his peak.  I was 12 in 1981, but the main thing I remember about that Ashes series was Botham, and the Willis 8-43.  Looking back at the stats, Lillee took 39 wickets at 22, but I didn't really appreciate how good he was at the time.

All of those bowlers were seriously quick though.  They were all capable of working over the best batsmen.

If Akhtar had any sort of decent fitness programme going, he might well have been the quickest around. Perhaps the quickest ever to undergo liposuction though...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/liposuction-rules-shoaib-out-of-tour-20091120-gdtt4b.html

The press are in a bit of a pace obsession right now. Lillee was indeed wonderful in 1981 but Alderman still got more wickets than him with a slower pace but more swing and seam movement. 

Lillee was recovering from pneumonia during the 1981 Ashes series so was never at peak fitness. He still took 39 wickets compared to 42 for Alderman , which is probably not statistically significant.

Heartfeltdawn

jpfamps said:

Lillee was recovering from pneumonia during the 1981 Ashes series so was never at peak fitness. He still took 39 wickets compared to 42 for Alderman , which is probably not statistically significant.

Very true but that reinforces the point I was making that pace outright isn't often the main destroyer.  When you look at the top series wicket aggregates for players on either side, fair to say that the slow bowlers and the fast-medium men, from Tate to Alderman, dominate. 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/bowling/most_wickets_series.html?id=1;type=trophy

Stuckfast

I love me a good dibbly-dobbler. Always a pleasure to see the likes of Darren Stevens dismantling county sides for fun.

I seem to remember Shaun Pollock was very fiery when he first appeared on the scene but most of his success came later when he bowled medium pace.

The odd one is Bhuvneshwar Kumar, who was a 75mph trundler when he first played for India and now gets close to 90mph.